In Memory of Kenneth Taylor

In this issue...

p4 Enduring October

p12 Drunk Feminist Films:Twilight

p14 Calm down Turonnuh

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY’S STUDENT NEWSPAPERVOL. 58 ISSUE 4 • OCTOBER 20, 2015

The Value of the Full-Length Album (p8)

p2 UTSU: What’s next?

Kenneth Taylor, the famed Canadian diplomat who helped orga-nize the Canadian Caper dramatized in Argo, passed away on October 15 in New York. Mr. Taylor is a Victoria College alumnus who worked on the Board of Regents and Senate and advocated for the Vic One program.

(Continued on page 16)

Illustration | Rachel Chiong

Photography | Victoria College

News • the STRAND

The UTSU’s Annual General Meeting ended without a new board structure in place, thereby continuing the UTSU’s non-compliance with the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act. After two years’ worth of nego-tiations among campus groups and three different board structure proposals, the question that remains is: What comes next?

“A lot of people have been asking that recently—are certain divisions on campus just fundamentally differ-ent from each other? … Maybe there should be a con-versation about how to further parcel out representation in the UTSU. But right now, that’s not a productive topic,” VUSAC Co-President Ben Atkins said in an in-terview. “The only way forward, to preserve our union, is to improve it. And the way to do that is to pass the proposal that has already been elected by the majority of students.”

The selected board structure, proposed by Khrys-tyna Zhuk and Daman Singh, was expected to pass both election and ratification votes after months of de-velopment and negotiations from not only St. George campus groups, but also representatives from UTM. The proposal passed the election vote, which required a simple majority, but did not pass the ratification vote, which required a two-thirds supermajority.

UTSU’s representation of over 44,000 undergradu-ate and professional faculty students, within seven dif-ferent colleges and two different campuses, means that many interests are at play, which has made the selection and ratification of a new board structure all the more difficult.

A second meeting, with the explicit aim of ratifying a new board structure, is expected in the near future. Beyond this, receipt of the 2014-15 audited financial

statements (in other words, approval regarding how the UTSU spent their money last year), requires immediate attention as well, as it was not addressed at the AGM due to time constraints. Several by-law amendments also demand attention in the near future.

With a certain level of doubt in the air, precautions are being taken and options explored with regard to Vic-toria College’s relationship with the UTSU. Although not a pressing concern at the moment, dissolution of the union will become a serious threat if non-compliance with the CNPCA persists.

“We continue to talk with our administration, our President, the Bursar, the Board of Regents, about Vic’s role in this—about Vic’s future in the UTSU, and in any campus-wide student organization. That’s impor-tant, simply because we would like to reform the union, and we have to prepare for any contingency,” Atkins said, while also stressing the immediate need to pass the elected board structure to avoid such a situation.

Continued efforts on the part of student govern-ments campus-wide are still being made to avoid such a situation, and there is still hope that the elected board structure can and will be passed. Atkins particularly praised the efforts of Vic students for their involvement in the process.

“Because of the engagement and interest that Vic students have in preserving their representation and im-proving the union, we’re at the point where at least it is only one more step, which is ratification.”

With an operating budget of over $2.5 million, $1.35 million of which is collected from student mem-bership fees, the future of the UTSU is an important concern for all students.

UTSU: What’s Next?

2

Erik Preston | Contributor

Session, Assembly On The Table

Erin Calhoun | Staff Reporter

Voting is one of many rites of passage that comes with being an adult, along with purchasing lottery tickets and being responsible for your own life. UofT stu-dents took the future in their hands during the first two weeks of October, at the several on-campus voting locations located at 16 Bancroft Ave., 316 Bloor St. W, and 36 Harbord St. There, students cast their votes for candidates in the local riding of their hometown. Stu-dents have made it clear, by the large numbers of votes they cast, that they believe voting to be a valuable right.

“I chose to vote because I am determined to have my voice heard. I think its great to see how much en-couragement young people are giving each other to go out and vote,” Victoria College student Victoria Butler told The Strand. Students have become infamous for not caring about the election or voting, since student voter turnout regularly ranks lowest in the national polls. This new positive energy being felt around cam-pus, however, is contagious and is rapidly picking up speed. Things are changing, and activity at voting sta-tions is becoming more apparent.

Elections Canada has made efforts to make voting more accessible for students. The Pilot Project set up by Elections Canada is in action within 40 Canadian universities, such as UofT and Waterloo. The project involves Elections Canada setting up offices where out-of-town students can cast a vote in their riding back home.

Youth voter turnout is rising, but still remains low. Youth involvement in the election process is vital for our democratic system. While the numbers of youth entering the voting world continue to grow, large num-bers within this category of voters are unaware and uninformed of the election process. Elections Canada’s efforts to involve youth in this system have proven to be effective, as students have created a buzz around plac-ing their votes.

For many first-years, this election will mark the

first official vote they have ever cast. Starting university is a difficult, mind-altering experience. Even if first-year students did not care for politics, it would not be hard for them to fall under the influence of a peer who speaks loudly and proudly of their political views. After all, university is a place where new ideas are born and nourished.

The next federal election will be in 2019. By this time, the first-year students in 2015 will be graduat-ing, and entering a new stage of their lives where they require different things from a prime minister. It is extremely important that students stay informed on politicians’ promises and the ideas their party presents. Although voting Liberal may seem new and exciting to university students, it may not be what they need one or two years later. What Elections Canada should learn from this transition is that the youth should be edu-cated and involved as soon as they are eligible to vote.

Candidates do not speak of student-related issues, such as student debt, on a large scale the way they do about the issue of employment and the middle class. That is one of the reasons for lack of student votes: stu-dents are often simply unaware of and uninterested in what politicians are saying. If a candidate were to dis-cuss something a student might find helpful to their lives, such as controlling the crippling debt assigned to students, they might accumulate support and votes from masses of students.

On the Victoria College campus, there have been several events to spark the interest of politics within students, such as the viewing of The Globe and Mail’s leaders’ debate. This student buzz and involvement is crucial for designing a world we all want to live in. Vic-toria Butler also states, “I think politicians really under-estimate the youth vote, which is a huge mistake. We are about to run the world, after all.” Students are the future, and the student body should not be taken for granted.Illustration | Seolim Hong

Why Your Vote Actually Matters

Photography | Rosa Kumar

News • the STRAND

3

American Apparel faces yet another year under pub-lic scrutiny after their decision to file for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy in early October, following the ousting of founder and former CEO Dov Charney in December 2014. This move, also known as “reorganization bank-ruptcy,” will see “the elimination of over $200 million of its bonds in exchange for equity interests in the re-organized company,” according to a statement made by the company. This move effectively cut American Apparel’s debt from $300 million USD to $135 mil-lion. This is not so much of a shock, however, after the company’s previous dance with bankruptcy in 2011 and lack of profit since 2009.

Financial troubles are not the only thing keeping American Apparel under the scrutiny of the public eye, however. Years of controversy, ranging from sexual ha-rassment, assault, employment of unauthorized work-ers, exploitation, and death surround this company.

Founded in 1989, American Apparel’s cornerstone is the concept that their clothes are “Made in the USA.” Their website boasts that “American Apparel garments are created by motivated and fairly paid employees who don’t just have jobs—they have careers.” Every piece of clothing is manufactured in the United States, and employees can expect wages well above the minimum, health benefits, and stock options.

However, in July 2009, after an initiative by Presi-dent Obama to reduce the amount of illegal immigrants in the country by firing unauthorized workers, an au-dit of American Apparel found 1,800 illegal immigrant employees in the company’s Los Angeles garment fac-tory. The company chose to terminate all 1,800 of the

aforementioned illegal employees, but founder Char-ney stated in an email to the New York Times that the firings “will not help the economy, will not make us safer,” and that “no matter how we choose to define or label them, [illegal immigrants] are hard-working, tax-paying workers.”

Later, in 2011, American Apparel faced scrutiny again after being forced to agree to pay $1 million to settle a civil suit over a worker’s death at their Garden Grove facility. Forty-nine-year-old garment worker Tuan Phan was killed in an accident involving a knit-ting machine after the company failed to disconnect and lock the equipment. American Apparel stated that they did not believe lack of training or oversight on their part was the cause of the accident, but agreed to pay the settlement in order to avoid the costs of litiga-tion later. Of this settlement, only $150,000 went to Phan’s family, while $566,000 went to civil penalties and $283,000 to administrative and investigative costs.

Through all of this, Dov Charney stood as the face of the company, a figure representing the two sides of the wholly controversial American Apparel. In certain respects, he was a champion of ethical reform in the business world, advocating the responsible environ-mental and conscientious company standards he strove to uphold. His company stressed the use of “natural looking” and “real” women in their advertisements and company branding in efforts to engage with the girl-next-door, whose body was more representative of the true American than any supermodel. At the same time, he led the brigade as ad after ad was pulled down for being considered too racy or provocative. In 2012, a

total of eight American Apparel advertisements were banned in the UK for “gratuitous nudity”: some of the more famous ones gave the impression of someone peeking up a young girl’s skirt, and others showed very young-looking models in very mature-looking poses.

Charney was let go from the company in Decem-ber 2014, his position as CEO having been suspended the previous June for, as stated in a press release, “al-leged misconduct and violations of company policy.” Charney was made an advisor to the company for a time before his firing, but American Apparel ultimately chose to close the doors to their founder as “it would not be appropriate” for Charney to be reinstated. These actions followed years of misconduct and inappropriate behaviour, including the discovering of a nude video, allowing nude photos of a former staffer to be posted online, and the misuse of company funds for personal gain.

Charney was replaced with Paula Schneider, one of the first women to ever reach the top tiers of American Apparel’s management. Schneider has previously over-seen turnaround at a swimsuit manufacturer, Warnaco, boosting profit by 25% in only two years.

It seems that only through watching the compa-ny carefully over the next few months and years can the public gain any insight into what successes or failures American Apparel might achieve, but Schnei-der is hopeful. She says in an interview with Forbes, “I think American Apparel is a cutting edge brand…we’re continuing to evaluate who our consumer is and aligning our product with their beliefs and their fashion taste.”

A Guide to American Apparel:

Justine Hamilton-Arvisais | Contributor

Scandal, Controversy, and the Move into Chapter 11 Bankruptcy

Illustration | Seolim Hong

Opinions • the STRAND

4

Re-evaluating October

Everything was going well for the first few weeks—the bustling campus, the countless smiling faces, the excit-ing events. A new year had begun, and in the midst of settling into a bright, foreign environment, I promised myself that things would be different, that I’d make more of an effort, work harder, and get myself out there. Frosh Week was such a loud blur of yelling and face paint that it didn’t feel like school had started yet. Even when lectures had begun and I started dragging myself to tutorials, the university thing hadn’t quite hit me. And then the leaves started changing colour.

Gone are the nights when we could get lost in To-ronto and greet the dawn while still wearing our shoes. Gone are the mornings when we could sleep in and skip breakfast, rolling around with carefree grins. Gone are the constant plans to see movies, attend shows, try restaurants. We now have papers to write, chapters to study, and interviews to attend. All of a sudden our non-stop rock star lives have hit a red light and we have fallen back to our usual ways. We are now procrastinat-ing for hours and cramming last minute; eating pack-aged garbage and sleeping at odd hours of the night.

It’s finally here: midterm season. I guess I should have seen it coming. Remember

fitted dresses, open toe sandals, and make up? Now it’s whatever’s clean and easiest; whatever we can put on while wiping the sleep from our eyes. Of course, there are still those who’ve kept their lives together and who haven’t buckled under the pressure. They’re still wear-ing dress shirts and attending all these extra-curricular events. As for the rest of us, you’ll find us sleeping in Robarts, smoking packs of cigarettes, and crying in lec-tures.

What happens when it all gets too hard to han-dle? What happens when your usual support system is gone? When I moved out, I saw everything on such a grand scale and thought everything to be exciting and glamorous. Now I know that things are harder than ex-pected, that there’s too much work, too many respon-sibilities, and not enough hours to even make a dent in it. It turns out that the optimism we had at the start of this new school year was fundamentally naive. It’s go-ing to be hard and you have to start trusting yourself. When everyone’s going out to the bar, but you’re three hundred pages behind in readings, what would the new you say today that your former self wouldn’t say in Au-gust? Yes, we craved liberty a short time ago, whether to escape parents, home, jobs, or boredom. Now what

we’ve encountered is something entirely different. We have this newfound liberty that allows us to do prac-tically anything, and the test of who we are is finally starting to hit home.

October is a time of re-evaluation and perspective. If we can’t continue with our black-out partying and procrastination, this is the opportunity to get it togeth-er. For those in relationships, this is where we can as-sess whether we have enough time to share. At the end of the day, these papers have to be written and these books must be read. I thank the people that supported me through my past endeavours, but it’s now time to decide which friends and family members are the most conducive to my education. When it’s 3:30 AM and you’re only halfway through your assignment, who are the people you can call for motivation or to bring you a cup of coffee?

When the leaves start changing colour and you’re reaching for a sweater, know that we, too, are trying to muddle through. Some may lose sight of what matters most, and some may forget who they are entirely. But hopefully this season of self-discovery will be a good thing. Maybe we’ll have it under control by the time snow is piling up.

Rosie Smegal | Associate Opinions Editor

The UTSU is holding a Plebiscite. The proposal you are asked to consider is:

“Are you in favour of moving the start of Orientation Week to a few days before Labour Day in order to allow for the introduction of a Fall Reading Week?”

Polling days: October 27-29

Polling times: 9:00am-6:00pm

Polling locations: Galbraith, Sidney Smith, Gerstein, Wetmore, OISE, TYP, Old Vic

For more information, visit your Students’ Union website at utsu.ca or contact the Chief Returning Offi cer at cro@utsu.ca. @UTSU98

How to Deal with Annual General Mania

There are at least three things Victoria College doesn’t lack: events with free food, great spots to study (nap), and opinionated student politicians. If you’re like me and many of your friends are involved in stu-dent politics, these past few weeks taught you more than you ever cared to know about board structures and the union that we all love to hate.

On October 7, the infamous University of Toronto Students’ Union (UTSU) held their Annual General Meeting where a very important vote occurred to select a new board structure. The current board structure has been rendered illegal through changes made by the Fed-eral Government to the Canadian Not-for-profit Cor-porations Act, which governs organizations like student unions. Basically, the real, adult world requires us to change things, but there needed to be a two-thirds ma-jority vote for a board structure proposal to be passed, and that majority was not achieved.

Now we are in a dispirited limbo where our union’s structure is illegal, though it probably won’t be dis-solved anytime soon because the federal government isn’t paying much attention to us. However, the day will come when they will notice our non-compliance and then we’ll be in trouble. I’ll have graduated by then, but I sympathize with whoever is still around. For the time being, there is the AGM aftermath to get

through, while keeping your friendships with student politicians relatively intact.

Here’s how you do that. To avoid sounding like a rookie, don’t ask how the

AGM went without saying “point of information” first, so that you can at least pretend you’re in on the running joke. And if you’re talking to a crowd, tack on the word “folks” at the end—I promise it’ll earn you excellent wit cred. If you’re confused, hit up #utsuagm15 on Twitter and you’ll be hip and cool in no time.

However, even if you don’t know specifics, you al-ready know how the AGM went. You know Vic’s side didn’t win because you didn’t see a succession of Face-book statuses along the lines of “I’d like to thank ev-eryone that came out to support Plan B, which will add some much-need marginalized group representa-tives and keep our glorious college representation on the UTSU intact!”

As the involved parties return to the drawing board to figure out their next steps, you may find yourself in the VUSAC office caught in a flurry of activity as people pace around with matching determined faces, mumbling, “No, you’re absolutely right. This is abso-lutely ridiculous.” Perhaps you’ll also be reminded that the SGM (Special General Meeting) is coming up and you’ll be expected to proxy your vote again, or attend,

whichever you’d prefer after hearing about the antics of the AGM. After all, who doesn’t want to see the im-promptu interruption by the Lady Godiva Memorial Bnad [sic] of engineers that has become AGM tradi-tion?

The main danger to watch out for, however, is walk-ing innocently into a UTSU rant session, where the good and bad guys are painted with such extreme bias that it’s hard to believe they’re real people. Your best op-tion is to altogether avoid mentioning the union-that-must-not-be-named. Seems simple, but let me tell you, there’s very little you can talk about lately without the UTSU sidling into the conversation. Discussion of vot-ing conjures the #voteposal campaign, any mention of money immediately recalls a certain lawsuit, and don’t even get me started about samosas. If these word-asso-ciations are meaningless to you, consider yourself lucky.

Truly, all you can do now is wait for it to blow over, but who are we kidding? The only time UTSU politics blow over for student politicians is when they graduate, and even then a few have been known to be unable to let go of their glory days. The best you can do for your politically-inclined friends is to roll your eyes, tell them to kindly shut up already, and take them on a magic carpet ride to a whole new world, shining, shimmering, splendid, and UTSU-free, the way you know it can be.

Enxhi Kondi | Contributor

Opinions • the STRAND

5

Photography | Rosa Kumar

Students are NOT Apathetic:Young people have good reasons not to vote

Every election, there seems to be a widely reported theme around the youth and student vote. That is, that youth, young adults, and students don’t vote and the problem is their apathy.

But the heart of this issue is not student apathy. If students are not tuned into election issues, there are good reasons for tuning out.

It is true that students and youth are less likely to vote. A report from Elections Canada following the 2011 Election noted that voting among young adults in Canada has been “declining for many years” and is a sig-nificant cause of general voter decline in Canada.

The main reasons identified for this lack of young voter turnout include: eligible young voters are too busy with work, school, and their families, and some say they don’t know enough about the issues, candidates, and parties to cast a ballot.

Some may argue that if students and young people

cared more about political issues, then they would make the time to learn about the campaigns, candidates, and parties.

But when they are not engaged by politicians, young voters feel left out of electoral politics and this is why they choose not to vote.

A 2015 report by Samara Canada, a not-for-profit democracy research organization, is evidence of this. The study shows that one of the main reasons eligible young voters participate less in voting then older demographics is that voters who are 30 years old and under are far less likely to be contacted and engaged by politicians than voters over the age of 30.

Students and youth are carrying their political weight and then some. Outside of voting, younger Ca-nadians are significantly more likely than their older counterparts to be active politically active, finds the re-port. Activities where younger Canadians were found to

be outperforming their older counterparts include going to protests, organizing political events, and participating in community-related work.

So let’s drop this idea of disengaged young voters. It does not account for the vibrant political movements driven by young people, such as Quebec’s 2012 student led strike, which garnered worldwide attention while bringing hundreds and thousands of people into the streets. It does not account for the student-dominated fossil fuel divestment campaigns, which have led to 450 institutions divesting around $2.6 trillion from oil and gas-related funds.

If politicians and political parties want young voters’ support, they have to engage students early, often, and not just at election time. Otherwise, students will put their political energy elsewhere.

Editorial Board | The Dialog

OUR MASTHEAD

The Strand has been the newspaper of record for Victoria University since 1953. It is published 12 times a year with a circulation of 2000 and is dis-tributed in Victoria University buildings and across the University of Toronto’s St. George campus.

The Strand flagrantly enjoys its editorial autonomy and is committed to acting as an agent of con-structive social change. As such, we will not pub-lish material deemed to exhibit racism, sexism, homo/transphobia, ableism, or other oppressive language.

The Strand is a proud member of the Canadian University Press (CUP).

Our offices are located at 150 Charles St. W., Toronto, ON, M5S 1K9. Please direct enquiries by email to editor@thestrand.ca. Submissions are welcome and may be edited for taste, brevity, and legality.

Follow us on Twitter for news and updates:@strandpaper

t

Orange Crash

Anthony Burton | Editor-in-Chief

Anthony BurtonRhianna Jackson-KelsoHolly McKenzie-Sutter

Nicole ParoyanNews

news@thestrand.ca

Featuresfeatures@thestrand.ca

editors-iN-ChieF editor@thestrand.ca

Olivia DziwakopiNioNsopinions@thestrand.ca

Geoff BaillieClaire Wilkins

Clarrie Feinsteinarts & Cultureartsandculture@thestrand.ca

Bronwyn Nisbet-GrayFilm & musiCfilmandmusic@thestrand.ca

Neil MacIsaacstraNdedstranded@thestrand.ca

Jake McNairCopy editiNgcopy@thestrand.ca

CoNtributors

Shamaila Anjum, Ariana Douglas, Erin Calhoun, Laura Charney, Katie Elder, Justine Hamilton-Arvisais, Amy Kalbun, Enxhi Kondi, Elena Senechal-Becker, Brenan Sivapragasam, Rosie Smegal, Angela Sun

Copy editors

Alexandra Jones, Tristan McGrath-Waugh, Tamilore Oshodi

illustratioNs

Rachel Chiong, Seolim Hong, Emily Pollock

photos

Elena Senechal-Becker, Rosa Kumar

Cover images

Victoria College (photo), Rachel Chiong (illustra-tion)

Genevieve Wakutzphotophoto@thestrand.ca

Lynn Seolim Hongartart@thestrand.ca

Emily PollockGrace Quinsey

desigNdesign@thestrand.ca

editorial assistaNts Joshua KimTanuj KumarAinsley MacDougallTristan McGrath-WaughTamilore OshodiAlison Zhou

Kasra Koushanwebweb@thestrand.ca

6

The NDP’s shift towards the centre has opened up a space on the left that Justin Trudeau is more than

happy to occupy

Emily Pollock

Tom Mulcair is a perfectly suitable party leader. By virtue of this, he’s a disappointment. It seems that in the final weeks of the campaign, his role has shift-ed from future standard bearer of the Canadian left to yet another third-party leader, liable to sit on his hands for four years while the big boys duke it out. It’s a huge blow considering the NDP’s investment in a calculated move towards the centre. History may show that he’s only another example of an inevitable loss of principles in the hopes of gaining election.

That’s not to say the spirit of the party has gone entirely by the wayside. Something like the NDP’s $15/day childcare plan is awfully ambitious and has the logic behind it to be a victory for lower-income families and the socially conscious. How does he plan to do this? By “raising tax on the rich,” of course. By how much?

Oh, one to two percent. Not terribly ambitious for Canada’s socialist party, is it?

The game of musical chairs in the centre of the spectrum seemed too enticing for Papa Tom not to make a beeline for the empty seat. It’s politics as usu-al, and that’s the problem. The NDP’s logic after the Layton lift was that they were within smelling dis-tance of some real power; they took all the standard measures to follow through on this after his passing. They elected Mulcair after looking up the “next step” in the political election manual. In doing this, they missed something fundamental about the Orange Wave. Jack Layton saw himself in the tradition of Ca-nadian idealists, so far removed from the concerns of politics as sport and closer to politics as the manifes-tation of something ephemeral, the organized expres-sion of our values. Not entirely practical, but that’s fuelled the NDP platform from the start.

It wasn’t more than four years ago that people were predicting the end of the Liberal Party as we knew it. They’d been squeezed out, painted as an un-principled boys’ club floating around asking for votes because, hey, haven’t we done well before? Remember Pearson and Pierre? After the CPCs finished wiping their chins with all the Ignatieff poster overstock, the Liberals looked like a recent divorcée: nowhere to go except wherever their midlife crisis led them. So, naturally, they looked for a pretty young thing to save them.

Problem was, Justin Trudeau’s first few months in office didn’t help this perception that the Liber-als had no idea what they were doing. They’d played their trump card too early, pulling the goalie with too

much time left. He was left open to attacks on his inexperience (as the successor to the too-experienced Ignatieff, naturally) and his hair (a struggle that yours truly understands all too well). Some policy trickled out as Justin was brushing the seat cushions, such as legalizing pot, but it all seemed like your uncle getting his ear pierced: a little too try-hard, a little too out-of-left-field for it to be anything other than a faux-“new direction.”

Meanwhile, Mulcair and the NDP were riding high, following the instructions of the aforemen-tioned Political Machine Assembly Guide. Mulcair proved himself a trustworthy bearer of the title of Opposition Leader. Behind the scenes, the NDP’s plan was spurred forward by the politics of negation, inherent in their role being primarily to oppose, op-pose, oppose. For a hot second, it seemed as if Mul-cair could carry the entire weight of stopping Harper on his own shoulders.

The problem with being the Official Opposition in Canada, especially to a party so unable to define themselves by anything other than the ideology that they ostensibly represent, is that you have a hard time avoiding falling into one side of an American-style party dichotomy, especially when you’re entering from hard stage left like the NDP. For all we talk of our political landscape being different from our breth-ren to the south, it’s really only been differentiated by the flourish of a couple of parties farther left than the standard-bearer occasionally winning double-digits of the popular vote. The war is still between cutting taxes and social programs, the difference being that the left can’t figure out who should lead the charge.

So what’s happened is that the NDP usurped the Liberals in terms of being the de facto left party. This is a cozy, enviable role; or at least, it was before 2011. That election showed nothing more than the fact that, just as Donald Trump and Ben Carson and Bernie Sanders are proving in the US, people are in-creasingly growing suspicious of anybody incubated in the womb of establishment politics. Layton had been leading the NDP for almost ten years before he suddenly became the mustachioed messiah, and his ascendance had less to do with any stark change in personality (heavy courting of La Belle Province aside) than it did with many Canadians’ gut rejec-tion of a guy like Michael Ignatieff, whose creden-tials are that he is academic and established and has a grasp on the underpinnings of global politics. Layton, in contrast, earned enough grizzle while cutting his

Editorial • the STRAND

7

Tom Mulcair is a perfectly suitable party leader: by virtue of this, he’s a disappointment. It seems that in the final weeks of the campaign his role has shifted from future standard bearer of the Canadian left to yet another third-party leader, liable to sit on his hands for four years while the big boys duke it out. It’s a huge blow considering Mulcair’s hauling of the party onto his back on his slow walk towards the centre. History may even show that he’s only the executor of an inevitable loss of principles in the hopes of gaining election.

That’s not to say the spirit of the party has gone entirely by the wayside. Something like the NDP’s $15/day child care plan is awfully ambitious, and has the logic behind it to be a victory for lower-in-come families and the socially conscious. How does he plan to do this? By “raising tax on the rich”, of course. By how much?

Oh, one to two percent.Not terribly ambitious for Canada’s socialist

party, no?The game of musical chairs in the centre of the

spectrum seemed too enticing for Papa Tom not to make a beeline for the empty seat. It’s politics as usual, and that’s the problem: the NDP’s logic after the Layton lift was that they were within smelling distance of some real power, and took all the stan-

dard measures to follow through on this after his passing. They elected Mulcair after looking up the “next step” in the political election manual. In do-ing this, they missed something fundamental about the Orange Wave: Layton saw himself in the tradi-tion of Canadian idealists, so far removed from the concerns of politics as sport and closer to politics as the manifestation of something ephemeral, the or-ganized expression of our values. Not entirely prac-tical, but that’s fuelled the NDP platform from the start.

It wasn’t four years ago where people were pre-dicting the end of the Liberal party as we knew it. They’d been squeezed out, painted as an unprinci-pled boys’ club floating around asking for votes be-cause, hey, haven’t we done well before? Remember Pearson and Pierre? After the CPCs finished wiping their chins with all the Ignatieff poster overstock, the Liberals looked like a recent divorcee: nowhere to go except wherever their midlife crisis lead them. So, naturally, they looked for a pretty young thing to save them.

Problem was, Justin Trudeau’s first few months in office didn’t help this perception that the Liberals had no idea what they were doing. They’d played their trump card too early, pulling the goalie with too much time left. He was left open to attacks on

his inexperience (as the successor to the too-experi-enced Ignatieff, naturally) and his hair (a struggle that your correspondent understands all too well). Some policy trickled out as Justin was brushing the seat cushions, such as legalizing pot, but it all seemed like your uncle getting his ear pierced: a lit-tle too try hard, a little too out of left field for it to be anything other than a faux “new direction”.

Meanwhile, Mulcair and the NDP were riding high, following the instructions of the aforemen-tioned Political Machine Assembly Guide. Mulcair proved himself a trustworthy bearer of the title of Opposition Leader. Behind the scenes, the NDP’s plan was spurred forward by the politics of nega-tion inherent in one’s role being primarily to op-pose, oppose, oppose. For a hot second, it seemed as if Mulcair could carry the entire weight of stopping Harper on his own shoulders.

The problem with being the Official Opposition in Canada, especially to a party so unable to define themselves by anything other than the ideology that they ostensibly represent, is that you have a hard time avoiding falling into one side of an American-style party dichotomy, especially when you’re enter-ing from hard stage left like the NDP. For all we talk of our political landscape being different from our brethren to the south, it’s really only been differen-

The Performing Arts EndowmentTerms: for students and student groups associated with Victoria University who require funding assistance for performances and/or improvements (e.g. costumes, professional assistance, additional equipment, etc.) that would oth-erwise not be possible given the resources available from existing sources.

Fall Deadline is November 2, 2015

The Dean’s Experience Enhancement Fund

Terms: designed to support Victoria students in pursuing important out-of-the-classroom experiences that may or may not be related to their coursework or

academic programs. Fall Deadline is November 1, 2015

The Webster Fund

Terms: To be awarded to eligible students and student groups associated with Victoria University who propose a plan that supports student-run athletics and

healthy living activities at Victoria.Fall Deadline is November 2, 2015

teeth on Toronto City Council to shake hands with the everyman. Layton was educated, too: he studied for his Ph.D. under C. B. Macpherson and his undergrad un-der Charles Taylor, two of Canada’s preeminent politi-cal philosophers and champions of the Canadian Ide-alism movement. But he wisely made himself a man of the people instead of the politics, and thus managed to stand firmly on the outside of the system, where a huge number of Canadians bumped into him.

(It should be noted, here, that Stephen Harper, the man, is being ignored in this analysis. This is because yours truly believes that at this point, a scarecrow that chirped out “economy!” as you walked by would be suitably adequate for the role Harper has created for himself, perhaps without as dead a look behind his eyes).

The problem with succeeding Layton is that, with-out that level of star-power charisma, you revert back to the tried-and-true way of playing politics. Mulcair has backed himself into the same corner that the Liber-als have been crawling out of since 2011. In crawling, they’ve stayed under the radar, taking only occasional flak while the big boys yell across the room at each other.

The election began and Harper’s CPC began to take shots at the Trudeau, seeming to preemptively consider the writ dropped with the Liberals 10 points

behind a gridlocked NDP and CPC. They had yet to shake the image of the kid still trying to pick out what they wanted for dinner.

But then, something changed. It began to solidify around the Munk foreign policy debate, with Trudeau’s evoking of his father standing out against the milque-toast exchange surrounding it (characterized by the re-alization that there isn’t a whole lot of depth to plumb, in terms of foreign policy disagreements, that hadn’t been already covered). While Harper and Mulcair’s unchanged style rarely came above pointed bickering, Trudeau was sidestepping the potshots and making declarations using the sort of change rhetoric that’s dicey to pull off without the special charisma of an underdog.

The question of whether or not it was a good per-formance takes a back seat to whether it was effective, as some parts of Canadian politics seem to beg for nothing more than “good enough.” It’s a testament to the delicacy of the position the Liberals occupied that the discourse surrounding the Liberal platform only needed a reversal in opinion on its leader to go from being haphazard and thrown together to principled and bipartisan.

In the meantime, the CPC’s attack ads pushed the NDP into playing a game of hardball that they weren’t used to, and the focus on this turned both

parties into wax simulacra of the supposed ideologies they represent. The Liberals took the fire from down below and didn’t join the game until they were done hoarding policy positions. When they’d finally joined in and Justin got the debate bump, their well-stocked cupboard was on display and even their thoughtful-ness was deliberately thought-out: running a deficit to build infrastructure and the common good, based on sound economic logic, beats the CPC and the NDP at their own game while the two parties are off playing pavement populism.

What’s happened, then, is the party that once seemed like empty calories is now coming across as hearty and substantial. While the two parties that have been duking it out in the House of Commons for the last four years continue fighting the same battle, Trudeau has left the ring and people are meeting him outside. He’s benefitting from the same outsider posi-tioning that propelled Layton to where he ended up at the end of the 2011 election.

The similarities between the two end there, to be certain. But when a party’s not stuck fitting itself into the political spectrum, the potential presents itself to move upwards and outwards. Or, at least, to seem to.

For more details on the awards and applications, visit the Office of the Dean of Students website. Applications should be submitted to vic.dean@utoronto.ca.

Features • the STRAND

8

An exploration into listening to an album, from start to finish

Several months ago, I stumbled into the basement of a record store I hadn’t been to before. Vinyl overflowed the recycled milk crates, labelled “A-C,” “Icelandic,” “80s African.” Craving an escape, I pulled out several records, placed one in an empty turntable, and sat and listened. It was an Icelandic band called My Summer as a Salvation Soldier. The sun peeked through the basement windows until the shadows no longer shifted shapes on the chaos of vinyl. This ritual continued all afternoon—switch the record, sit and lis-ten—and I felt transported. I wrote in my journal the lyric, “I don’t have the guts to question myself.” Absorbing the thoughts, melo-dies, and desires of my strange new friend was cathartic. Leaving

my white noise behind, I found solace in feeling lost.My purpose here is not to exalt vinyl, criticize the many music-

sharing platforms that exist, or to declare the DEATH of appreciat-ing ART!! I don’t want to declare the death of anything—quite the opposite (how can these ancient concepts continue to be declared futile when we millennials seek out anything that connects us to, well, anything?). But the full-length album is sacred. Listening to a full album, from start to finish, is a process that requires patience, commitment, perception, and empathy. Individual songs can com-plete your thoughts, but strung together in narrative they can be truly transformative.

Laura Charney | Contributor

The Value of the Full-Length Album:

An exploration into listening to an album, from start to finish

Illustration | Emily Pollock

Features • the STRAND

9

Albums as ArtifactsArtifacts are objects modified by humans, often a long time ago. The ancient quality that we attribute to them is, in essence, a mod-ern-day projection: part imagination, part historiography. Your mother’s silk wedding dress, your grandparents’ photographs from their honeymoon to Atlantic City—holding these relics, smelling the dust, feels like time travel. Interacting with ancient objects en-livens them. They begin to tell stories and generate memories or sensations within you that are truly only ghosts.

Like artifacts, albums have function, value, and memory, which are ephemeral and ever-changing. Burnt ceramic bowls that were used a thousand years ago in domestic settings are now preserved in glass cases at museums. The artifact-quality of albums is cultivated through the re-animation and re-attribution of meaning, like the substance of a ceramic bowl. The intangibility of an album allows for cyclical engendering of new meaning. My Jagged Little Pill, Acid Rap, Abbey Road, whatever, is not the same as yours—it is not even the same as mine three years ago. In this sense, albums, when expe-rienced from beginning to end, become a part of a musical geology. While songs can take on the same transformative quality, the pro-cess of an album generates a larger metamorphosis. This geology, patterned through layers of experiences, is constructed through the durability of engagement—superimposed activity that carries im-plications of discourse and cycles of histories.

Albums become artifacts when we prescribe them with agency. They signify different cosmologies, thus carrying brute implica-tions within the stories they tell. The first Beatles album, Please Please Me, is not merely a series of sappy love songs: the congruence of the album recalls a time past, which contextualizes the contem-porary suggestiveness of its lyrics (“Please please me, ooh yeah, like I please you!”). It takes time to engage a world where all that remains is intangible remainders of memory—conscious time, im-mersive time. Albums provide connectivity to a life I will never live. Marcel Proust said that “The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes.” When I carefully absorb an album and allow it to swim in my skin, I have become connected to ancient or imaginary worlds that, through this medium, become alive.

Albums and the ArtistA song expresses a statement, mood, or feeling: an album explores the multi-faceted ways that these can be interpreted. The Frank Ocean album Channel Orange is an exploration of fallen angels, the heartbroken and the unreconciled: the song “Pyramids” inves-tigates these themes using images of ancient Egypt and a modern strip club. The potential for expansion gives musicians the abil-ity to holistically probe the complexity of experiences: an album can stand alone as one cohesive narrative that reflects a particular spatial and generational mentality. Josh Tillman has utilized his guise as Father John Misty to embody strangely subverted experi-ences. In his first album, Fear Fun, FJM is a sort of drugged out, debauchery-seeking space cowboy (“I ran down on the road, pants down to my knees, screamin’ please come help me, that Canadian shaman gave a little too much to me!”). In his second album, I Love You, Honeybear, FJM is a self-loathing asshole who has found love and attempts to reconcile his worthiness of it (“I barely know how long a moment is, unless we’re naked getting high on the mattress, while the global market crashes”). The process of album listening realizes mental imagination and embodies subjective intuitions.

Albums allow artists to facilitate social commentary. Kendrick Lamar’s To Pimp A Butterfly probably exemplifies this best today. I cannot begin to discern the importance of listening to this al-bum—you should go do it right now. The individual songs are masterpieces, but when strung together, Kendrick has created a complex narrative that grapples with complicity, challenges socially embedded racism, and attempts to internalize self-worth despite living in a system that wants to deny him of it. At the Justice or Else march in Washington, D.C. on October 10, thousands of

people chanted the words to “Alright.” But the chant “we gonna be alright” holds so much weight because of the other truths Kendrick disseminates. In “The Blacker the Berry,” he professes, “I mean, it’s evident that I’m irrelevant to society/That’s what you’re telling me, penitentiary would only hire me” and in “i” declares, “It shouldn’t be shit for us to come out here and appreciate the little bit of life we got left.” Kendrick highlights the paradox between celebrating life and being fearful of it. I cannot know his experiences, but pay-ing attention to what he has to say allows me to try to understand.

Albums and MemoryIn the film High Fidelity, protagonist Rob Gordon (John Cusack) does not order his vinyl collection alphabetically or chronologi-cally—he organizes them autobiographically. As douchey as this might seem, albums do regenerate eternal memories. Memories, unreliable as they are, change every time we access them. I want to pretend that I foresaw a relationship ending. I want to pretend that I felt ambivalent about something I was passionate about. I want to pretend that my political views were always as progressive as they are now (I never bought Jian’s story, I swear). I can narcis-sistically recreate my past selves, because I can colour my memory with ownership of experiences.

Perhaps I can rationalize my thoughts and actions. But I cannot lie to my visceral sentiments, and I know that because every album that has ever meant something to me brings me right back to face the sometimes unpleasant, often cathartic truth of a moment in an honest version of my past. My mind instinctively turns to Joni Mitchell’s Blue. “A Case of You” was one of the first songs I learned to play on guitar. I was 17 and devastatingly heartbroken. Blue cocooned me in blankets of emotive release and I still often turn to it, trusting it will carry me through battlefields as it has before. The album plays, and I listen. I can feel the pain in my teenage heart, how astronomically small I felt when Joni suggested to me, “Just before our love got lost, he said, ‘I am as constant as a north-ern star,’ and I said, ‘Constantly in the darkness? Where’s that at? If you want me I’ll be in the bar.” It amazes me how something I know so dearly can still move me, heavily, every single time.

I think of Simon and Garfunkel’s Bookends. Traveling on my own for the first time, wondering if my wandering soul might satis-fy its hunger. “Cathy, I’m lost, I said, though I knew she was sleep-ing. I’m empty and aching and I don’t know why.” Taylor Swift’s 1989. Living alone in a new city, reminiscing on past relationships, how I wouldn’t be broken down again. David Bowie’s The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars. Fleet Foxes’ Help-lessness Blues. Led Zeppelin’s Zeppelin III. Sharon Van Etten’s Are We There. It goes on.

What is the private history of all those who have wept, rejoiced, reveled in the weight of these albums?

Albums and DiscoveryThe algorithm of information access ensures that we renew the vocabulary of the conversation that engulfs us. Social media plat-forms target the information you want to hear and reinforce uni-versal limitations. There is a paradox in having access to unfathom-ably diverse media, yet feeding ourselves familiarity. When is the last time that you engulfed your entire being in the unknown?

Dip your toes in an album. Take a step and let your body float. Stare up at the sky. Then plunge, feel your weight sinking, and rise to the surface. Take a breath. This is an experience that nobody can tell you how to feel about. “The more one was lost in unfamiliar quarters of distant cities, the more one understood the other cit-ies he had crossed to arrive there” (Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities). Distancing yourself from white noise might grant you access to the unembellished sounds of your own soul. It feels good to wander.

Arts & Culture • the STRAND

10

For: Wilderness ExplorersNeighbourhood: High ParkCost: $15/ person (Mostly for food)

I decided to plan another outdoorsy date for this week to get in as much fresh air as I can before everything gets buried under snow. Hopefully most Torontonians have visited High Park (1873 Bloor St W) at some point, but it is so huge that most of my friends have never explored all of it. I’ve been to the “Dream in High Park” site numerous times and have visited the zoo and the cherry blossoms. I had never even seen Grenadier Pond—that changed this week.

Travelling down to Queen East on the streetcar presented us with the opportunity to take advantage of all the great food available in the area. There’s an Ed’s Real Scoop (920 Queen St E) if you want to brave the cold weather and feel your teeth chatter on ice cream. I also generally drop in to Leslieville Cheese Market for a grilled cheese sandwich (891 Queen St E) when I need a quick bite to eat. We ultimately decided to stop off at Rashers, “North America’s Only Bacon Sandwich Shop” (948 Queen St E). I had a perfectly melted brie and bacon sandwich, which was messy but worth it.

The streetcar route to High Park took twice the time of the subway, but it was certainly more pictur-

esque. As soon as we got on the Queensway, the sight of the lake greeted us to our left, while the shops along Queen West gave way to vibrant shrubbery. We soon caught sight of the glimmering surface of Grenadier Pond, and arrived at our stop. Even as a native Toron-tonian, you can still explore new areas of the city.

We followed a trail around the pond, which was dotted with informative signs about the history of the area and the plants we saw along the way. My compan-ion wanted to read all the signs, but unfortunately I wasn’t in a reading mood, so we had to play catch-up with each other.

Finally, we made our way up a big hill to Hill-top Gardens, a small, baroque-structured garden with three fountains surrounded by sculpted hedges. The bottom of the fountain was sullied by debris, but the water created rainbows when it shot up.

Afterwards we went to the zoo, which was unsur-prisingly smelly, to be later entertained by the llama feeding hour. As an aside, I would recommend you avoid going on the weekends if you don’t want to hear the sounds of young children. Making out while sur-rounded by llamas and children is not exactly condu-cive to a romantic atmosphere.

There was nothing more sublime than being sur-rounded by autumnal-coloured leaves, set aglow by the

afternoon sun. We even encountered a smaller path that I wish we’d had more time to explore. Next time, I’m definitely giving us time to get lost.

A Stroll in High ParkAngela Sun | Staff Writer

Nuit Blanche was launched in 2006, and since then, the multi-media art event runs annually for one night from dusk ‘til dawn. It showcases the best and brightest artists from Toronto and around the world in street installations—and it’s free! Since its inception, “Nuit,” as it has come to be af-fectionately nicknamed, grew from 300 art-ists to approximately 400, with installations all around the city. In 2014, the sleepless night attracted a million people, including around 200,000 visitors from out of town. Though this might sound exciting, some Torontonians say that Nuit Blanche has be-come too big for its own good.

The majority of the art I saw was im-pressive. The only problem was, I barely saw anything because of how crowded and spread out the event was. I set out from my residence in Victoria College expecting to be able to walk around and stumble upon some installations. After fifteen minutes of walking, I still hadn’t seen anything.

The first piece of art I saw was in Queen’s Park by Tania Bruguera, a Cuban installation and performance artist whose art is usually political. Her installation Un-titled asked spectators to vote on whether or not physical geographical borders should exist. The installation felt poignant and relevant given the recent refugee crisis in Syria, and Bruguera’s objective in setting up the voting booth was to prove how borders are kept at the cost of human lives.

In Nathan Phillips Square, I saw Sean Martindale’s and JP King’s There Is No Away, a sculpture composed of compressed garbage blocks piled on top of each other. Martindale is an interdisciplinary artist who often focuses on ecological and social issues. The objective of the piece was to show that when something is discarded, it still needs to go somewhere. His project highlights the massive waste cities dispose of in harmful landfills.

The next stop was OCAD, which un-fortunately had a lineup that circled all around McCaul Street. When I finally en-tered the building, the first and most prom-inent installation was a video montage by the name of Cthuluscene. It consisted of a digitally manufactured video of a fictional planet, complete with accompanying sound effects, projected on a huge wall. While the installation itself was impressive, I’m not sure it was worth the long wait.

Finally, I found the only installation that I had actually planned to visit: Light Cave by the Los Angeles based group FriendsWithYou. The group was founded by Samuel Borkson and Arturo Sandoval III, who aim to spread a positive message through “joyous interaction.” Their work has gained international recognition, and the Light Cave has been exhibited in other cities like Dallas and New York City. The larger-than-life sculpture is an inflatable monument, lit up with vibrant colours. It has no distinct shape or form, but it was intended to be a “cathedral of the spirit,” all the more majestic in the dark Toronto night. This particular piece was a good way to end my Nuit Blanche trek for the year.

With the recent announcement of Sco-tiabank dropping their sponsorship of Nuit Blanche, the event’s future is uncertain. Supposedly the art event doesn’t fit with the bank’s “sponsorship strategy,” ending the decade-long partnership. Currently, Nuit Blanche has not announced any new sponsors, but they have set the date for next year. However, the unfortunate incidents that occurred this year at Dundas Square, in which rowdy event-goers became involved in a violent altercation with police, shows that Nuit Blanche may have begun to stray from its original intentions.

Elena Senechal-Becker | Contributor

Nuit Blanche Retrospective: Art vs. Audience

50 First Dates:

Emily Pollock

Elena Senechal-Becker

Arts & Culture • the STRAND

11

When the new school year began in September 2015, classes were not the only new activity on campus. It was also the start of the Victoria College Drama So-ciety’s new theatre season. Established in 1918, the Victoria College Drama Society (VCDS) is Victo-ria College’s oldest student-run theatre group. Each VCDS season features five different shows performed in a variety of spaces, including the Cat’s Eye, Hart House, and the Isabel Bader Theatre. The VCDS also represents Victoria College on the broader UofT the-atre scene, competing in the annual Hart House The-atre Festival against other colleges’ drama societies.

The Strand caught up with two members of the VCDS Executive Committee, Roxanne Griffiths and Maya Wong, to hear all about VCDS, its upcoming season, and its place in the UofT theatre community.

The Strand: Tell me a little bit about the Victoria Col-lege Drama Society. What does it do, and what kinds of opportunities does it offer?

VCDS: VCDS is Victoria College’s official student theatre company. Vic has a lot of talent, so we pride ourselves on producing high quality theatre that pro-vokes thought, laughter, tears, and all those feeling things! However, we also appreciate theatre as an invaluable tool for creating community—a team of

committed people taking on creative challenges to-gether and working towards a concrete goal. So, our purpose is twofold: make great theatre, and foster an environment of supportive, creatively-engaged stu-dents. In addition to acting, students can apply to be technical designers, stage managers, choreographers, music directors, or even volunteer on one-off bases to build [the] set for one of our Bader shows.

TS: Who joins VCDS? Is it only for drama majors or people with a performance background?

VCDS: To join the executive committee, you have to be a Victoria College student. However, to get in-volved with our shows in acting or crew, your college or major background do not matter!

TS: Tell me about the upcoming VCDS season.

VCDS: We’ve finished our first show of the season, The Physicists, and are gearing up to present Trojan Barbie in the Bader Theatre at the end of October. Trojan Barbie is a powerful play that looks at the time-less struggles women endure during times of war and conflict. Specifically dealing with the consequences the Trojan War held for its female survivors, such as Hecuba, Helen, and Cassandra, we feel this play is

especially relevant given the horrific events occurring in our 2015 world. In January, we’ll put on God of Carnage in the Cat’s Eye, a black comedy about two couples slowly descending into animalistic behaviour as they negotiate the consequences of their sons’ seem-ingly-trivial playground scuffle. In March, we’ll stage our entry for the UofT Drama Festival, which will be student written and directed (budding playwrights: applications are still open!). Last but not least, we’ll close our season off with the rock musical, Rent. Hope to see everyone in the audience!

TS: What’s the wackiest pre-performance ritual you’ve ever witnessed for a VCDS show?

VCDS: One of our actors taught us a vocal warm up primarily using the words “shit,” “damn,” and “fuck-er” to tell a short, sad tale of adultery (feel free to stop random VCDS people on the street for the whole thing, which is probably unprintable here). The actors repeat it with increasing speed and volume until it’s just an energetic frenzy of cussing. Understandably, we only do this exercise in the farthest corner of the back room of the Cat’s Eye.

More information about VCDS can be found at vcds.ca.

Amy Kalbun | Contributor

Written in 1961 by Friedrich Dürrenmatt, The Physi-cists is set in a wing of a heavily endowed asylum. In this wing are three patients who believe themselves to be physicists: Albert Einstein (James Hyett), Isaac Newton (Mertol Özaltan), and Möbius (Jacob Nathaniel Lev-itt). The play follows the aftermath of a nurse’s murder at the hands of Einstein—the second murder of a nurse in the wing. The play explores the ethical responsibili-ties of physicists, a topic that held great weight for an audience that knew the devastating consequences of Al-bert Einstein’s work, the creation of the atomic bomb. Are physicists morally obligated to work in the interests of their government, or to share their work with the world at all? Is it even possible to avoid doing so? These are the questions the play attempts to answer.

The VCDS production of the play, directed by Frederick Gietz, is minimal in its approach. Staging the performance in the Cat’s Eye provided a feeling of in-timacy with the characters, as did the minimalist set of only two couches, a lamp, a picture and a table. In fo-cusing on the characters and their actions, the produc-tion retains much of the integrity of the original text.

With every costume matching the set’s colours, even characters from outside the asylum seem to be a part of it. This leads to a sense that there is no way to escape the insanity the asylum represents and that every char-acter is at least partly insane. In this way, the VCDS manages to keep an element of the original’s satire.

Still, the ethical dilemmas cannot, and do not, disturb a modern post-Cold War youth audience in a particularly meaningful way. While the production still allows the audience to ponder questions of ethics and science, the overall impact remains comedic. Despite an asylum as the setting and a murder investigation as the opening scene, the audience is laughing within the first few moments. As the play progresses, the jokes be-come funnier as the actors really show a commitment to their characters. Both Hyett and Özaltan allow their characters to shine, supplying numerous accents and deadpan looks to maximize their eccentric humour. Özaltan even manages to have dinner in character, cutting food erratically and speaking his lines between sips of wine. Shak Haq, as Fräulein Doktor Mathilde von Zahnd, draws out her own character’s madness by

pairing crazed expressions with poised words, while Carmen Kruk boldly depicts Inspector Voss’s larger-than-life personality by smoking and acting drunk with complete abandon. The cast play off each other wonderfully, coordinating their actions for maximum impact, with each cast member getting an equal chance to command the audience’s attention.

The heart of the show, however, is Möbius. In contrast to his clownish fellow patients, Möbius is a rather tragic character. Levitt really manages to show the character’s desperation and grief. In his trembling words, his stricken expression, and his slow-calm move-ments, one sees a broken man. His agitation continues valiantly as the audience laughs, and his words are so passionately delivered that they threaten to overshadow the comedy of the play. The heartbreaking portrayal of Möbius’s wife (Joanna Decc) and the bittersweet op-timism of Nurse Stettler (Abbie Liu) complement his sorrowful role remarkably and manage to leave a lasting impact on the audience, despite limited stage time.

Shamaila Anjum | Contributor

VCDS The Physicists Review

Behind the Curtains with the VCDS

flickr: matt northam

Film & Music • the STRAND

12

Drunk Feminist Films tells all

with a glass of wine

Drunk Feminist Films is a feminist collective that puts on monthly film screenings at Revue Cinema. The col-lective uses humour as a means to examine the limit-ed portrayal of women in Hollywood. So far, DFF has shown movies like Bridesmaids, Clueless, Mean Girls, and Fast Times at Ridgemont High, to name a few. With an ac-tive social media platform on Facebook and Twitter, the group also has a YouTube series, where the women dis-cuss various films (and one episode of Game of Thrones) while drinking to the outward misogyny and stereotypes that Hollywood propagates. You should take a look—it’s wickedly good.

The Strand interviewed DFF, who provided interest-ing answers on their collective, the feminist voice in To-ronto, and the responsibility of providing Torontonians with a chance to “laugh instead of cry” their way through Hollywood films.

The Strand: How did DFF get started?

Drunk Feminist Films: We’re excited to screen Twilight, since that’s where DFF started. Gillian wrote a drinking game to go along with this movie, and invited everyone else to her place—we found we had a lot to say about it. Also, it was far less exhausting watching together in the spirit of fun than getting angry about it. The idea was born out of that: that getting a group of feminist folk to-gether to rag on damaging Hollywood tropes and repre-sentations (or lack thereof ) could be a great outlet. Burn off some steam, laugh your face off, and relax together. Drinking is optional—the heart of the idea is silliness and fun, which is why we include callouts and actions (like swinging tampons) when the game rules demand action. It’s about participation in any way viewers are comfortable.

TS: What is the objective or goal of your collective?

DFF: Fun. There are so many frustrating, enraging, and triggering themes, characters, and ideas in Hollywood movies, and once you see them, you can’t un-see them. This is a place for folks who see, or are beginning to see, these gross occurrences for what they are: total bullshit. Seeing them can make movie watching really challeng-ing. Sharing that challenge with a whole theatre that is shouting at the screen together? That’s really, really fun. We also do drink-/shout-along-at-home episodes on YouTube, with a similar goal. Can’t make it to the screen-ings? You can watch an episode and play along at home with your friends. TS: Within the realm of feminism and feminist activism, it’s not common to use humour as a means of instigating discussion—why use humour and the medium of film/cinema? How effective is it?

DFF: We may have covered this above, but it’s so im-portant to have a release valve when it comes to some-thing as serious as discrimination. As a culture, we are bombarded with images and examples of gross injustice, cruelty, and suffering being experienced disproportion-ately by marginalised folks. That can seep into your skin and feed despair. When you laugh, you are breathing and interacting with the garbage-y ways of this world, in-stead of letting [them] paralyze you. You’re meeting like-minded folks in a fun environment, empowering you to

Clarrie Feinstein | Arts & Culture Editor

act. Humour is imperative—it’s born out of joy and love, and that is always the goal. More love, please.

TS: How do you choose the films? Is there a specific issue/theme you wish to draw out in every screen-ing? If so, what are the most common themes that emerge with the film screenings?

DFF: Our movie choices are the balance between what people are interested in watching and what we can obtain rights to screen. Popular movies are more interesting, because they are a part of our lives already. It’s so interesting to take a deeper look at some films that have become cultural institutions. You see the ways they let you down, and the ways they pleasantly surprise you. Themes of women and agency are popular: women are so frequently and routinely stripped of basic decision-making in films. Race is a big one as well. It’s not news that white people dominate Hollywood movies—if we drank for every racialized person in a speaking role, we’d never get drunk. That’s sad on many levels.

TS: Within feminism, there is a lot of discussion about inclusivity and intersectionality. Is there a conscious effort by DFF to be aware of these aspects within feminism?

DFF: From the get go, we were very concerned about the homogenous voice that four white, cis women bring to the table. We recently made a call for more voices to join us and have been wowed by the response. We’ve also been very lucky to have some incredible guests for both our videos and events (Soha Kareem, Sophia Banks, Bee Quammie, Kyrell Grant, and more) and are looking forward to stepping back to let other voices and perspectives

be heard. Over the last few weeks we’ve been meet-ing with a bunch of new cast members who bring a wide variety of perspectives and senses of humour to the table, and we can’t wait to introduce our ex-panded cast. That announcement will be happening very soon!

TS: What do you think of the feminist community in Toronto? Is it prominent? Could it have a louder voice?

DFF: The feminist community in Toronto is in-credible—we are so lucky! Toronto is brimming with intersectional feminist brilliance, from post-secondary school groups, to book clubs, to women’s fitness communities like Newsgirls, to advocates like Saadia Muzaffar and Septembre Anderson, whose voices in social and traditional media are leading the charge toward a more inclusive Canadian feminism. The conversation on social media is particularly vi-brant, and we are thrilled that our events are part of that landscape. TS: Lastly, for all the young women and men that feel too embarrassed to openly say they’re feminist in public spaces (or for those that believe feminism is only used to “blame” men…an annoying but un-fortunately common sentiment), what advice and worldly wisdom can you impart on the next genera-tion?

DFF: Hmmm. This answer is touchy-feely as hell: talk to your friends about their stance. Ask ques-tions. Listen to the answers. Root your desire for change in a desire to increase the love and connec-tion between people. Make friends and foster un-derstanding.

Illustration | Emily Pollock

Film & Music • the STRAND

13

Photography | Netflix/USA

It’s becoming increasingly hard to keep a secret in TV. Game of Thrones and other serial dramas have bred fans that comb through any casting and shooting information for clues about what the next season will bring. Only recently has Thrones been able to catch up to its adaptation source material and surprise fans of the book series, and it has led to an increased tide of criticism over its once-unanimous praise. Two new series—Mr. Robot on USA Network and Narcos on Netflix—offer alternate ways forward for how a show can remain engaging when viewers know, or can guess, what’s coming next.

From its pilot, Mr. Robot feels like Fight Club updated for millennials. Elliot (Rami Malek) works as a cybersecu-rity savant suffering from depression in New York, until he discovers a piece of data that lures him into a group of radical hackers tasked with taking down the world’s big-gest corporation and essentially eliminating financial debt. As an elevator pitch, it’s a blessing and a curse: the 1999 film still lures in fans and detractors in equal measure. Ei-ther way, it prepares the viewer to have reality flipped late in the season, as Fight Club’s infamous reveal does. While the preparation ends up justified, Mr. Robot’s payoff is not nearly so satisfying in its predictability or its execution.

The whole season is a tightrope walk between the bet-ter influences of Fight Club (fantastic direction and acting)

and the worse (poor-posing-as-edgy writing and reliance on voiceover). In the pilot, the outstandingly human intro-duction of Elliot’s depression is almost immediately under-cut by his “gritty” treatment: he snorts morphine! Similar oscillations between the excellent and the eye-roll-inducing form an additional layer of tension on top of the plot. But perhaps the biggest twist isn’t in the show: creator Sam Esmail intended the series to be a movie and for the first season to be the first act. So rather than a guide, Fight Club serves as a setup. The consequences of the first season feel earth-scorching, but inspire confidence for new growth in the next season tasked with exploring the nature of revolu-tion and power.

Whereas Mr. Robot feels predictable by its influences, Narcos is initially predictable by its history as well. The series plots the rise of Pablo Escobar (Wagner Moura), notorious leader of the Medellín drug cartel, and the Colombian and American authorities trying to take him down. Any cur-sory research into the topic will let you in on a spoiler: Es-cobar is killed by the Colombian National Police in 1993. Furthermore, the series utilizes the trope of an opening ac-tion scene cutting to an earlier time; the viewer therefore knows that anybody in that opening scene survives until the timeline catches up, which proves to be late into the season. On top of that, early episodes are fairly reliant on

standard cops-and-criminals tropes like voiceover, “build-ing the empire” scenes, and pairing two officers (Boyd Holbrook and Pedro Pascal) who have to learn to work to-gether. The series seems hell-bent on becoming derivative, but at the drop of a hat subverts expectations wonderfully.

After a cliffhanger fourth episode—to the extent that those exist on Netflix—the fifth episode brings eventual Colombian President César Gaviria (Raúl Méndez) into sharp focus. With this, the focus of the series shifts from a moderately compelling chronicle into a remarkable exami-nation of a state swallowed by conflict. While there is still the tension of characters dying, it only serves to underscore the tension of a time period in which national news anchors could be kidnapped and SUVs are given freely to families so sicarios can hide in plain sight. No one’s expressed mo-tives can be trusted, nor can any sense of humane restraint. Like The Wire before it, Narcos lures the modern audience into a deeper and older tale; the American City via Greek tragedy, Colombia at war via magical realism. Coupled with a nuanced performance from Moura, who inhabits Escobar’s dual normalcy and insanity, the series exploits what we don’t and can’t know through a spoiler: how per-vasive danger can feel.

Neil MacIsaac | Stranded Editor

When the Twist is Not the Twist: Mr. Robot and Narcos

FX’s You’re the Worst is a half-hour romantic comedy series that rises above the tropes it presents and confuses you with how likable it is.

The characters should be some of the most unwatch-able people imaginable. The romantic leads are Jimmy, a British ex-pat author with a superiority complex, and Gretchen, a snarky PR executive with an infrequent coke habit and recent DUI. After meeting at the wedding of Jimmy’s ex-girlfriend, the two begin a reluctant relation-ship despite both being anti-commitment and anti-ro-mance. The main cast is evened out with Gretchen’s best friend, trophy wife Lindsay, and Jimmy’s roommate, im-mature war veteran Edgar.

While all of these people and the premise itself should be extremely annoying, by the end of the first season it’s hard to deny that you love all of them. What You’re the Worst achieves where others have failed is presenting cyni-cal Gen-Xers with a rom-com about terrible, selfish people who are watchable, likeable, and capable of genuine rela-tionships. Jimmy and Gretchen are two people who hate the idea of love but eventually succumb to a relationship because of how undeniably compatible they are. They lead a show for jaded people who hate the idea of a rom-com but give in to how much they love it because of how unde-niably genuine it is.

The second season opens with Jimmy and Gretchen living together, a setup that threatens to upset the show’s balance by moving away from the will-they-won’t-they the-matic focus of season one. What season two has managed to do so far is tackle questions of the rom-com genre and of relationships themselves.

One episode takes on the elephant in the room of most romantic comedies, that being: “Why don’t these people have any other friends?” Gretchen hosts a party to reunite her “girls,” only to realize that they have drifted apart for a reason—everyone has either become a boring mom or tak-en the party lifestyle to a deadly extreme. In the same epi-sode, Jimmy adamantly argues that he doesn’t need friends, only to realize that the party is populated by his friends at every turn, from the tween neighbour he hired as the par-ty’s bartender, to his ex-girlfriend’s obnoxious husband who invited himself. It’s a terrific episode that addresses the need for friendships outside of romantic relationships, while bal-ancing the difficulties of knowing when to give up on a friendship and when to accept that the odd people you’re surrounded by are actually your friends, like it or not.

In one of the most recent episodes, Gretchen and Lindsay become hyperaware of how much of their time together is spent talking about the men in their lives. In an impassioned and failing attempt to find other topics

of discussion, Gretchen suggests, “Can we shit-talk other women we know?” By the end of the episode, their brief project to talk about “serious topics” is dropped, and they settle back into watching Real Housewives and complaining about Lindsay’s ex-husband’s new girlfriend (she posted an Instagram photo of herself doing sign language interpreta-tion for a Beyoncé concert.) This casual takedown of the Bechdel Test works because You’re the Worst has already established that these women are intelligent, mostly com-petent, and pretty good friends to each other, despite also being kind of the worst. You’re the Worst asks if you can be a mean gossipy girl who talks about boys and makes fun of people, but still be a good person.

One of the best recurring jokes of recent episodes starts when Lindsay’s ex-husband Paul declares that “Love is put-ting another’s needs above your own,” to which Lindsay immediately responds “Ew,” much to Paul’s distaste. His line is then repeated through the grapevine to Gretchen and Jimmy who separately give the exact same monosyl-labic response. It’s a simple, dumb joke that gets funnier ev-ery time, and also legitimizes why these people have stuck with each other. As sad as it is, friendships often feel most real when you hate the same things, and what is noticeably real in You’re the Worst is that the characters hate the idea of love, but really love each other.

You’re the Worst Season Two Holly McKenzie-Sutter | Editor-in-Chief

14

Film & Music • the STRAND

ImagineNATIVE Film FestivalA video created by the Canada Media Fund playing in the corner of the Digital Media Art+Cade lists statistics that help to spell out one clear message: Canadians are con-nected. On average, each Canadian spends 76 hours online every month. As a country, Canada has a digital economy consisting of $22 billion, 16,000 media producers, and over 125,000 creative jobs. It is no secret that Canada is immersed in digital culture and art, constantly swiping through our tablets and smartphones and consuming hun-dreds of thousands of hours of film and video games. The Digital Media Art+Cade exhibit, as part of the imagine-NATIVE film festival at the TIFF Bell Lightbox, explores these connections and the significance of digital media and art, focusing on ways to make this technology and media both as accessible to Canadians as possible, as well as how to utilize its influence to honour Indigenous stories and representations.

A large topic of discussion throughout the Indigenous Gaming Panel, which took place in the Art+Cade on the afternoon of October 15, was the accessibility of this me-dia. Previously, video game design has been viewed as in-timidating, requiring a specialized skill set and knowledge of coding to create virtual worlds and games. The panel, which included game designers, producers, and writers, discussed the many resources available today that allow even those unfamiliar with gaming programs to participate in game design. A member of the audience suggested us-ing the Wii game Super Mario Maker to try your hand at

designing mods, while the panel urged creators to begin making what they want to make, even if you just start out by creating paper prototypes. Toronto also has many re-sources to help introduce the public to video game design, including the organization Dames Making Games that of-fers many free workshops and events for game design (and was represented in the Art+Cade).

The panel also discussed the impact that digital media and games have in representing people, using video games as an opportunity to showcase new stories and ideas and to immerse players in new cultures and experiences. As Ja-son Edward Lewis, a panelist and professor at Concordia University, noted: “It is important that we tell our stories ourselves.” With a medium that is so influential and is be-coming more and more accessible, it carries great weight in spreading information, sometimes even motivating play-ers to learn new languages and interact with issues in new ways in order to play through. With greater accessibility to digital media comes more occasion to promote individual and unique experiences, including the Indigenous stories supported within the Art+Cade.

I had the pleasure of trying demos for two games show-cased in the Art+Cade, and each found new and creative ways to communicate human experiences. The first game I tried, Wanisinowin | Lost, created by Meagan Byrne, fol-lows a young human girl living in a spirit world where she struggles to resolve her identity. The characters are simply-designed silhouettes against a colourful background, and

the player uses an Xbox controller to lead Wani as she drifts listlessly from beautiful screen to beautiful screen, learning about spiritual and Indigenous cultures while searching for her place in these two worlds.

In Cheating Perspective, created by Tara “Kitty” Ren-wick, the player interacts with a much larger cast of char-acters, interviewing various high school students in an at-tempt to solve a criminal case. The characters are diverse: a socially awkward transgender bookworm, an Aboriginal girl with dreams of going to college who feels held back by her family’s weed dependency, a friendly blonde cheer-leader with a complex and difficult home life. The player is given the chance to explore these characters even further through individual interviews, moving beyond these la-bels and descriptions to understand even more about the people and their separate identities while solving the crime.

While the demos were quite short, both games were exceptionally mesmerizing, combining the accessibility of digital media with the possibilities of these new representa-tions and stories. The Digital Media Art+Cade and Indig-enous Gaming Panel provided a new and inspiring way of interacting with the Canadian media industry, encourag-ing new opportunities and showcasing an expanding, in-clusive, and rousing community that can only continue to grow.

Katie Elder | Contributor

AN EVENING WITH BRADFORD YOUNG

”“

TSDP PRESENTS

Tarantino sees Selma as a film that uses black aesthetics, but it uses them without Hollywood’s per-mission. To [Tarantino] it’s inferior, and that’s altogether a pretty big shame and an indication of what it’s like to work in the business as someone different. - Bradford Young

The Society of DirectHERS and ProduceHERS (TSDP) presented its inaugural Master Class, An Evening with Bradford Young, on October 15 at De-sign Cofounders in Toronto. The award-winning cinematographer behind Selma, A Most Violent Year, and Pariah discussed his impressive body of work with host Amanda Parris in front of a live audience.

Read more of Film & Music Editor Bronwyn Nisbet-Gray’s coverage of this exciting first-time event online at thestrand.ca/category/film-music.

Photography | Paramount Pictures

Stranded • the STRAND

15

Okay, so congrats or whatever. The Blue Jays had the third best record in the MLB and have come back from a 2-0 deficit to win their American League Division Se-ries over the Texas Rangers. And it was in particularly fantastic fashion, given José Bautista’s seventh inning home run. Don’t let it be said I don’t believe that. Also, this is not some anti-bat-flip old-fogey rant. Bat flips are cool. I’m cool and nice and live in Toronto, so I do have your best interests at heart.

Hear me out: despite the #ComeTogether gi-ant-slayer pride, your season’s attendance numbers lagged behind Boston and just edged out Detroit, two of the worst teams in the league. Detroit went bank-rupt, but its citizens were able to come out in compa-rable numbers to watch a team be absolute garbage. So a lot of you are not, to use a phrase others would use more pejoratively but that I will use purely for sake

of argument, “real fans.” There’s nothing wrong with that, it’s just bad when coupled with rapid success and chest-thumping pride.

The kind of sentiment I’ve been seeing from some of you lately stands in stark contrast to the sincere hope for your Maple Leafs, who are as if Hans Moleman getting hit in the groin with a football could be a hockey team. It’s funny to watch, but you do feel for him. If you want to actually be a sports city, you have to take footballs to the groin. If you just want to be around when every-thing’s coming up Milhouse, you will be exactly as well-liked as Milhouse. There’s nothing worse than a team full of bandwagon-jumpers winning a World Series, or, while we’re on the topic, the NBA Championship.

At his JFL42 headlining performance, cool and nice comedian Hannibal Buress had to eject two hecklers who felt he slighted the Raptors and Blue Jays. That’s

the image we are projecting to the world right now: drunk assholes who need to be ejected. For the record, that would be hard to do literally, but is so easy to do socially. Drake has worked so hard to make “The 6ix” become a not awful nickname for Toronto, despite how easy it will be to inspire “The Sucks” chants from other teams. Drake has worked so hard to make himself not a joke, and he lives in fear of Kendrick Lamar ever actu-ally taking a shot at him, because he knows it will carry the force of the Death Star. Toronto’s coolness hinges on people giving you a pass; they can choose to stop doing so at any time.

In your struggle for success, you’ve poised yourself for destruction. Icarus only fell because he flew too high. Maybe a drop in altitude and attitude is warranted.

Calm Down, Toronto: A Non-Torontonian Perspective

Cross Words

1. Goddesses Venus and ______6. VERMIN, singular10. x or y ___11. Oversharing warning (abbrev.)13. Disney On ___™14. Kind of moss, sorta15. 90s slang, opposite of ‘dope’17. George Bluth __, Oscar’s bro18. A kind of stunt (abbrev.)19. Valentine mood22. Tech brand 24. Another ___ in the machine25. Tai ___27. Strong cattle28. Ta-__

29. (x2) Thomas the Tank Engine’s catchphrase30. Toby Flenderson, __ representative32. _&_ music33. Large unit of time34. Irreplaceable songstress36. PM’s opposite37. 1 lap around the sun (abbrev.)38. Lunchtime option41. The gift of ___43. __ Brea Tar Pits44. 2 vowels45. From _ to _47. Lieutenant aboard the Starship Enterprise49. Fancy word for dirt51. “It’s Raining ___” (Hallelujah)52. 1 of 2 seaboards

1. Famed lady-loving poet2. Verb, as with pressure or one’s self3. Tiny body of water4. Donde ____ la bibliotheca?5. With 12 down, a national treasure 1st name/surname6. Puerto ____7. Self-aware robots, for example (abbrev.)8. “I need 30___ of Nutella, stat!”9. 1/3 of famed Hogwarts trio12. With 5 down, a national treasure 1st name/surname16. Initials of a Seth Rogen film 20. Kevin Gnapoor, math enthusiast, badass __21. Collective knowledge23. “I Wear My Sunglasses At Night” by ___ Hart26. ___ boy30. Olympian first lady31. Rhapsody __ ____34. Expression of surprise35. Composer _____ Schumann36. _ ___ by any other name39. __ are the champions40. Bread, in Québec42. Sesame seed ___46. Hyrule Princess, minus vowels and also ‘d’48. Also known __50. Ready __ not

Ariana Douglas | Staff Contributor

Across

Down

Illustration | Emily Pollock

Neil MacIsaac | Stranded Editor

Memorial • the STRAND

16

On Ken Taylor:One Victorian’s Experiences

Upon hearing of the passing of Kenneth Taylor, I was immediately saddened to hear Canada had lost a man who had made such invaluable contributions to the Canadi-an Foreign Service and the longstanding diplomatic relationship with our American neighbours. However, as time passed and I began to reflect on everything he had done, not only for Canada, but also for Victoria College, the full magnitude of his loss began to sink in.

Ken Taylor’s connection to Victoria College began long before his six-year term as Chancellor in 1998. Hailing from Calgary, Alberta, he completed his BA at Victo-ria College while living in South House at Burwash Hall. After working around the world both as a diplomat and in the private sector, he returned to Victoria College and served on the Board of Regents and Senate while Chancellor.

Taylor’s term came at a time when the Vic One program, the brainchild of former President Paul Gooch, was still very much in its infancy. Recognizing its potential and with the desire to pass on his enriching and delightful Vic experience to future Victorians who would walk the path he had walked not so long ago, Taylor strongly supported the program in his time serving on its Advisory Board from 2003-2005. It was during this time that Chancellor Taylor was also able to convince NATO Ambas-sador David Wright to fill the role of the Kenneth and Patricia Taylor Distinguished Professor in Foreign Affairs in Vic One’s Lester B. Pearson Stream for the social sci-ences, an endowment previously created by Victoria College to honour Taylor’s con-tributions as Chancellor. His investment and effort is still felt today as the Vic One program continues to thrive, having grown from the initial four streams offered to a total of eight today.

Personally, my experience as a Vic student has been enhanced as a direct result of Ken Taylor. When I visited Vic as a prospective student, I got the chance to sit and speak with Professor Wright, who helped convince me to apply to the Pearson Stream. This led me to volunteer to assist with the introductions for weekly plenary speakers. In a stroke of luck, I was assigned to introduce Professor Wright, Ken Taylor, and his wife, Dr. Patricia Taylor, as they discussed historical inaccuracies in the then-newly-re-leased film Argo. Leading up to the event, I was very nervous about portraying the lives of such accomplished individuals, but after the event I was comforted to hear from Taylor himself as he shook my hand and thanked me for the introduction.

A month later, I discovered that my favourite seat in the Isabel Bader Theatre had Ken Taylor’s name engraved on it.

There have been many times during my undergraduate years where I have con-templated the different paths to take with my education. It is in these moments that I remind myself that people like Ken Taylor were once in my position and went on to do great things.

In his parting message as chancellor for the Winter 2003/2004 issue of Vic Re-port, Taylor wrote: “As a Victoria College graduate, I am immensely grateful to have had the opportunity to serve Victoria in this capacity. I was able to meet many Vic students, alumni, faculty, and staff. What could be a more enriching and delightful experience?” Leading an exemplary life of service—to his country, his family, and to his surrounding community—was how Ken Taylor fulfilled the pledge to make a difference wherever he went (the expectation placed on all graduating Vic students).

Thank you, Ken Taylor.

Brenan Sivapragasam | Staff Writer

The Strand sat down with Professor David Wright—the Kenneth and Patricia Taylor Distinguished Professor of Foreign Affairs—to discuss the legacy left by his friend and colleague, Kenneth Taylor, both in Canada and at Vic.

To the outside world, Mr. Taylor was known as a heroic and courageous diplomat. When recalling the hostage crisis of 1979, Professor Wright states that Taylor “showed tremendous courage, was very decisive, and exercised remarkable judgment.” Nevertheless, Wright also stresses that these events “never changed [Taylor] fundamentally.” Despite appearing in the spotlight for many decades, Wright consistently highlights Taylor’s friendly and infor-mal character, which stayed with him throughout his life. At Victoria College, Taylor played a significant role in the creation of the Vic One program.

“He was always enormously enthusiastic about Victoria University,” Wright recalled over the phone. “Ken cared very much about education.” Taylor understood the importance of students learning from someone with

first-hand experience and knowledge of foreign affairs. Wright spent 30 years in the Foreign Service, making him an ideal candidate for the job. To Wright, Ken Taylor was not only a colleague, “he was definitely a mentor and an incredibly helpful one.” Of course, Taylor’s tutelage benefitted more people than just Wright. His work has left a lasting legacy in both the Canadian For-eign Service and at Victoria University. On this legacy, Wright summarized: “Sometimes you have to make decisions that involve challenges and risks, and I think it brought home to [Canadians], in a very vivid way, the importance of a diplomatic profession.”

For an accurate depiction of the events that occurred in 1979, Professor Wright suggests students both read and watch the film adaptation of Our Man in Teh-ran by Robert Wright.

Professor David WrightRemembers Ken Taylor

Nicole Paroyan | News Editor

“In his six years as Chancellor, Ken Taylor, despite living in New York, never missed an important Vic alumni event. He performed his role with genuine enthusiasm, be it a formal Victoria University occasion or an alumni event or reunion. Ken Taylor was truly a living example of Vic's motto: ‘Studies pass into

character.’ He was also my good friend, and I am going to miss him very much.”

Larry DaviesExecutive Director | Alumni Affairs and Advancement

Photography | Victoria College