Latest News

Arts & Entertainment, Books

Finding sanctuary in the written word

Jane Urquhart was born a writer, but she never envisioned that she would one day be considered among the ranks of the most widely read and respected Canadian authors. With the recent publication of her seventh novel, Sanctuary Line, Urquhart has been nominated  for the prestigious Giller Prize: an award honouring the author of an outstanding work of Canadian iterature.  

Aside from demonstrating Urquhart’s astonishing prose and vivid, cinematic descriptions, Sanctuary Line’s importance stems from its ability to incorporate—and masterfully weave together—a number of contemporary Canadian issues.

“It’s a novel that’s almost impossible to describe,” says Urquhart. “When I try to describe it, it sounds as if it should be 1,400 pages. But in fact it’s quite a slim book. I wanted it to be spare, not burdened with too much stuff because of the various things that were occupying my mind at the time.”

Among the many issues she grapples with are the plight of the monarch butterfly in Canada, the decline and almost full disappearance of the family farm in Ontario, and Canada’s uncharacteristic role as a combatant in Afghanistan. (Particularly female involvement in the combat.) Urquhart skillfully touches upon  these issues by telling the story of entomologist Liz Crane who returns to her family’s 150-year-old farm to study butterfly migration. There, she mourns her cousin Mandy who died in Afghanistan, and reminisces about how her uncle Stanley’s mechanization of farming techniques contributed to the demise of the traditional family farm.

While Urquhart is not among the camp of writers and scholars who consider Canadian literature to embody something inherently distinct from other Anglophone writing, she certainly credits her country’s unique geography and history with providing the landscapes for her works.

“My work is geographically autobiographical,” says Urquhart. “I do come from an agricultural past; a pioneer, Irish past that has intrigued me all my life. I didn’t grow up in Essex county, but I visited it every summer, so in that way I’m like Liz, who’s only in that world in the summertime.”

Urquhart’s work is also part of the body of contemporary Canadian fiction that has brought about the coining of a sub-genre called “Southern Ontario Gothic.” Invoking the Gothic genre made famous by American writers like William Faulkner and Tennessee Williams, the term describes works that similarly critique social conditions and moral hypocrisy, but take place in Ontario.

Other well-known Canadian writers whose works fit into this genre are Alice Munro, Margaret Atwood, and Timothy Findley. As Liz describes her family’s subtle mistreatment of the Mexicans hired to work the farm and emphasizes the ghostly presence of her dead family members, it’s no wonder Urquhart’s work is associated with this term.  

“Weirdly, this book may be more [Southern Ontario Gothic] than the works that got associated with that term,” says Urquhart. “Because I am dealing here with the ends of things—the moment when whatever it is that has existed in a seemingly stable state is no longer going to exist.”

And that emphasis on the ends of things that were seemingly stable is the root of the novel’s ironic title. Although the multi-generational Butler family felt incredibly secure in their prosperity and long-standing traditions, a series of events revealed throughout the novel ultimate disprove their apparent stability. While Liz goes back to her childhood summer home as a means of seeking refuge from her painful memories, the memories evoked by the place itself become even more painful.

“The understanding of sanctuary is often a confused one,” explains Urquhart. “The family felt so secure, as if what had been created around them was stable and forever. And of course that wasn’t the case.”  

Like many writers, Urquhart is convinced of literature’s ability to not only tell a compelling story, but to teach us something about our history and ourselves. As the study of Canadian history is fairly recent, it was left up to who she calls the “fictioneers” to fill in the gaps. Although she began her career as a poet, Urquhart sees the novel as unique in its ability to re-create lost worlds and bring life to individual stories.

“I like the novel better for me,” she says. “Not as a reader, but as a writer; I am able to create an alternative world and keep it with me for long periods of time. When I’m in the middle of writing a book, it’s the happiest time of all.”

Arts & Entertainment, Theatre

Opera de Montreal explores the dark price of laughter

Opera de Montreal’s season-opening production of Rigoletto’s famous tunes, virile tenor solos, rousing choruses, lavish costumes, and talented cast are well worth the price of admission.  

Spectators will be rewarded with a dark, compelling fable of comedy and fate. Rigoletto is the hunchbacked, misanthropic jester in the court of the Duke of Mantua—a libertine with limitless and dangerous desires who “shun[s] fidelity like a bad disease.”  

Rigoletto’s bitter joking gets him into trouble when he mocks a rival count, who puts a curse on him. When the Duke falls in love with Rigoletto’s cherished daughter Gilda, the jester vows revenge. The curse, however, prevents him from doing so.

Like most operas, Rigoletto’s plot moves slowly. The tunes, however, are so catchy that you don’t even notice. The opera runs a fast two hours and 30 minutes.

That’s not to say, however, that Rigoletto is just a sequence of foot-tapping songs. Composer Giuseppe Verdi was especially good at writing simultaneously accessible and serious scores, and Rigoletto is one of his masterpieces.  The quartet in Act III, in which four characters with totally different psychologies sing together in a coherent ensemble, is a world-famous piece of operatic art.  

Rigoletto is a complicated, tortured character, and baritone Anthony Michaels-Moore is excellent in the role. He despises his career, his employers, and mostly himself, but he is capable of powerful, concentrated love. Michaels-Moore’s rich voice is especially strong in Rigoletto’s introspective scenes, where it soars and falls with the character’s passionate emotional cadences.   

Opposite him, David Pomeroy is very good as the predatory Duke.  He prowls the stage like a panther, and is by turns slyly seductive and fiercely sexual. His voice isn’t as commanding as Michaels-Moore’s, but is full of style and bravado.  

In a supporting role as the lawless assassin Sparafucile, Ernesto Morillo’s broad, woody bass is also particularly memorable.    

The story is set in an unapologetically male world. The Duke’s courtiers’ sing three all-male choruses that are extraordinarily energetic, and the play’s most famous tune is “La donn’é mobile,” or “woman is fickle.”

Political incorrectness aside, Gilda is a multi-dimensional character, and soprano Sarah Coburn got a standing ovation at the curtain call as she sang Gilda’s challenging vocal parts admirably.

The 16th century set and costumes further enrich the drama. (It’s worth checking out the costumed mannequins in the concourses during intermission.)  The Duke’s court boasts a gaudy 25 foot tall statue of a cherub that emphasizes his decadence and lavish appetites.  

If you go, you’ll want to spend some time people-watching during intermission. Montreal’s aristocrats come to the opera dressed to kill, and if you stand by the bar you can witness a steady stream of them ordering $25 glasses of champagne.

Relinquish your credit card, find a date, get dressed up, and see Rigoletto. It’ll be a grand game of make-believe as you watch the actors onstage with your opera glasses and pretend you’re rich and famous.

Rigoletto is playing at Salle Wilfred-Pelletier, Place des Arts.   Tickets are $30 each for two productions (it’s probably the cheapest opportunity you’ll ever have to see an opera like this).

Opinion

Steven Very Wrong on Quebec Tuition Hike

McGill Tribune

I would like to challenge some of the faulty reasoning expressed in Brendan Steven’s column titled, “Scrap the Quebec Tuition Model” (McGill Tribune, September 20).  In his article, Brendan gauges the value of our entire higher education system through the lens of one university.  He confuses weakness in the government with the inability to equitably fund all tertiary institutions while satisfying the ambitious needs of McGill.  Heather Munroe-Blum would like McGill to rise up in the international rankings. There would be nothing wrong with that if we were a private university. But this action would impoverish our system.  And this is a critical problem, whereby Monroe-Blum may be doing great by McGill’s standards, but her significant lobbying is undermining the advantages of a low tuition rate for the majority of the other students in this province.

Steven states, “There is no solid evidence that the Quebec model improves education. In fact, Quebec lags behind Canada for proportions of young people holding a university degree. Quebec’s graduation rate lies well below the OECD average. Meanwhile, Quebec has had the lowest rate of increase of those holding degrees in the entirety of Canada since 1992.”  He claims that low tuition is not improving our graduation rate, but we must be careful not to look merely at university degree holders, because there are a variety of factors that influence university attendance and completion.  One of the reasons Quebec lags behind in graduation rates is because of the problems in both the primary and secondary levels of the Quebec education system, which contribute to a large dropout rate.

Surprisingly, Steven raises the issue of equalization payments. He states they are despised in the rest of Canada, but that is simply not true.  This issue is recycled across Canada when media outlets would like to sell more product or gather more attention to their product.  They do this by dragging out polarizing issues that perpetuate the “Quebec versus the rest of Canada” hyperbole.  These payments are mathematically calculated and used to pay for healthcare and education—big ticket items that would otherwise burden provincial finances.

Tuition is one way of increasing revenue to universities and I have no doubt the current government will try to increase the tuition rate over the next few years. Clearly, the voice of McGill is being heard in the Charest administration. But all tuition is artificial as most students in the entire country do not pay the “real” cost of a university education.  Tuition, however, like the price for any product, tends to rise until the market will bear no more—when the average investment does not equate to advantage or benefit. In fact this may already be the case for many students in Ontario, the province with some of the highest tuition fees in the country.  Steven advocates scrapping the current tuition model because it would be advantageous for McGill, and I have no doubt that it would. But is it worth destroying our current provincial system so that we can re-create Harvard in the heart of Montreal?

We have to look at other ways of generating revenue. Tuition is one method, but it is not the only way.

The best way to discuss this issue would be in a forum. I challenge the author to present his case at the PGSS/SSMU/AGSEM panel discussion on university financing this upcoming October.

Ryan Hughes is Vice-President External of the Post-Graduate Students’ Society of McGill University, and can be reached at [email protected].

Opinion

Another Open Letter to McGill University

McGill Tribune

I recently read that you placed extremely well in various rankings of universities around the world. Congratulations! You must be very proud. I hope you realize, that, as Heather Munroe-Blum herself said, this is in large part due to the students and alumni.

In light of this, my question to you is as follows: As an institution which prides itself on the calibre of its student population, who claims that its graduates are in a league of their own—that they are leaders and innovators in their fields—would you not be proud to see the fruits of your labour right in front of you?

Wouldn’t your eyes swell with tears at the sight of individuals, in whom you have invested so much of your time and energy practicing what you have apparently taught them? Wouldn’t you feel a sense of accomplishment in knowing that students from different faculties, faculties that wouldn’t necessarily have anything to do with each other, are willing to work together for a common goal that does not in any way have a grade or money sign assigned to it? This unifying goal is one that is pure, simple, and good. Aren’t those the values you want to teach?

When your students stood together in front of Leacock before Senate, did you not feel a tugging at your heart strings? How could you not be moved—even if you disagreed with them—by their passion and fervour and dedication?

Life and death do not depend on your decision, but confidence in ourselves and each other does.

This issue of the Architecture Café is greater than brownies and zaatars. It’s about us; it’s about the students—the reason that this university exists in the first place. It’s about us having a voice, and a place to belong to, grow, learn, and share. It’s about sometimes putting the quality of life before the dollars and cents of it all.

We’re not asking you to say yes to the Architecture Café right away, but only to let us try and convince you of what we the students are so convinced ourselves—that the café is integral to the life and history of this esteemed establishment and that we can find a way to make it work. Let us try to devise a sustainable business plan that pleases both you and us. But really, it shouldn’t be you, the university, and us, the students. Shouldn’t it just be an all encompassing us?

We’re asking you to let us put in practice the skills and knowledge you pride yourself in having instilled in us. We understand that you have a contract with Aramark, and in a way, I guess we should feel proud that they truly viewed the Architecture Café as competition. We understand that you’re trying to honour your agreement with them, but wasn’t your first agreement with us, the students?

Katherine Messina is an Architecture Master’s student. Reach her at [email protected].

Opinion

QPIRG Opt-Out Campaign

McGill Tribune

As many McGill students know, several associations have once again joined together to launch the QPIRG Opt-Out Campaign. Every semester, the campaign aims to inform students about their right to opt-out of the Quebec Public Interest Research Group. We never expected that this year QPIRG would use violence to try and stop us.

QPIRG was founded some 23 years ago as an organization pursuing the interests of students on matters of public concern. In this respect, they have failed atrociously. QPIRG collects $7.50 per year per student of student fees, which it pools to finance the activities of radical fringe groups.

The list is stunning. The Coalition for Justice for Adil Charkaoui seeks the immediate release of all terror suspects currently detained by the Canadian government under security certificates. Students Taking Action in Chiapas stands in solidarity with the Zapatistas of Mexico, a violent rebel movement, and seeks to bring the struggle “back home” to Canada. The Chaotic Insurrection Ensemble actively promotes anarchism, while Tadamon! is an anti-capitalist, anti-corporate organization which lobbied the Canadian government to remove Hezbollah from the terrorist organization list. QPIRG claims that Israel is an apartheid state.

QPIRG also publishes School Schmool, the organizer that once celebrated the creation of the pipe bomb and teaches readers how to vandalize and destroy private property.

The Opt-Out Campaign features a diverse array of organizations. Free the Children McGill, the Italian Student’s Association, and Swiss Club are only a few examples. We want students to know that QPIRG doesn’t have a right to your money: you can take it back, and withdraw your consent from the causes that they support.

QPIRG itself is terrified of students making an informed decision on whether to opt-out. They are so terrified, in fact, that some of their members have actively harassed the Opt-Out Campaign. The removal of flyers and the destruction of posters have antagonized what should be a free and open debate.

These acts of political intimidation culminated on September 23 when QPIRG members discovered that our campaign was tabling in the MacDonald Engineering Building. While at first these individuals engaged in argument, they became more aggressive as tabling continued; this aggression spiraled into the hurling of racial slurs and stereotyping, in addition to the destruction of campaign property.

The crowd of QPIRG members grew, and they began to physically obstruct members of the Opt-Out Campaign from distributing flyers. McGill Security was contacted, and QPIRG was told to maintain a reasonable distance from the Opt-Out Campaign.

While the situation stabilized, it eventually deteriorated when Maddie Ritts (a member of QPIRG’s Board of Directors) stormed up to the Opt-Out table and proceeded to steal and violently rip posters. Security caught several individuals, and a report has been filed with administration.

Campaign members were fortunate to have the presence of McGill Security, who stood firmly for free speech when they told QPIRG that political intimidation was unacceptable in a university atmosphere.

Campaign members did not expect such a violent response to our exercise of free speech and open debate. We thought that we could engage in a sincere disagreement with QPIRG, and have our disagreement aired respectfully.

Clearly, we were terribly wrong. QPIRG is only concerned with its pocketbook, not with the concerns of McGill students.

QPIRG needs to be sent a message: we all have the right to express our thoughts and voice our dissent, and we shouldn’t be bullied for it. Don’t let QPIRG intimidate you, or tell you that they have a right to your money. We urge you to inform yourself further, and if you feel that this group doesn’t deserve your money, don’t give it to them.

The QPIRG Opt-Out Campaign is a coalition of concerned students and associations dedicated to informing students about their right to opt-out and to explaining why we feel they ought to. A complete list of all those involved can be found at qpirgoptout.com.

Nathaniel Elfassy, Marc-Olivier Fortin, Shayna Goldman, Lisa McLennan, Divya Pahwa, Brendan Steven, and Jess Weiser contributed to this article.

News

QPIRG confronts Opt-Out Campaign in alleged altercation

Holly Stewart

On Thursday, Quebec Public Interest Research Group supporters and Board of Directors members surrounded a table hosted by the QPIRG Opt-Out Campaign in the hallway between the McConnell Engineering and Frank Dawson Adams buildings. QPIRG attempted to block QPRIG Opt-Out campaigners from distributing flyers and reportedly hurled slurs. The incident culminated in a QPIRG board member ripping QPIRG Opt-Out posters and leaving the scene with a stack of the Opt-Out Campaign’s flyers.

The QPIRG Opt-Out Campaign had set up a table to distribute flyers to passing students with information on why students should opt-out of the QPIRG fee and instructions for how to do so on Minerva. Jess Weiser, one of the leaders of the Opt-Out Campaign, said that a number of QPIRG board members and supporters were also present and tried to “obstruct [Opt-Out campaign members] from giving a flyer and would instead give a QPIRG flyer.”

According to Weiser, the number of QPIRG supporters around the Opt-Out table steadily grew from two or three to about 10, at which point McGill Security was contacted and QPIRG was told to move down the hall.

However, QPIRG board members moved back towards the Opt-Out campaign’s table and continued the competitive flyering until one QPIRG supporter and board member, Maddie Ritts, “stormed up to the Opt-Out table and proceeded to steal and violently rip several posters,” according to an Opt-Out Campaign press release. The press release also called for her immediate resignation from the QPIRG Board of Directors.

Ritts said her actions were completely self-driven and not in any way mandated by QPIRG. According to Ritts, she grabbed several flyers and was then seized by Weiser, who Ritts said refused to let go of her as she yelled, “Let go of me. Please let go of me.”

“Despite my attempts to free myself from this person’s physical control,” Ritts said, “he would not release me until the person who was flyering with him reminded him that physical harm done to another person is, unlike the removal of a stack of flyers from a table, on a whole other level of violent and aggressive behaviour.”

Weiser, however, denied these allegations, saying he never touched Ritts.

Rae Dooley, a member of the QPIRG Board of Directors and former Students’ Society of McGill University VP university affairs, said she could understand the intensity of this debate.

“The [QPIRG Opt-Out Campaign] fundamentally disagrees with a lot of our political stances,” she said. “When you’re getting into sort of very heated ideological debates like that, it’s going to get heated.”

But Weiser explained that he felt although heated debate is expected, there is a line that all parties involved need to respect.

“It’s extremely disheartening,” Weiser said. “I mean we can have political discussions, we can have political debates, we can have political disagreements. But when it comes to destroying private property, it’s a problem. And when it comes to using physical violence, it’s a big problem.”

Thursday’s events were the latest in a series of incidents involving the two groups, including the hacking of QPIRG’s website and phrases like “SLANDER” and “FUCK YOU” being written on Opt-Out flyers on campus.

“Stuff like getting our website hacked. Come on, are we in university?” Dooley said. “It’s escalated but I don’t think it’s going to get out of hand, I’m not really concerned about that.”

Weiser also expressed concern over some of the actions related to this ongoing debate, citing what some QPIRG members said to him at the time of the aforementioned incident.

“QPIRG likes to talk about themselves as an anti-racist group, yet it’s ironic that they used racial slurs against us,” he said. “‘Fucking rich white boy.’ Those were the three or four words [they used].”

The two groups have yet to have an official discussion in a formal setting. “They’ve never asked to talk to us directly,” Dooley said.

 “[We’ve made] consistent and serious efforts to talk to [the Opt-Out Campaign member] groups individually,” Ritts added.

In an interview, though, Weiser said he was willing to sit down with QPIRG members and discuss the issue.

“If anyone believes there’s anything [in their campaign] that’s not factual or that warrants any kind of revision, bring it to our attention immediately,” he said. “We will check it over, and if it deserves to be revised or changed, we’ll duly do it immediately.”

 Weiser said he felt that the Opt-Out Campaign has been very successful this year and has reached a large number of students.

“Students see what QPIRG does [and] students don’t like what QPIRG does,” he said. “Students are taking their money back from QPIRG and QPIRG is seeing a big drop on their bottom line and clearly they don’t like that.”

The opt-out system was originally devised by QPIRG in 1988, but the organization has since grown dissatisfied with it.

“[The current opt-out system] is fundamentally undemocratic and in violation of our MOA with McGill University,” Ritts said.

In the past, students could opt-out of a fee by visiting the organization in person or by loggingon to its website. Ritts said QPIRG believes McGill is out of line in its collecting and distributing of student fees through Minerva.

“The McGill administration does not support QPIRG or independent student organizations financially, but they made a decision affecting the budgets of many of these student groups (including QPIRG) without consultation, and without addressing the concerns of the SSMU,” she said.

Spencer Burger, an Arts representative to SSMU, said he thought both groups were out of line and that all on-campus debate and discussion must be “civil and non-violent.”

“It was a very inappropriate action, what some members of QPIRG did in vandalizing property, because ultimately, everything is free in the marketplace of ideas and it’s important that we do not have any form of intimidation take place on the campus,” Burger said. “Students have a right to their opinions and I think we should all respect that.”

News

Arts Execs reveal $30,000 Frosh budget deficit at Council

The Arts Undergraduate Society announced on Wednesday that Arts Frosh had taken in far less than what was needed to cover the event’s expenditures, resulting in a budget deficit of $30,105.

AUS Vice-President Finance Majd Al Khaldi spent more than an hour detailing how the event went so deeply into the red at AUS Council.

Much of the revenue shortfall, Al Khaldi said, stemmed from the fact that Nampande Londe, the vice-president in charge of organizing Arts Frosh, decided to raise the cap for attendance to 1,800 participants. More first years chose to register online this summer, which led Londe to believe that a high number would also register on campus in August.

Based on the higher cap, the AUS projected that Arts Frosh would take in $170,863. As the registration numbers in the days leading up to Frosh failed to meet projections, however, the AUS decided to open Frosh to all McGill students in an effort to register as many people as possible.

Nevertheless, this last-ditch effort failed to register many more students. About 1,482 students registered for Arts Frosh, and the event took in $137,637.

Members of AUS Council were made aware of the shortfall during the first week of term, but most of them did not see the budget until Wednesday.

“When I saw the budget, I was appalled,” said Amara Possian, an Arts senator who has been involved in Frosh for the past three years. “Some of the things they spent money on were absurd.”

Froshies, for example, have typically spent the last night of Arts Frosh at St. Sulpice, a popular bar on St. Denis Street, which hosted the event free of charge. This year, though, Londe paid to book the Just for Laughs Theatre.

After news of the loss broke in campus newspapers, Londe resigned her position as AUS VP events on September 14. She cited personal reasons in her decision to resign and is no longer a student at McGill.

Many of Frosh’s financial difficulties, Possian said, stemmed from Londe’s mismanagement. She added that councillors were ready to impeach her if she had not resigned.

Although Londe was not present at Wednesday’s meeting, councilors voiced concerns about how the event generated such a large shortfall.

“Raising the cap was the biggest problem they had, and I wasn’t aware of the extent to which that was going to have an effect on the deficit,” said Cathryn Supko, a representative to AUS Council from the Society of Undergraduate Math Students. “I was actually really fascinated by the fact that they did not spend as much as they anticipated, and there was still quite a significant deficit.”

Several councillors also questioned some of the event’s expenditures. The AUS originally budgeted $4,950 to pay its six Frosh coordinators, who assisted Londe in organizing the event. The AUS subsequently raised their total pay to $7,000, despite the fact that one of the coordinators quit midway through the summer.

“[The decision to raise the coordinator’s stipend] was made by the executive based on the fact that these coordinators had to pull out more work based on the fact that somewhere halfway through the summer the cap was raised,” Al Khaldi said. “They ended up planning an event for 1,800 students instead of 1,400, hence this raise.”

In addition, the budget presented by Al Khaldi showed that the AUS spent $5,505 on food for a barbeque on the second day of Frosh, though only $2,263 was budgeted for the meal. Al Khaldi attributed the overrun to Casey Adams, one of the Frosh coordinators, who failed to order the food from Provigo far enough in advance.

The AUS spent far more on Frosh this summer than in previous years. Total expenditures ran to $167,752 this year—about $46,000 more than last year.

According to Al Khaldi, Arts Frosh had budgeted to lose money on Frosh, but these projections showed the event losing $7,933.

Councillors also expressed concern that Al Khaldi was unable to be more involved in the Frosh planning process. Though Al Khaldi was not required to help plan Frosh or be in Montreal over the summer, councillors suggested that the future holders of Al Khaldi’s position might take a larger role in Frosh.

“I think that it would have been better to have the VP finance there [during Frosh planning] to look over the budget and work in conjunction with them the whole summer,” said Tim Apedaile, the president of the Political Science Students Association. “I think that’s a positive that’s come of this because I think they’re moving towards doing that.”

McGill, News

Students rally to save the Architecture Cafe

Margot Van Der Krogt

In a last-ditch attempt to save the Architecture Café, hundreds of students gathered to protest outside the Leacock Building last Wednesday afternoon.

 The rally kicked off minutes before McGill’s first senate meeting of the year was scheduled to begin in Leacock 232. As administrators, professors, and other members of senate entered the building, students chanted slogans such as “Save Arch Café” and “Show some respect and show us the numbers,” backed by banging drums.

McGill’s administration permanently shut down the café at the start of the school year, citing concerns about the management and profitability of the café. However, they have refused to disclose exact figures.

At Wednesday’s demonstration, the largest at the university in recent memory, students held signs displaying phrases like “McGill ranked number one in ignoring students” and “Show us the numbers or give back the Arch Café.”

“I think it’s really upsetting that they’re shutting down the café, our last student-run food service, and they have absolutely no proof that they’re running a deficit,” said Taylor Stocks, a U3 political science student who attended the rally. “I mean, what’s next? We need a place to work on campus that we run.”

“The Architecture Café was always a great place to go to get reasonably priced food during breaks, and it was student run which was great,” added Cathryn Supko, U2 mathematics. “I think it’s really unfortunate that it’s not around anymore and [the administration is] not even giving us legitimate evidence for why they’re closing it. We have the right to know what’s going on.”

Students’ Society of McGill University President Zach Newburgh appeared at the rally and thanked the students for helping to send the administration a message.

The rally continued after the Senate meeting started and eventually made its way around campus towards the Macdonald-Harrington Building, where the Architecture Café was located. McGill Security refused entry to protesting students.

For some students, the café itself is not the main issue, but rather the way the administration deals with student needs and responds to their petitions.

 “I think it’s more than just the café,” said Lily Schwarzbaum, a U1 international development student at the rally. “I think it’s a representation of the attitude of the administration towards students, the manner in which they did it was really inappropriate. They want to replace it with study space, which is very clearly not what the students want.”

The Engineering Undergraduate Society, in conjunction with the Architecture Students Association, has presented an alternative proposal to closing the café to the administration, in which the EUS would take over the café and establish it as a student run service, similar to the Frostbite and Copi-EUS food outlets in the engineering buildings.

Despite the optimistic atmosphere at the rally, the efforts of Arts Senator Amara Possian along with those of SSMU President Zach Newburgh and Vice-President University Affairs Joshua Abaki at senate failed to sway the administration. At senate, Possian, Newburgh, and Abaki cited the rally and a slate of student signatures supporting the proposal for the EUS to run the café under their management.

Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning) Morton Mendelson, however, said that the Architecture Café’s closure was part of a long process of phasing out student-run food services on campus. He rejected calls to re-examine the issue.

“I can accept that people in the university feel attached to the café, but I am convinced that the café can no longer operate at a managerial loss,” Mendelson said. “There’s been a number of years where we had student run services on campus which generated serious problems that were addressed by taking over.”

The café, Mendelson said, was operating at a loss which the university could no longer afford. He added that the purpose of having co-ordinated food services on campus is to improve the delivery of [these] services on campus.

“[When the café was] run by ASA, students involved were given seven years notice that there will be a change,” said Mendelson regarding claims that students were not consulted when the closing of the café was considered. “The administration does not wish to revisit the issue.”

 

We have additional photo coverage available online

News

McGill placed among world’s best schools in two rankings

In two rankings released this month, McGill University was recognized as one of the world’s top universities. The QS World University Rankings placed McGill 19th globally and first in Canada, while the Times Higher Education (THE) Rankings placed McGill 35th globally and third in Canada.

McGill has been in the top 25 universities in the world by the QS rankings for the last seven years. It was ranked highest in 2007, when it was ranked 12th globally. This year, the QS rankings also affirmed McGill among the top 35 universities in Arts & Humanities, Engineering & Technology, Life Sciences & Medicine, Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences & Management.

In the THE rankings, McGill placed behind the University of Toronto and the University of British Columbia within Canada.

The publications of the two reports is the first since the end of the partnership between QS Quacquarelli Symonds Ltd and Times Higher Education. Previously, the two organizations worked together, with QS as the data supplier for THE magazine. This year, however, QS produced rankings in association with partners such as US News & World Report and Scopus, the Elsevier database. THE partnered with Thomson Reuters to produce its own university rankings.

“THE is very happy to be working with Thomson Reuters, who have very reliable data collection methods,” said Richard Renolds, a researcher for THE. “THE has rebalanced away from reputational surveys and adopted a more scientific approach.”

The two ranking systems now employ substantially different methodologies. Academic reputation  is the largest part of the QS rankings, compromising 40 per cent of a university’s score. This is measured by an academic peer review, an opinion survey asking active academics about top universities in their field.

 The THE rankings on the other hand, place the greatest weight on citations, which make up 32.5 per cent of a university’s ranking, compared to just 20 per cent in the QS rankings. THE also assigns equal weights to teaching and research, with each accounting for 30 per cent of a university’s score.

 Another advantageous factor for McGill in the QS rankings is the greater weight placed on international students and faculty (10 per cent compared to 5 per cent), a category in which McGill has consistently performed well.

“Part of both the teaching and the research components of the ranking had a reputational component to it as well,” said Vaughan Dowie, executive head of public affairs at McGill.

Dowie said that he was pleased with the recognition McGill was given and explained that the rankings are a useful method of determining how McGill is performing from year to year.

Dowie also spoke about the unique financial situation faced by McGill compared to other universities of a similar stature.

“We have a reality in Quebec in terms of the funding issues which is part of the equation. The kind of miracle of McGill rankings is that with a much smaller resource base than that of universities with which we are ranked, we still do really well. We will continue to do more with less.”

Dowie’s words echoed similar statements made by McGill Principal and Vice-Chancellor Heather Munroe-Blum.

“[McGill is] tremendously gratified to be recognized consistently as one of the world’s leading universities,” Munroe-Blum said in a press release. “[McGill has] managed to maintain its standing despite a growing funding gap between us and the universities with which we compete.”

News

Dawson shooting game taken off-line by creator

“Dawson College Massacre,” a controversial videogame based on the 2006 shootings at Dawson College that killed one and wounded 19, was removed from the Internet on September 17 by its creator, a computer programmer with the screen name Virtuaman.

Virtuaman initially refused to remove it despite numerous complaints. He only did so after discovering that the game offended the victim’s family.

“I don’t really care who or what plays my games, I don’t really care if the average person is angry about my game or upset,” Virtuaman said.

“The victims, however, I can understand they could be upset knowing this thing exists, and I can understand if they are angry at me. [But] some that I spoke with were not angry with me. They were great people. They were able to understand that it’s just a game that tries to explore the mind of a killer.”

The game was posted on the Internet shortly before the fourth anniversary of the shooting. It irked many close to the incident and received mixed reviews from others.

Despite complaints, police were unable to take the game down since it did not violate any laws.

“We did what we could do, which is strongly suggest to the Internet provider to take out the game because we didn’t think it was of good taste,” said Marie-Elaine Ladouceur, a spokeswoman for the Montreal Police Department.

Despite police urgings, both Virtuaman and the U.S.-based website initially refused to take down the game.

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue