Tufts students that have a penchant for filmmaking and live in university housing will soon have the opportunity to compete in ResLife Shorts, a short film competition allowing students to highlight different aspects of living in university housing.
A panel of judges will select three winning videos, and those three will be posted on the Office of Residential Life and Learning's Web site for the next academic year and will be used in Tufts promotional materials. The winners will be revealed at an "Oscar Night" event on April 14.
The idea for the competition came from Assistant Professor of English Radiclani Clytus, the faculty member in residence for Houston Hall. Clytus became a faculty in residence about a year ago.
"This year, while on sabbatical I've been pretty much away from the dorms and had to do a lot of research for my first book," Clytus said. "I thought one way I could actually kind of keep myself involved in academic community was to put on an event that could possibly involve the entire campus."
"[The idea for the competition] came out of essentially seeing how the relationship between ResLife and students is oftentimes kind of an antagonistic one. People would often talk about the nature of ResLife is being one where you don't get the kind of room or housing that you wanted," Clytus said. "Ultimately, I thought, 'Is there a way in which we can do something that will allow students to be more self?reflecting about the more productive aspects of living on campus?'
"I thought one way that could actually happen is by having them do kinds of self?reflective video statements about their organization or the kind of social life or academic or cultural communities that have been facilitated because they reside on campus, or in on campus housing or make use of the resources provided by the university."
Clytus hopes that students without extensive filmmaking experience and equipment don't feel intimidated into believing they need top?of?the?line gear to produce a good film. "The idea was supposed to be that students wouldn't have to go out and buy some expensive ... $1000 HD camera, but that you could use whatever preexisting technology you already have on your cell phone or ... Flip cameras," Clytus said.
Though Clytus' expertise is 19th?century American literary history and African?American literature, his work has led him to study cinema. "As someone who got a PhD in American Studies, a lot of my work focuses on visual culture and so I've always been interested in moving images and the history of moving images," Clytus said.
Both individuals and groups can submit videos to the competition. "I thought that people would make videos about study groups, friendships and social organizations. I happen to know that there are a number of culture houses that are going to produce videos about their organizations on campus and what kinds of benefits [the campus] serves for the student community academically, socially or otherwise," Clytus said. Clytus noted that some might use the competition to take a critical look at parts of the university if they so choose.
Dean of Undergraduate Education James Glaser is one believer in the potential of the ResLife Shorts competition. "I think that one of the things we can do here is make sure learning happens in all kinds of environments, and I think the residence hall is a very healthy environment to have intellectual exchange and cultural experiences and middle?of?the?night conversations, you know, deep conversations about life," Glaser said. "So, I'm very happy when there are initiatives coming out of ResLife to engage students intellectually, and this was one such initiative that really came from the minds and imaginations of the scholars in residence."
Glaser credited professors Clytus and Assistant Professor of History Kris Manjapra for developing the idea for the competition. "I had no role in the conceiving of the project and no role in developing the idea. I am providing a little bit of money to help them, and I'm providing my services as a judge, but I have no qualifications as a judge other than willing to give a little bit of my time," Glaser said.
For students wondering what judge Glaser might be looking for in entries, he said he is looking for creativity rather than technically proficient filmmaking. "What I care about is that people exercise their imagination, and so obviously there will be people there that have a sense of what film looks like technically and from the perspective of a cinematographer, but I don't have any expertise in that at all, and the only thing I feel capable of judging is my own response to it and I tend to respond to imagination and creativity, so that's what I'm going to be looking for. But there's several different judges and they'll all be brining something different to the table," Glazer said.
Students that are looking to enhance the cinematic qualities of their entries can attend a film editing seminar today from 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. in Barnum 008 or from 7;)) to 8:30 p.m. in Pearson 106.
Columbia University School of the Arts film student Bryan Parker, a friend of Clytus', will be instructing for the seminar. The seminar will focus on editing with Apple's popular iMovie editing software.
Parker has extensive experience in numerous types of filmmaking and will be able to instruct students in a variety of film styles.
"I used to do documentary work for the U.N. so I spent a few years in Asia shooting docs for them, basic projects and project documentaries. I graduated from Harvard with a degree in Political Science and Documentary Filmaking," Parker said, "Now, I go between neo?realism and social problems and offbeat comedies."
Parker also shoots music videos and commercials with fellow Columbia film student Gregg Conde, who also knows Clytus. "It helps pay the bills," Parker said.
The deadline for submissions for the competition is April 7. Students that want to learn more can visit the ResLife Web site.
Tori Amos once sang, "If the sharpest thing where you come is a blade of grass, take me with you."
Perhaps being an English and French double major has inspired my reverence for language and the acknowledgement of the power it can wield to disparage and upset. Or perhaps it was my obsessive devotion to the extremely talented musician Tori Amos that clinched the deal. Regardless, I am writing this column with the wholehearted belief in the importance of words.
Having said that, I'd like to discuss the shame?inducing "F" word: Feminist. (I hope that wasn't censored, but if so, expect an acrostic to reveal the naughty word.)
Although feminism denotes the acceptance of a value system to which many people would have no problem aligning themselves, identifying as a feminist carries the burden of negative stereotypes.
Many people do not consider themselves feminists, though feminism seeks to benefit everyone, whether directly or indirectly. Why not sign yourself over to a dogma that promotes the equal rights, recognition and opportunities for people in all spheres of life? The stigma further encourages the reproduction of the apologetic clause: "I'm not a feminist, but [insert feminist statement here]." But why should society consign those supporting equal rights to a disclaimer? The forceful grouping of all feminists into a bag of unsavory adjectives probably stops many (like those who are ideological but not nominal feminists) from using this label. Thus, as "Schoolhouse Rock" suggests, I'll begin by unpacking these adjectives.
Though several more stereotypical characteristics exist, these four descriptors first come to mind: man?hating, angry, ugly and whiny. To start with, I'd like to debunk the belief that feminists hate men with empirical data. A 2009 University of Houston study found that women identifying as non?feminists report stronger feelings of hostility toward men in comparison to those identifying as feminists. Fancy that: a stereotype that doesn't convey the entire truth. The kicker of the study lies in the explanation that the findings likely resulted from the umbrage non?feminists take with being restricted within the traditional spheres they themselves support. Perhaps the adjective "man?hating" would do better to reinvent itself. Maybe inequality?hating? It just doesn't have the same ring though.
Joking aside, feminism is not a movement that promotes hate; it seeks to spread awareness and enact change in unfair systems. Dismissing it with the polarizing adjective "man?hating" reveals nothing about feminism; conversely, the trivializing act affirms the existence of gender inequality in stereotyping a movement that aims to stop the marginalization of a large portion of the population, specifically women.
The remaining three adjectives all function similarly in that each aspires to illegitimize feminists by calling their femininity into question, which implicitly suggests that men aren't feminists. As you may well know, angry, ugly and whiny are not very becoming traits for young ladies. The prominent discourse discounts feminists as failures to a social construct of femininity without addressing the ideological aspects of feminism.
Also, a resistance to recognize the inequalities existing within society exists; thus, it dismisses the way in which individual, discriminatory acts can indicate issues at the institutional level, which then frames the protests of those seeking fairness as irritating complaints already heard and sufficiently dealt with. Feminists then aren't allowed to be angry and express it without backlash, for only men can express anger without reproach. Thus, the stereotypes themselves necessitate the existence of feminism to combat the reality of gender inequality.
I am feminist, and you've heard me roar.
--
