OPEN Review: An Absolutely Remarkable Thing

Cover Art Credit: https://www.kaitlinkall.com/ 

Okay, if you like sci-fi commentaries on humanity and our unique place in the universe, and you haven’t read this book, please go out and borrow it from a library right now. 

An Absolutely Remarkable Thing is a novel written by the science nerd and face of Crash Course himself, Hank Green, in 2017. It tackles issues of social relations, fame, and media, making meaning in a world that’s constantly changing faster than any of us can keep up with. 

Summary: April May is a young artist trying to pay off her student loans and make it in New York City. When she happens upon a beautiful statue that catches her creative eye, April makes a decision that will change her life forever. hijinks ensue, April faces death, unfathomable dreams, and most frighteningly of all, SOCIAL MEDIA. She wants to make a difference in the world, but she’s desperately balancing between enacting change for better or for worse. 

An Absolutely Remarkable Thing is a deep dive into what makes humanity special: what motivates us, what brings out our best, and what brings out our worst. Hank Green has such a beautiful take on us and all our weird ticks. He picks apart many of the people who are found in our modern society: internet haters, fear mongers, scientists passionate about making a positive difference, political figures, newscasters, rural sheep farmers, and everyone in between, and he does it through the lens of a witty, dramatic 20-something-year-old woman. I love this man so much. 

Oh, and this book is Gay. I guess I should mention that in an OPEN media review. April May is canonically Bisexual and there are other characters that are in our community as well. Hank Green himself is Bi, and I’m all here for the support. The great part about An Absolutely Remarkable Thing is that all the LGBT+ people in this series are deep, fleshed-out characters. They are not “The Gaytm ” best friend, or “The Gaytm ” parents, nah. They are people, who happen to be gay. There is also a character in the sequel (yes there is a sequel, if you read this one, PLEASE read that one too) that is canonically Agender, which warms my AroAceAge heart. 

So if you’re looking for a great read, looking to have a good laugh, solve a few puzzles, and have an existential crisis or two, then I highly suggest that you give this book a glance.

The Crucial Role of Project Teams in Engineering Education at Olin

Hello, Olin community! For those who may not know me, my name is Ishaan, and I’m currently a senior. Many of you might recognize me as the previous project manager for Olin Electric Motorsports and a passionate advocate for project teams on our campus. As I near the end of my college journey, I’d like to share my thoughts on the significant role of project teams as someone who has led one.

Olin’s unique approach to engineering education is why I’m here. The first two years of coursework focus on leveling the playing field and providing students with essential technical knowledge used in real-world engineering through a project based curriculum.

However, there are some challenges. Course budgets often constrain the depth of project-based learning we initially came to Olin for. In an effort to simplify the curriculum, some course content gets cut, resulting in limited opportunities for in-depth exploration. This situation becomes even more pronounced in the junior and senior years, where there’s a shortage of advanced engineering courses. While I understood that Olin’s project-based philosophy might mean sacrificing certain depth, I didn’t expect course cutbacks and budget constraints.

Furthermore, most classes at Olin are just one semester long, which leaves little time to dive deeply into project details beyond the Minimum Viable Product (MVP) stage. This constraint often prevents students from diving into the details of a project.

The shortcomings of our classes have prompted many students to turn to project teams as a valuable learning opportunity. Project teams offer extended timelines that allow us to move beyond the MVP phase, providing the resources to undertake significant engineering projects and fill in the gaps missed by classes.

While the prototyping and MVP skills gained from coursework are invaluable for early-stage design, creating a product often demands a level of detail that goes beyond what is typically covered in a classroom setting at Olin. The current semester structure doesn’t allow students ample time to practice this detail-oriented engineering.

My involvement in project teams has been instrumental in securing internships. The skills I’ve acquired in these teams have proven indispensable in real-world engineering environments. In interviews, I find that I talk more about my project team experiences, as these projects offer a level of detail that surpasses most class projects.

Project teams, such as Olin Electric Motorsports, have a clear goal in mind. In our case, we aim to create an inclusive learning environment by building a formula-style electric race car. The complexity of this endeavor is both challenging and exciting due to how integrated it is. 

These systems present a complex engineering challenge. The integrated nature means that one system’s failure can result in missed learning opportunities for others. This is why our team may not always take extreme technical risks or engage in groundbreaking innovations. Balancing innovation with technical risk mitigation, such as having backups from previous years, is an invaluable lesson to carry forward.

One of the biggest learning opportunities from project teams is the leadership and teamwork skills you gain. Most projects in Olin classes are teams of 5 people. On Olin Electric Motorsports last year, we had 62 students, and this year 81. The leadership team learns how to manage all these students to ensure that both their goals and the team’s goals are achieved. They learn about motivating others, teaching others, and managing the resources of the team. It’s an experience unlike anything else. 

Many of the decisions we make as a team may seem corporate from the outside, but there’s a reason why so many members stay on our team. The leadership team every year has to figure out how to provide the best learning opportunities to its members. Sometimes that means remaking a project so everyone can learn from it. Competition is a large motivator for students as well, even when we didn’t drive our car at competition, members were excited to work on the next car based on what they learned from going to competition. 

While project teams offer incredible learning opportunities, they can also demand a significant investment of time and energy, sometimes taking a toll on students’ mental health. Last year, I dedicated 10-30 hours per week to Olin Electric Motorsports on top of a 16-credit workload for both semesters. This strain led me to work on making project team involvement more sustainable by collaborating with the Academic Review Board and other stakeholders.

In summary, project teams are a vital component of engineering education at Olin College. They fill the gaps left by traditional coursework and provide students with invaluable hands-on experience, enabling them to excel in real-world engineering environments. The incredible challenge they pose makes them a rewarding experience for their members. We need to continue redefining the project team experience so that it is fulfilling but also sustainable.

Breaking the 7th wall (how the suite walls changed Olin)

A suitemate is sitting in the common area, eating some snacks and working on their laptop. Another suite member enters, looking to recharge their social battery. Other suitemates in their room hear the camaraderie and sit alongside everyone else to work, relax, or play. As a group, they decide to visit a suite down the hall that’s hosting a coffee shop later that night. The shared space created a sense of responsibility for ourselves and each other. This was the safe space where Olin culture was born, where Olin ideas were cultivated.

The classroom is where the seed is planted – our collective first year at Olin taught us about the importance of failure, and not to be ashamed of it. The classroom planted the seed about codesign and setting our own goals. These were things we had not been exposed to before, and it was our first time holding these ideas in our hands and molding them into our own lives. 

However, where the classroom was the seed, the idea had to have a place to grow. The idea needs to exist not only inside the classroom, but also needs a place to exist outside of the classroom where a student can try it for themselves in the real world. And what better place to apply these skills in the small town of Needham than our own dorms? Our own tiny test run of fostering a large community relationship.

The dorms were a catalyst for change. The spaces that allowed for gathering generated crazy new ideas and brought together niche passions and exploded into something that defined Olin today. It was the place where students could take power into their own hands and become the creators of a community; a community born from the principles taught to us. 

The students were the ones who took the honor code and decided to give it power. To us, it meant something important when we left a five dollar bill right where we found it instead of taking it. It was important that we were the ones watching out for each other and taking care of people who got too drunk. It was meaningful that we were lifting each other up.

Adding a seventh room into the originally six person suites was a solution created to address the admission of an unexpectedly large number of incoming freshmen. The idea was to split the suite common area in half and turn the other half into a new room. It was said to be a temporary solution that would be taken down in around 4 years, but recently it seems like the walls are here to stay.

For the administration and staff making these decisions, it may have presented as a clever solution, where perhaps students may grow accustomed to the seventh room and allow for the school to enroll more students. 

Was it a financial decision? Most definitely, as any organization would have to consider the financial impact of an investment like this. Perhaps this solution was the best financial investment that would ultimately benefit the state of our school. 

The administration rarely ever steps into the dorms. The higher ups don’t know the complex inner workings of the Olin dorms and the culture we’ve cultivated, not only to have fun but to hold each other accountable. There is no way for the administration to fully understand what this seemingly small change in the suites would have on an entire school. 

Now, when a student seeks social interaction, they will opt to enter another suitemate’s room, rather than sit in the lounge. Because of this, communication gets stifled or passed around in potentially harmful ways. Oftentimes, it is not out of bad intention, but it happens naturally due to the configuration of the space – it is hard to communicate openly when everything is so closed off. It’s too easy to go straight to your room without running into any of your suitemates, therefore making it easier to isolate yourself from them. 

Living in the suite no longer feels like a mini community working together. It just feels like 7 single rooms with an awkward hallway in between. 

Due to the reduced area, it’s almost impossible to have all (now) seven members in the common area at one time. Some people might have to stand or sit on the floor. It was organic to see all members of the suite in the common area before, and now it’s rare to see any people at all. 

Another side effect of the reduced area is that items start migrating outside of the suite space into the hallways. It’s too crowded and cramped to fit all of the furniture in the common space, along with a shoe rack and 3 trash cans. Naturally, it made sense for some suites to start moving a shoe rack or a couple of trash cans or a bike outside. It opened up the space meant for community and reduced the clutter. 

As a result, the residential hall assistants, cleaning staff, and others immediately brought attention to the items in the hallway, stating that it was not up to fire code, or that spaces were harder to navigate or clean. Warnings would be put on items that were in the hallways, stating that if it is not cleared out then it will be taken. These warnings existed for a short period of time, but eventually, items would be simply removed by the hallways without further notice. Staff and students had been given permission to remove or take any belongings that were in the hallway. 

Under Respect Others in Olin’s Honor code, it states as follows: “I will be patient with and understanding of fellow community members, and considerate of their inherent dignity and personal property.” This is something that Oliners have been proud to uphold for years, as we have created a culture of trust. If someone had forgotten their laptop or dropped a five dollar bill, it would not disappear. It would remain right where they last saw it, or someone would send an email stating that they have it. 

Almost overnight, this culture of trust vanished. It was no longer safe to leave your things out for even a second. This was an unintended consequence of the seventh room. 

As one of the few students remaining who has lived in both a six room suite and a seventh room suite, I can say through first hand experience that this seventh room has made a lasting negative impact on the Olin experience. 

….On the recent events

I wrote this piece last year to talk about the consequences of what happens when people in power change the spaces they do not reside in. I aimed to commemorate Olin culture and share some of my favorite memories while highlighting what a huge difference a small change can make. I have also seen Olin students take matters into their own hands and mold the spaces in the dorms to fit their needs with every coming challenge. This section is now an expression of my feelings and frustrations of the changes that are being made, and the trust that has been broken. 

I have learned from my professors at Olin that changes to a space should be initiated by those who occupy it. “Nothing about us without us.” Making a decision of bringing in Babson students into the dorms should involve the students who occupy the dorms, no matter how wonderful the Babson students are, no matter how careful we are about the process, no matter how much we want to improve our relationship with them. I applaud the staff and faculty who have developed a fully thought out plan to make this integration as smooth as possible. I am disappointed and frustrated with the decision to exclude students from the conversation. Just like the 7th suite wall, (which was supposed to be temporary) we have been left out of the conversation. Ever since COVID, we have been struggling with a lack of housing in the fall semester, and now we are blindsided with the introduction of Babson students into our dorms in the spring, forcing students to move and rearrange to accommodate.

I have also noticed that Oliners also are starting to feel unsafe and uncomfortable with what feels like the administration’s blatant disregard to the students’ wellbeing. Especially when we had a conversation about this a year ago and the majority of the student population communicated their strong disapproval of this decision. At this point, this is no longer an issue about the changing of dorm culture, it’s also about breaking trust and being misleading with the guise of a false partnership between administration and students.

I wonder how this continuous dismissal of students’ wellbeing will affect the future of this institution. “In 2020-21, the Olin Fund represented 46% percent of the total philanthropic dollars raised for the College” and I have noticed recent talks of alumni who are hesitant to donate in light of these critical changes that are being made without student voices at the discussion tables.

I want to highlight all the intricacies of how dismissing the student body will impact the future of this institution. It’s hard to put a number on how much student relations with their administration correlates with the “success” of a college, but at the end of the day, I truly believe that cultivating communication and transparency is essential for the health and wellbeing of Olin College. 

If financial stability is the administration’s goal, then I would like for students to have a seat at the table to help achieve that goal while preserving the parts of what makes Olin unique. It would go both ways, as the students would be better informed on the administration’s decisions. I can suggest that we start looking for data that proves these decisions will be detrimental in the long run. We can pitch alternatives. We can prove that the Olin student body is an asset, not a liability. We can practice what Olin preaches: community mindedness, problem solving, and teamwork.

If there’s one thing left for me to wish upon this school before I leave, I wish for the administration to hear our voices and help us rebuild this trust that has been broken.

Tragedy of the Project Team

I tell people I hate all project teams — so they quizzically ask me why I am on two of them. The reality is I don’t hate them in the strongest sense of the word; rather, the argument is too long to explain, so I keep it short and life goes on. I’ve fleshed it out over time, conversation upon conversation I’ve reached an equilibrium where I feel like my beliefs are grounded enough to put into writing. And after so long, I’m writing this manifesto as a record of my current stance. In short, I think that Olin’s project teams do not do enough to benefit the student population and college at large because they are run like mature corporations, so we need to reflect on ways to return to a start-up mentality.
Project teams suffer from a value cap. What I mean by this is that beyond a certain time spent per week, the value that a member experiences from a project team diminishes greatly. I believe that value can be derived from happiness stemming from altruistic endeavors, pride in one’s work, pure academic learning, and many more. Beyond this cap, the member experiences no further benefits at the cost of time. You probably don’t realize that it exists — you work until your work has reached a good place and then you time out — it feels normal. Just like a 9-5, you put in the effort to reach the goal and then you’re done. At Olin, this cap is too low across the board on all project teams. During high school, I spent 18 hours a week on my school’s project team and not a moment of it felt like a chore. Now, the two project teams I am on combined barely scratch half that and I watch the clock like a hawk. Maybe you don’t feel it yet — a young, idealistic first-year with so much to learn and so many opportunities and obviously that FRC experience under your belt — but as your time at Olin progresses, this cap will get lower and lower. You wonder why all project teams are so youthful: first-years, sophomores, where are the upperclassmen? The fact that Olin project teams have become accustomed to the trickle-down of leadership to underclassmen is a symptom of the value cap leading to the disengagement of senior members. Upperclassmen realized a long time ago that the machine would keep churning with or without them, so they made their escape before being turned into soulless pulp.
The cap has a perfectly predictable lowering over the course of a student’s time at Olin. At some point, learning stagnates — an avionics programmer can only learn so much C++, a structures member can only perfect a composites layup so much, a drivetrain engineer can only engineer so many drivetrains, and an ECE who took ECE courses finds that their skills have surpassed any potential learnings of being on a project team (applies to any major). We are fighting against this natural process and we are losing. Olin’s project teams need to find a way to raise the cap so that any student with any time commitment can still find value in one more hour.
In terms of value, for the unnamed project teams I reference, altruism is not on the table. This leaves one thing. The only thing that Olin project teams hold on to. Pride. Yet, somehow, they managed to rot even pride from the inside. They asked first-years to redesign that part that had been redesigned the year before and the year before and the year before in the exact same way because that legacy design was fully functional to begin with. They actively pushed for this, laughing off the ones who wanted to attempt it for themselves first. They told them, this is how it was done before, this is how it is done, and this is how it will be done. And the impressionable first-year thought nothing of it. They are more experienced, having taken more classes and done the exact same thing the year before, they know exactly how to avoid failure. They took changing competition goals, requiring a completely reworked design to perform well at competition, and blurred the lines until a high-wing monoplane careened down the runway for the innumerable year in a row, because that’s all that they knew. When projects are underwhelming it is nigh on impossible to feel pride.
Failure. It’s a word often thrown around in idioms and half-assed wisdom from big tech CEOs on 30 Under 30. It’s painted as the Holy Grail of learning and ironically rightfully so, despite its cliché nature. Yet, Olin project teams wiped that line from their programming. There is no project team willing to try something unique or unproven on accounts of it increasing their failure chance. There is no attempt to experiment for the sake of learning. The forefathers had functional designs; replicate, replicate, replicate. In high school, I spent $2,000 of my own savings on my project team and the results were disastrous. I watched planes nosedive into the ground at terrifying speeds, planes disassemble midair and become lodged at the tops of 100 ft trees, landings that should’ve been classified as debris fields, and many more. I sacrificed my time, my savings, and my emotional health seeking the high of success. And on completing that goal the spring of my senior year, an autonomous search-and-rescue unmanned aerial vehicle, the future wasn’t as bright as I’d hoped. As the wheels touched down for landing after the maiden flight, I realized that the journey was over. All the things that I had learned had come before when the planes were not successful, when we tried new things for the sake of trying them, because we had nobody to teach us — but now we hadn’t crashed.
As my freshman year of college passed, I watched my highschool team fall into the project team trap. From when I was on it with eight active members, having built three massive planes my senior year to have two of them be destroyed, they had only regressed. They built no new planes the whole year, instead focusing on modifying the wing airfoil of the legacy I’d left and building PCBs to replace the spaghetti wiring. But they profited — none of them had to spend a dime of their money and recruitment pulled in swarms of new members, surpassing even Olin’s most crowded interest meetings. Everyone wanted a piece of that success. And next year with the same competition and the same general goals, it will repeat itself, climbing ever higher on the rankings towards the perfection they strive to achieve. They should be able to see that this isn’t the fate forced upon them — they build wings with plywood and laminating film, something that could be transitioned to carbon fiber composites, yet they haven’t innovated. There’s room to learn there and grow, but after that? There’s nothing in the book after a fixed-wing monoplane made of carbon fiber: only blank pages. And throughout this whole ordeal there will be no significant failure; learning is greatly diminished. I hope you see the parallels at Olin and the difference in value cap between when I was on my high school’s project team and after I left it. One was worth $2,000 and 18- hour weeks, and the other clearly not. They fell into a trap of hyperfixations, working on small improvements and holding on to past successes. This is the trap of success.
You could say that my highschool team had moved from its start-up phase into the corporate world. Rather than having the ability to be nimble and allow failure, they had come to the harsh reality that they had expectations to uphold. Failure is hard to swallow in the eyes of project teams — not going to competition or not placing well means that members will foolishly leave and sponsors will too. I will let you young engineers in on a little corporate secret. Psst, failure is not permissible in the corporate world. A recall can lead to millions in losses, a mis-dimensioned part could cost millions for reconfiguring the assembly line, and negative customer perspectives mean millions lost in future sales. Welcome to Nissan, Boeing, Google, etc. Now is the time in a young engineer’s life to experience liberty and failure, and Olin project teams are failing the students at being that sandbox for creativity.
So far, I’ve outlined a circular problem, which I will reiterate here. Olin teams are run like corporations and as such fail the creative genius of young engineers at Olin. They do this to maintain a high level of security against failure and thereby protect member yields and sponsors. The more they have on the line to lose, the more aggressively they protect it. In this manner we arrive at a Catch-22, which I will break down further in a bit. I would first like to discuss two more factors of project teams that complicate things further: competitions and careers.
Competitions are parasitic. They pose one of the largest drains on project team budgets, are a huge waste of time since most of the competition is sitting around doing nothing, and are the only obvious way of staying relevant to sponsors and prospective members. In return, competitions provide rules and goals, both of which can be detrimental to project teams. Rules can stifle creativity and limit the freedom of project teams to do anything except churn out replica deliverables. Goals, which normally are stagnant (except in some rare cases of competitions changing goals each season), lead to the never-ending design cycle of rinse and repeat. Both of these downsides have been discussed in great depth previously regarding project teams, but it is important to note how they originate both from within the teams and outside them. In the end, it is up to the team to make the most of these constraints and be creative, but we don’t see any examples of that.
Finally, I believe that project teams are a necessary evil. Olin pumps out a high percentage of engineers that go straight into the workforce. These engineers wish to get internships and jobs and as a result feel compelled to do at least one project team for the infamous résumé. It’s on every job/internship listing, “project teams or real world experience required.” And honestly no wonder recruiters consider a project team real world experience; it’s f***ing corporate! This is the career dilemma.
Now, we reach the ineloquent point where I need to tie together loose ends, propose solutions, and write a call to action. I will admit that while these problems are apparent to me and indubitably, ubiquitously exist, the solutions are not so. I believe that the steps to remedy this require a rethinking of the role of project teams in Olin’s community, a reflection on the value of competitions, and a change in how Olin supports new teams.
A project team is truly only a valiant endeavor in its first 2-3 years after inception. This time period is marked by there being no legacy work to copy, many failures, and altogether a huge emphasis on experimentation and iteration. Beyond this time period, a project team’s future is at the hands of its leadership. Although a project team can try to sow liberty and freedom and promote failure as permissible, unless it parts from its legacy goals, it remains entrenched so deep that it succumbs to the chronic condition I’ve outlined. A well-managed project team, when reaching maturity, will pivot its goals greatly in order to start a novel project from the ground up. This could be one of three things: moving to a new competition bracket/goal, pursuing a new competition altogether, or abandoning competition entirely.
Those three aforementioned options are in order of difficulty. The first two maintain the grandiosity associated with competition and the sponsors and member recruitment opportunities. As a result, they also are the least likely to remedy the problem. A team with replicatory ideals will attempt to apply the same strategies to whatever new goals come their way unless it is a failing strategy. A rocket with a goal of 10,000 feet and a rocket that reaches 30,000 feet can be made using the same techniques — it’s only a question of scale. However, a liquid fuel rocket and a solid fuel rocket differ entirely. Shrewd leadership is a necessary corrective force for steering a project team away from copycat strategies.
A project team that gives up on competitions altogether will reap the greatest rewards, but face the toughest challenges. The most apparent is the pecuniary struggle in which the team finds itself. This can be remedied through proper fundraising, focusing on the value that the team brings, rather than competition rankings. The second, and arguably larger, hurdle is that of misdirection. A team without a competition is a team without a goal, unless a strong leadership steps in and inspires the team with one. This involves not only the goal itself, but rigid deadlines, and firm stakeholders that ensure that the team continues operating with some amount of direction and reasonable tempo.
And in the most extreme case, we must let the team perish. Pivot or perish — this is not corporate — we don’t aim to persist. Olin is founded on principles of adaptation and innovation; ingrained in our culture is the idea of avoiding the traps of stagnation. We preach to reevaluate everything and redesign our courses, our culture, and systems whenever and however necessary. Why should project teams escape this cycle? The project teams I envision, let’s call them neo-project teams, embody a start-up’s ephemerality, but unfortunately Olin is not prepared to handle these types of organizations. There are major roadblocks in securing space and money, barring new project teams from entering the arena.
In an ideal world, neo-project teams would be highly successful, dramatically raising the value cap, enthralling the attention of Oliners, and each delivering value surpassing that of all of today’s project teams combined. The composition of neo-project teams would become almost uniform, with each year making up a quarter of a project team’s membership and leadership being delegated to seniors at the higher level and juniors at the lower level. Oliners would find the time to be on only one project team and would pick that work over the alternative of 20-crediting or splitting their efforts across many. These are the signs of a thriving team. Neo-project teams would sow creativity, autonomy, confidence, and promote learning through failure.
I would like to end by breaking the fourth wall with you, the reader. I don’t believe that my analysis in this manifesto was exhaustive — you may have identified other problems or believe in different solutions. That is fine; what is important is that we talk about this, not suffer in silence. The responsibility now falls upon you to continue this discussion, ensure that your project teams don’t fall into complacency, and unite our community so that together we can prevent the Tragedy of the Project Team.

OPEN Review: Nimona

Dear Olin Community,
I am proud to announce the beginning of a new tradition, the connecting of minds and hearts through books, movies, podcasts, and any other media you can think of that contains flavors of LGBT+ characters and concepts.

For our debut, I will be reviewing the Netflix feature film Nimona. If you haven’t checked this movie out, I implore you to give it a try.

Plot summary (without spoilers):
Ballister Boldheart is a knight in a futuristic medieval kingdom who’s fought tooth and nail to earn his place among the noblemen that share his ranks. He has been met with critique and skepticism throughout his life due to his lack of high-esteemed family, but that has only made him more determined to succeed. When he is suddenly outcast due to a crime he’s falsely accused of committing, he must team up with a witty, chaotic kid named Nimona to find a way to clear his name. Little does Ballister know, Nimona turns out to be the exact type of creature he’s been trained to protect the kingdom against.

Nimona’s got everything you could ever want in a “Kids’ movie”: Harrowing adventure, hateful betrayal, beautiful Achillean and Sapphic representation, heartbreaking social commentary, and, of course, a deliciously overt allegory for being transgender in a world that just can’t seem to wrap it’s mind around the concept. At least, until it’s forced to.

Nimona is based on the comic of the same name, which was created by the writer behind She-Ra and the Princesses of Power, Nate Stevenson: a transgender individual. The movie feels like it was written by Trans, Non-binary, and Gender Non-Conforming people, with the same people set as the target audience. It is so beautiful to see characters like Nimona given depth and miles of personality, on top of their gender identities.

So if you haven’t seen Nimona, I hope I’ve given you enough reason to put it alongside all the other worthwhile watches of the year.

For more information, check out the IMDB page: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt19500164/?ref_=ttmi_tt

Trigger warnings:
Analogies for transphobia
Mentions of suicide and a non graphic suicide attempt
Mild violence

Exploring Boston

Exploring Boston 

Pauline Petersen (she/her)

I love getting off campus to places like Boston almost every weekend. Whether it be a coffee shop to do QEA on a rainy day or getting Boba on Newbury Street, it’s nice to explore new places. I’m not a local, but I’ve collected a few of my favorite places to check out and tips for those new to traveling into Boston. If you have recommendations to add on, let me know!

Getting into Boston

Split an Uber or carpool to Eliot Station and take the green line

Take the MWRTA shuttle from Babson to Woodland Station along the green line https://www.mwrta.com/routes/fixed-routes/route-1

Take the commuter rail from Wellesley Hills or Needham Heights ($10 weekend pass for unlimited rides) 

The Wellesley Shuttle once you have a Wellesley ID or purchase tokens from Lulu

Getting around Boston

Use the transit section in a map app to find subway and commuter rail times and routes.

Scavenger Hunt of Places to Check Out Around Boston/Cambridge 

  • The Charles Boardwalk
  • Bakey
  • Banana Lounge (unlimited supply) 
  • Get a Cannoli (Mike’s or Modern Pastry)
  • The Slide (it’s metal and curves)
  •  Most Photographed Street 
  • Bates Hall
  • Brattle Bookshop

Let me know your recommendations! 

–> ppetersen@olin.edu

What I’ve Learned

This moment last year, Olin Climate Justice was little more than an idea in the back of my mind. I’ve spent this past year pouring my life and soul into building OCJ.

I understand our group means many things to many people. To me, it represents thousands of hours of work and love and care and courage and determination and resilience and guts and kindness and heart. This may not be your view; that is okay.

OCJ has responded to the claims made by March’s anonymously published article. In this moment, however, that response is immaterial. Instead, in an act of vulnerability, I will tell you that article landed with deep hurt, frustration, and sadness. I recognize this was not the author’s intent, and yet both things can be true. And so I extend an invitation to you. 

I hope to use this space to reflect on one rollercoaster of a year, and I invite you to journey with me. These learnings are borne of experience; you may find them vague and unsubstantiated. That is okay too. I invite you to see them as an open question, an opportunity to wonder why I might have learned this.

Above all, I invite you to wonder what Olin could be. And I hope that wonder inspires you enough to act, as it did for me.

  • I’ve learned that the same anti-democratic structures in this college that center whiteness and maleness and wealth are the same structures that got us into the climate crisis in the first place.
  • I’ve learned that “collaboration” is wielded by those in power to obscure power differentials, and that when we say “collaboration” we really mean perfunctory student participation.
  • I’ve learned that “community” is similarly wielded by those with whom I am not in community as a means to suppress dissent.
  • I’ve learned that we can repeat the words collaboration and community over and over until we drop dead, and yet nothing will substitute for democratic processes that hold people in power accountable.
  • I’ve learned that student decision making power in this college is predicated on whether people in power feel like listening, and so students are expected to accommodate the whims of unelected white men.
  • I’ve learned that those in power are seen as collaborative because they maintain a range of things they are willing to do and take student input on, and outside of that range they are steadfast in their opposition.
  • I’ve learned that the lack of formal decision-making structures at this college prioritizes the “old boy’s club” that has existed from the start, empowers well-liked white men to attain outsized control over every decision, and prevents accountability and real democracy by obscuring power.
  • I’ve learned that better does not equal good, whether that is relative to other institutions or the Olin of the past, and those in power wield narratives of “change is slow” and “acknowledge small progress” to justify inaction.
  • I’ve learned that “common ground” and “shared values” are all too often employed when they do not exist, as reasons to ignore the substance of one’s argument.
  • I’ve learned that “impact” is meaningless when divorced from who we are impacting, what impact we hope to achieve, and why. And that meaninglessness is precisely why those in power love the term. (The same applies for “changemaking” and “do something”, always a low bar).
  • I’ve learned we’ve set the bar for “caring about sustainability” so low that not denying the existence of the climate crisis is considered enough.
  • I’ve learned that “sustainability” can mean anything, and so often is used to reinforce business-as-usual operations.
  • I’ve learned that some are so invested in avoiding discomfort, are so unsettled by efforts to pull back the Olin veil, that they would tear down their fellow students to uphold the systems of oppression that built this college.
  • I’ve learned that you can spend long nights poring over solar panel proposals and early mornings cleaning out overflowing compost bins, and those in power will turn around and claim credit for that work.
  • I’ve learned that no matter how hard you work, the credit will go to the cis men around you, while other men will always be happy to offer their unsolicited opinions.
  • I’ve learned that those in power will co-opt your work until you are no longer palatable to them.
  • I’ve learned that the only way that white men take me seriously is if I contort into someone calm, collected, and quiet, who never pushes for more.
  • I’ve learned that it’s one thing to care about sustainability and real environmental impact, which everyone does, and another thing to care enough to prioritize it above CompArch and PIE and Formula. It’s one thing to say you care and another thing to stare wide-eyed in terror at the ticking clock that is 1.5C and look around and think, what the hell are we all doing, acting as if everything can be normal and the same? That we can just keep going like this?
  • I’ve learned that we’re made too busy to care. For this college and for each other.