If you have been on the internet in the past two weeks, chances are you have seen at least a glimmer of Martin Scorsese’s hit 1973 film “Goncharov,” a cult classic following the story of discotheque-owner-turned-Italian-mafia-boss Goncharov. It’s a tale of tragedy, betrayal and the fall of man, widely considered “the best mafia movie ever made.”

The only issue? “Goncharov” doesn’t exist.

The story of “Goncharov” started on Aug. 22, 2020 when Tumblr user losermo posted a picture of a pair of knock-off boots with a tag labeled “Martin Scorsese presents ‘Goncharov.’” It was later decided that these boots were actually meant to reference a real Scorsese film: “Gomorrah,” which was directed by Domenico Procacci and released in 2008. The mystery of “Goncharov’s” origins was solved, but the story of this non-existent movie was far from over.

An “official” poster for “Goncharov” spread across Tumblr on Nov. 18, 2022, spurring a collaborative site-wide effort to treat this movie as an actual film. Theories, fanart, analyses, screengrabs and even script segments were created to substantiate the existence of “Goncharov.”

Such feats of creativity aren’t new to internet culture.

“Goncharov” is a prime example of the concept of unreality: a phenomenon where a group of people treats a non-existing entity or piece of media as truth, while still acknowledging that it is not of the real world. It’s not a lie; it’s a type of thought exercise.

Internet-based unrealities and creative endeavors have exploded in popularity since the COVID-19 pandemic. The Ratatouille TikTok musical began in 2020. It started with a single TikTok user creating a song about the 2007 Pixar movie of the same name and ended as a full-fledged online musical with a Broadway cast. All because the people of TikTok managed to work together to write, direct, design and choreograph the whole show.

The creation of this musical, and, more recently, “Goncharov,” speaks to the desire for human connection and ingenuity. The collaboration involved in creating and executing these creative endeavors is truly admirable.

“Goncharov” isn’t real, but the connections created by the internet’s effort to bring it to life are. Perhaps the “Goncharov” phenomenon is less about its authenticity and more about what its creation stands for.

The creation of “Goncharov” was almost mythological in nature. It was a collaborative effort to create something meaningful that allowed people to connect with one another in a new and exciting way. Unreality is a bizarre form of creativity, surely — but isn’t all creativity bizarre?

Amber,

This is my second year here at the University of Minnesota. I have been balancing my schoolwork with having a job for the entirety of my college career so far. Recently, I learned of a job posting for a position I’ve been wanting to apply to for a while.

The job I have right now pays fairly well in comparison to this new job. However, my current job is part of a very toxic and unfulfilling environment that I would like to escape as soon as I can.

Even though this new job pays a lot less than my current job, it sounds far more mentally rewarding than the job I have right now. If I did go for the new job, I think I would experience less overall burnout from trying to balance it with my school schedule. At the same time, since this new job would pay less, I probably would not be able to support my current lifestyle.

I don’t know what to do. Should I keep the job I have, apply for this new one or do something else?

Thank you,
Bracing for Burnout

Dear Bracing for Burnout,

I think there are two main points that should be addressed in this situation.

First, I think you should leave your current job. There is no job that pays well enough to sacrifice your well-being. If this current job is as toxic and harmful as you say it is, get out of there as soon as you are financially and realistically able to.

Second, while we tend to idealize our dream jobs, they aren’t always realistic. If the job you are looking into does not pay enough to sustain you, it will not be worth it in the long run. If you do get this new job, would you be willing to sacrifice aspects of your current lifestyle?

Depending on how much of a pay drop you are talking about, I would also suggest looking into other jobs. I know this job you are considering is something you’ve been wanting for a while, but there are other jobs out there too. They might not be exactly what you are looking for, but sometimes we do have to find a compromise between financial stability and personal fulfillment.

Either way, there is no harm in applying for this new job. Perhaps you can even request a slight starting pay bump or increased hours if you can afford the time. The most important thing in this situation is to get out of your current job and get into a job that is less taxing on your humanity.

Best of luck,
Amber

Are you in desperate need of advice? Amber can help! Email advice requests to aatkinson@mndaily.com.

Amber,

With it being election season right now, my life seems to revolve around politics. Inevitably, the overturning of Roe v. Wade found its way into the conversations between me and my friends. A few weeks ago, I brought up the Nov. 8 election to them, and everyone was very upfront about the fact that they would be voting.

One of my friends, though, immediately shut down at the idea and snapped at me for bringing up politics when we were originally just supposed to be hanging out for dinner. She said that voting was stupid and that she already gets enough political nonsense from her family and the news.

I do understand some of where she is coming from. Election seasons are very stressful and overwhelming, and even I sometimes would like to step away from it for a while. However, this election [was] very important, and I just don’t understand how she can be so upset about voting.

I want to talk to her more about it because I think voting is very important, but I’m afraid of bringing up something that will just make her angry again.

How can I convince my friend that voting is important?

Thanks,
Ballot Blues

Dear Ballot Blues,

Politics are almost always a sticky kind of situation to talk about with people. You’re right about voting being important, and I appreciate that you are looking out for your friend in this way.

I think this issue is something a lot of people can relate to. Election season can very easily take a lot out of people. It seems like you are trying to create that kind of politics-life balance that is important for coping with these stressful issues, which is wonderful to hear.

Honestly, I don’t have a concrete answer. Some people can get defensive about politics, and people that get angry or defensive about these kinds of things can be difficult to talk to, let alone convince otherwise.

The best advice I can give you is to try to talk to your friend anyway. Ask her to give you her perspective on the issue so that you can maybe figure out why she feels this way about voting. Maybe the issue isn’t even voting at all — she could just be overwhelmed in general, and election season was the straw that broke the camel’s back. But, you’ll never know unless you talk to her.

If she does get defensive again, don’t blame yourself for trying. If worse comes to worst, there might be nothing better to do than stop talking to her altogether. Some people refuse to have an open mind about differing political views, and to me, that’s a sign you shouldn’t be engaging with them at all.

Best of luck,
Amber

Are you in desperate need of advice? Amber can help! Email advice requests to aatkinson@mndaily.com.

Netflix released a new limited series on Sept. 21 about notorious serial killer and cannibal Jeffery Dahmer to extreme success. Even a month later, “Dahmer: Monster: the Jeffrey Dahmer Story,” rests comfortably at the second-highest view count of a Netflix original, just under its new series “The Watcher,” another true crime mockumentary.

As a casual true crime fan myself, I have no delusions about the popularity of this genre. I have seen this phenomenon time and time again, from Youtube series to the endless slew of true crime podcasts to Netflix’s previous mainstream serial killer mockumentary “Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile” back in 2019.

So, what’s with the fascination with true crime? What is it that draws the everyday viewer or listener to media that extensively cover homicides, physical and sexual assaults and cannibalism?

Humanity has always seemed to have a bit of a draw to the macabre, to the things that are seen as abnormal and heinous. The works of Edgar Allan Poe and H.P. Lovecraft come to mind, two of the most prevalent pioneers of the horror genre. Or even that of Vincent Van Gogh, one of the most popular “tortured artists” in history.

I can confidently say we have all had grotesque and immoral thoughts before, no matter how unwanted. The difference is when those thoughts become manifest in the real world. What leads a person to commit atrocities? Honestly, we may never know.

I cannot blame people for being somewhat morbidly curious about criminal activities. Sandy Bolton-Barrientos, a third-year Spanish student and prison abolitionist, said understanding the societal pressures that influence people to commit heinous crimes is crucial.

“People who commit violent crimes don’t commit crimes because they are inherently evil people,” Bolton-Barrientos said. “It’s these social conditions that lead them to make the choices they make.” They listed patriarchy, hatred and white supremacy as some examples of these conditions.

It is important to understand the people who commit violent crimes are still human beings. To take away their humanity or call them monsters creates a degree of separation between violent criminals and the everyday person. We have to acknowledge these horrible people are human beings, even if it leaves a sour taste in the mouth. It should be an uncomfortable thing to think about because it is an uncomfortable reality. People who commit violent acts are people, and that is so much worse than a mythical monster doing such things instead.

The true crime genre provides a good opportunity to create this kind of understanding of violent criminals. Perhaps it does too good a job at doing so. It creates the opportunity for some people to begin to sympathize with these kinds of criminals. To pity them, or even romanticize and idolize them.

To me, this is where one of the biggest problems with true crime lies; where we humanize criminals so much that they begin to resemble tortured artists. Where we begin to justify the actions of violent criminals and remove the blame from them. Where we begin to feel more empathy for the criminals than the victims they have harmed.

Families of the victims of Jeffery Dahmer have stated time and time again how harmful the show has been to them. Rita Isbell, the sister of one of the men brutally murdered by Dahmer, Errol Lindsey, told Insider that Netflix provided no compensation to victims’ families and no warning this show was being created. There is nothing I can say that better covers how Isbell has been forced to live and relive such unspeakable atrocities than her as-told essay.

And yet, voices like Isbell’s are being silenced by fans who claim victims’ trauma does not matter. But it does, regardless of how much of this case was already public knowledge or how this show could provide some amount of “education.”

“Just because we understand what led someone to commit heinous acts doesn’t mean we let them off the hook,” Bolton-Barrientos said. “We can both hold that individual accountable and address those broader structures. You’ll find that in the process of holding those individuals accountable and repairing the harm that’s caused, those broader structures will be broken down as well.”

I have only one question left to ask: What kind of person must one be to idolize the trauma and torture of marginalized groups of people?

Netflix released a new limited series on Sept. 21 about notorious serial killer and cannibal Jeffery Dahmer to extreme success. Even a month later, “Dahmer: Monster: the Jeffrey Dahmer Story,” rests comfortably at the second-highest view count of a Netflix original, just under its new series “The Watcher,” another true crime mockumentary.

As a casual true crime fan myself, I have no delusions about the popularity of this genre. I have seen this phenomenon time and time again, from Youtube series to the endless slew of true crime podcasts to Netflix’s previous mainstream serial killer mockumentary “Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile” back in 2019.

So, what’s with the fascination with true crime? What is it that draws the everyday viewer or listener to media that extensively cover homicides, physical and sexual assaults and cannibalism?

Humanity has always seemed to have a bit of a draw to the macabre, to the things that are seen as abnormal and heinous. The works of Edgar Allan Poe and H.P. Lovecraft come to mind, two of the most prevalent pioneers of the horror genre. Or even that of Vincent Van Gogh, one of the most popular “tortured artists” in history.

I can confidently say we have all had grotesque and immoral thoughts before, no matter how unwanted. The difference is when those thoughts become manifest in the real world. What leads a person to commit atrocities? Honestly, we may never know.

I cannot blame people for being somewhat morbidly curious about criminal activities. Sandy Bolton-Barrientos, a third-year Spanish student and prison abolitionist, said understanding the societal pressures that influence people to commit heinous crimes is crucial.

“People who commit violent crimes don’t commit crimes because they are inherently evil people,” Bolton-Barrientos said. “It’s these social conditions that lead them to make the choices they make.” They listed patriarchy, hatred and white supremacy as some examples of these conditions.

It is important to understand the people who commit violent crimes are still human beings. To take away their humanity or call them monsters creates a degree of separation between violent criminals and the everyday person. We have to acknowledge these horrible people are human beings, even if it leaves a sour taste in the mouth. It should be an uncomfortable thing to think about because it is an uncomfortable reality. People who commit violent acts are people, and that is so much worse than a mythical monster doing such things instead.

The true crime genre provides a good opportunity to create this kind of understanding of violent criminals. Perhaps it does too good a job at doing so. It creates the opportunity for some people to begin to sympathize with these kinds of criminals. To pity them, or even romanticize and idolize them.

To me, this is where one of the biggest problems with true crime lies; where we humanize criminals so much that they begin to resemble tortured artists. Where we begin to justify the actions of violent criminals and remove the blame from them. Where we begin to feel more empathy for the criminals than the victims they have harmed.

Families of the victims of Jeffery Dahmer have stated time and time again how harmful the show has been to them. Rita Isbell, the sister of one of the men brutally murdered by Dahmer, Errol Lindsey, told Insider that Netflix provided no compensation to victims’ families and no warning this show was being created. There is nothing I can say that better covers how Isbell has been forced to live and relive such unspeakable atrocities than her as-told essay.

And yet, voices like Isbell’s are being silenced by fans who claim victims’ trauma does not matter. But it does, regardless of how much of this case was already public knowledge or how this show could provide some amount of “education.”

“Just because we understand what led someone to commit heinous acts doesn’t mean we let them off the hook,” Bolton-Barrientos said. “We can both hold that individual accountable and address those broader structures. You’ll find that in the process of holding those individuals accountable and repairing the harm that’s caused, those broader structures will be broken down as well.”

I have only one question left to ask: What kind of person must one be to idolize the trauma and torture of marginalized groups of people?

Amber,

Recently, I moved into an apartment on campus. In an effort to save money, I elected to rent out a two-bedroom apartment with another student. I love meeting new people, so the idea of living with a potential new friend was exciting to me.

When I met her, though, things immediately seemed off. I’ve been nothing but kind to her, but she never seems interested in what I have to say. She hides in her room almost constantly. The few times we ever even see each other she never initiates a conversation, and whenever I try to talk to her, she ignores me and walks away.

I’m pretty sure she’s been stealing my food, too. Last week I brought home a box of those Target sugar cookies, and they’re already almost gone. I know I haven’t eaten that many of them yet, but I don’t know how to confront my roommate about it. I would be fine with sharing my food with her, but we’ve never discussed it.

What can I do to get my roommate to like me? I want us to be friends, but she seems dead-set on not letting that happen.

Signed,
Friendly Foe

Dear Friendly Foe,

I think it is understandable that you want to be friends with your roommate. After all, you two will be living together for a while, and it would be difficult to live with someone with whom you aren’t comfortable.

If it seems like your roommate has a personal grudge against you, have you tried talking to her about it? I know she doesn’t seem interested in speaking with you, but you could try writing out a message to her and allow her to initiate conversation on her own terms. Perhaps you have done something to upset her that you aren’t aware of.

At the same time, some people are just not destined to be friends. It’s possible that you have done nothing in particular to offend her, and she just does not want to be friends with you. It’s unlikely to be anything personal in this case. It is also possible that your roommate is not as social as you. She could be shy or not sure how to engage in the type of small talk you’re interested in.

There is not much I can tell you about this situation. I cannot predict what is going on in your roommate’s mind and neither can you. Communication is always key when it comes to these kinds of disconnects between people.

It can be unfortunate to have a roommate you don’t click well with. Even if you two cannot become friends, I assume that you can at least set up an agreement. Start by creating a system for food sharing.

Best of luck,
Amber

Amber,

This is my first year at the University of Minnesota. I’m from out of state, and I miss my family more than I thought I would.

One of the reasons I applied here was to explore more of the U.S. outside of my hometown. It sounded like a good opportunity to spread my wings and explore myself as my own individual person. I’ve only been living here in the dorms for a little over a month, but I miss my home.

I like being here for the most part. I enjoy a lot of my classes, and I’ve already met a few new friends. Despite all of this, I can’t help but feel like all of these new experiences are just being tainted by my homesickness. I am constantly comparing my life here to what I would normally be doing in my hometown.

My friends here are wonderful and understand my homesickness. I feel bad though because I keep comparing them to my friends back home. It’s a toxic mindset, and I hate that I’m doing this.

How do I get over my homesickness?

Signed,
Sick of Being Homesick

Dear Sick of Being Homesick,

First of all, I want to emphasize that whatever homesickness you’re feeling is completely understandable. It can be incredibly scary to be off on your own, especially if this is your first time away from home. Don’t feel ashamed about missing your family and friends.

How often are you in contact with your family? Homesickness cannot always be easily cured, but it can be lessened by talking it out with the people you miss most. I’m sure they miss you too and would love to hear from you!

Remember the pandemic days? During the pandemic, I would schedule hours-long FaceTime calls with my friends to just talk about our mutual boredom and express how much we missed seeing each other in person. There are plenty of ways to keep in touch with those you can’t always see in person. Try to figure something out with your friends and family: scheduled phone calls, writing letters or anything else you can think of.

As you said, it’s still early on in the school year. In cases of homesickness, sometimes the best you can do is wait a while longer. Be proud of the life you’re building for yourself here, and I’m sure that eventually, your homesickness will subside.

Best of luck,
Amber

Are you in desperate need of advice? Amber can help! Email advice requests to aatkinson@mndaily.com.

Amber,

I’ve been best friends with someone for years, but lately I have started to think that we don’t connect anymore.

We started college last fall, and managed to coordinate it so we were both staying in the same dorm hall on campus. Especially with the loneliness of the pandemic, it was nice to be near someone who already knew me well, even though we have different interests now.

Of the two of us, I am definitely more of the timid type. I have always had trouble making new friends and meeting new people, but this person has always been there to — literally in some cases — drag me to whatever club she wanted us to join or some frat party I wasn’t really even interested in.

We’ve started seeing each other in person more often, and it’s made me realize a few things about our friendship. I don’t know if we ever had anything in common back when we first met, or if we just latched on to each other out of convenience. Either way, it’s obvious to me now that we don’t really share any of the same interests. I still want to be friends with her, but it always feels so weird to try and find any common ground between us.

How do I fix a friendship with someone I can’t even understand as a person?

Signed,

Missing the old days

Dear Missing the old days,

Whenever there’s some kind of interpersonal conflict between me and someone else, I always try to talk to the person first. I know it sounds daunting — especially if you are more of the shy, non-confrontational type — but there’s a reason why “communication is key” is such a common piece of advice. It might be awkward, but telling your friend how you feel will help you out in the long term. Especially if you want to remain close friends.

However, based on what you’ve told me, it doesn’t seem like your friend really understands you either. Does she know that you don’t like going to these frat parties? And what about the clubs that you’re interested in? To me, this doesn’t sound like a very well-balanced friendship.

It’s okay if you no longer connect the same way you used to with someone. I like to think of it as a sign of growth, and gaining a better understanding of yourself. It’s exciting, but also very scary. Embrace the person that you are, and don’t try to change yourself for anyone, even your best friend. Not all friendships need to be fixed, and if you don’t connect with this person anymore, that’s fine!

I encourage you to seek out the things that you are interested in, and hopefully you will find some new people along the way that connect with you in a way that you are looking for. Making new friends, or dropping old ones, is a part of life. Remember: you can stop being friends with someone while still appreciating the time you had together.

Best of luck,
Amber

Are you in desperate need of advice? Amber can help! Email advice requests to aatkinson@mndaily.com.

In my few years as a student at the University of Minnesota, I have received countless Safe-U alerts, ranging from carjackings to shootings to assaults to gas leaks and bomb threats.

This system has always seemed a bit odd to me. After all, what could I, a singular student, do about an armed robbery that occurred hours ago? Why do I even need to know about such things in the first place?

I will admit that the idea of Safe-U alerts does make sense – to an extent. Safe-U alerts can be helpful to inform students and staff about certain types of threats, particularly ones regarding dangerous areas on campus, said third-year philosophy student Syd Huntimer.

“There is one alert that directly aids students,” Huntimer said. “Think reporting on gas leaks, fires or bomb threats.”

These kinds of alerts are geared to tell students to avoid a particular area during an active event, which is understandable. One such alert went out last summer about a gas leak on University Avenue. The leak led to a multi-block shutdown while authorities cleared the area. It is important for students and staff to know about these kinds of events because they involve currently active events that interfere with public safety.

Other Safe-U alerts, though, do not accomplish any such safety aims. In fact, I would argue that the Safe-U alerts reporting criminal activity are actually counterproductive. To be living on campus while constantly receiving reports of shootings, robberies and assaults does nothing but make me feel unsafe. It’s fear-mongering at its finest.

“I think hyper-visibility is a keyword here,” Huntimer said. “Most activity reported feels like incidents that affirm projects of ‘clearing’ or making those areas ‘safe.’ Reporting with strong eyes on crimes that happen once a night creates fear about areas around the University.”

In an area as highly policed as the University there are bound to be endless instances of crimes reported. Why, though, do we need to know about them?

The only explanation I can think of for this is to create a sense of need for increased police presence on campus. It is as if these kinds of Safe-U alerts exist only to say, “Look! There is so much crime going on on campus! Don’t you feel afraid? But fear not, dear students! The UMPD is here to save the day! Please, give us more money, guns and military-grade equipment so we can make campus the safest it can be!”

After all, Safe-U alerts are here to keep the U, and you, safe. Right?

Current efforts to cut down on crime include the new Dinkytown Alerts, which launched earlier this month. Unlike the Safe-U alerts, the Dinkytown Alerts are an opt-in system that focuses only on criminal activity in the Dinkytown area.

This is a step in the right direction in only one regard: an opt-in program. If students do wish to be hyper-aware of the crime in their neighborhood, it should be a choice – not a requirement.

One might ask, “What would we do if there were no Safe-U alerts? Just let students roam around campus without knowing about the crimes being committed in their community?”

Yes, I would argue.

This kind of argument reminds me of a 2020 quote from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). A big proponent of defunding the police, AOC was asked what a world without heavy policing would look like, to which she famously replied, “It looks like a suburb.”

Indeed, the stereotypical suburbs are widely considered safe, crime-free and full of middle-class white people.

Part of the reason the University seems like a dangerous, crime-ridden place is because of the frequency of Safe-U alerts. This hyper-visibility of crime on campus only increases fear of crime and encourages pro-cop sentiment.

If we want campus to feel safe, we need to start by cutting down on Safe-U alerts.

Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) hosted Rock Out for Roe, a concert and fundraiser for the Minnesota-based abortion fund Our Justice, at the Whole Music Club in Minneapolis on Saturday.

This event featured five Minneapolis artists: Human Error, Jada Brown, Party Foul, Jada Lynn and Rigby. The crowd was scattered and various groups of attendees were gathered loosely around a low stage. At times, the noise was almost overwhelmingly enthusiastic, while at others it was stiflingly quiet.

I had my doubts about the impact this event could have. Perhaps I am too cynical, but I found it difficult to believe that any small student organization could evoke meaningful change for an issue as contentious as reproductive rights.

Jasper Nordin has been a member of SDS since last fall. He said up to 100 attendees showed up to watch the performances and potentially donate to the cause. During the event, his task was to encourage people to donate in between sets.

SDS’ approach to event planning is nontraditional, Nordin said.

“The SDS is a sort of non-hierarchical organization,” Nordin said. “I, like all SDS members, attend meetings where we plan and organize all our events, actions and protests.”

I’m inclined to doubt the coherence and effectiveness of an organization without any set roles or hierarchy. This lack of role delegation in a political protest planning committee seems like it would invite lower event turnout.

They come across as disorganized and ineffective, especially for a student group that allows anyone to join in on their weekly planning meetings. Yes, student protests should be student-involved and anyone with an interest in the issues covered by such organizations should participate in those groups.

However, this type of large-scale event planning should have more delegation. If you want to effectively plan any kind of event, there should be a promotional media team, someone involved in outreach and an experienced planning committee. One hundred concertgoers isn’t much to write home about for an event covering an issue so important to the people of Minnesota.

Nordin said by the end of the nearly five-hour event, SDS had raised around $2,000. How much influence can $2,000 really have for the state of bodily autonomy? Two thousand dollars cannot bring back Roe v. Wade.

Perhaps that is completely beside the point of Rock Out for Roe. It does not matter how much of an impact such an event has on larger governmental politics at all. Instead, the event may just have been a way to create a sense of community among those at the University who have been most impacted by the June overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Or, maybe it was less about the overall impact of Rock Out for Roe, and more about the sense of purpose it gives those involved. Therein lies the final problem with SDS.

How self-important must one be to assume a half-organized student group can have any real impact other than inflating egos? If SDS wishes to help in the fight for abortion rights, they need to step up in their organization. They need to be more publically disruptive. If SDS wishes to work with organizations such as Our Justice, they should focus on student recruitment into groups that can enact real change.