One might question the significance of a newspaper on Tech’s campus. Literature, at a Tech school? Thought-provoking editorials? Encouragement of the arts? Unfathomable. Who could have thought of such blasphemy? The answer to that is Albert Blohm, the founder of the Technique.

The paper was established in 1911 by Blohm, who was adjunct professor for Tech’s six-member English Department along with Co-Editor-in-Chief, E A. Taylor, General Secretary of the Atlanta YMCA.

Following its first full year of publication, the Technique was lauded for its ability to “keep alive the spirit of the fellows” and was “certainly the one best influence here for developing a spirit of loyalty and unity,” according to the Blueprint, Tech’s yearbook.

On Blohm’s personal life — he was one of 12 children of a Lutheran immigrant tailor from Luebeck, Germany, and was born in American Fork, Utah, before moving to Portland. Studying at Wabash College and receiving his MA in English from Columbia University, Blohm was the only one of his siblings to go East for higher education.

Following Columbia, he started his tenure at Tech for a few eventful years then left to teach high school English in New England, where he met his wife, Helen Bradley Hewitt of the Cooper-Hewitt family, one summer on Martha’s Vineyard. Blohm spent the remainder of his career as head of the English department at Evander Childs High School in the Bronx in New York City, publishing writings on his thoughts on writing and education.

According to the progression of events of Albert Blohm’s career — Blohm’s establishment of the Technique, his tenure at Tech, and his abrupt leave — it is likely that there may have been some drama involved in his departure.

Upon his arrival at Tech, Blohm was ranked fourth among the English department faculty, and first among adjunct professors. This was during the time that the Technique was being established, in 1911.

As he integrated himself into the English department, Blohm proved himself to be an advocate of clear thinking over grammar and spelling in teaching English, and thus expected that all faculty make an effort to teach in this manner. Blohm even had students use written assignments for other subjects as English composition assignments, to emphasize the importance of writing and communication across all fields.

In accordance with this approach, Blohm wrote a four-page “Manifesto to the Faculty and Instructors of Georgia Tech,” expressing the sentiment that most of the graduates of Tech lack the “ability to express themselves effectively or often times even creditably, in speech or in writing.”

Through this manifesto, he proposed rules within the English Department, including a closer relationship between departments at Tech, combining students’ compositions in his or her field with compositions for the English Department and pinpointing students’ faults in thought and expression, ensuring that oral recitations are delivered logically and accurately.

He described the state of Tech as having a “lack of cooperation between the various departments of our school and a great consequent waste of time and energy and lack of efficiency,” asking for support from every instructor in the school.

It is likely that the majority of the English department was, at the time, not convinced of the effectiveness of this approach and may have felt like it was not Blohm’s place to impose such measures. Hoping for a promotion, Blohm was met with the opposite response.

In 1912, President Matheson, the president of Tech’s English department at the time, overruled and trivialized the manifesto as another attempt at intercommunication between departments at Tech.

Shortly after, Albert Blohm was demoted to fifth-rank in the English department and left Tech at the end of that academic year in 1913.

While his methods were met with harsh criticism and an unwillingness to change at the time, Blohm was likely the creative spark for effective communication, not only within the English department, but also across campus, leaving his mark at Tech with the Technique.

Inspired by professor of philosophy John Dewey, who was an instructor at Columbia at the time, Blohm’s ideas on the importance of writing may have stemmed from his time studying at Columbia.

Dewey’s teachings were based on the role of education as a means of not just conveying knowledge, but to further students’ imaginative ability. Albert Blohm wrote “Mental Hygiene,” a seminar in which he spoke about the importance of not only the knowledge of subject matter but also an intelligence of how to think and express oneself, arguing against perfectionism and nit-picky details and advocating for the development of a student’s personality.

What set Blohm apart from the other professors in Tech’s English Department at the time was his innovative spirit in combining academics with practical and social interests, constantly reminding the campus community of not only the importance of writing and communication but  also its application in society.

There is a persistent myth that exists among the environmental movement in this country that claims that climate change denialism is the primary reason for opposition to their energy policies. It argues that the people who fail to see eye-to-eye with them are doing so either out of ignorance of science or self-interest.

The implication that someone can only disagree with a certain perspective because they’re either uninformed or somehow nefarious is entirely incorrect and is a major part of the problem with our current political discourse. The reality is that most Americans understand that human activity impacts earth’s climate in a meaningful way. The disagreement comes on what policies should be enacted regarding climate change.

In last week’s Roundtable editorial piece, two authors both provided their answer to the question “what can be done to defeat climate change denial?”, in which they immediately fell into the trap of confounding climate change denial with opposition to the energy policies of the political left. Ultimately, both writers succumb to the false narrative that accepting a scientific consensus and agreeing with a specific policy prescription are one and the same.

It’s unfortunate, but this has become the prevailing attitude within much of the environmental movement. Opposition to their agenda — independent of any counter-arguments one might provide — is usually viewed as either uninformed or unethical.

The authors delve further into the ethicality trope, suggesting that the fossil fuels industry has funneled money towards politicians and slanted research aimed at diminishing concerns over the effects of climate change. While this is likely true to some degree, they provide no examples of such activity. They also fail to acknowledge the reality that if the oil or coal industry has an incentive to try and dampen concerns over carbon emissions, then the solar and wind industries have an equally strong incentive to drum up fears over emissions. The implication that clean energy is somehow immune to the corruption that’s claimed to be pervasive within the fossil fuels industry is naïve and intellectually dishonest.

In fact, a cursory glance at the clean energy sector reveals the extent of the cronyism that’s necessary to sustain the industry. While the sector is growing — the job market has indeed experienced “boom times” as one of the articles claims — this growth isn’t driven by consumer demand as much as by billions of dollars in government subsidies and the overregulation of the industry’s competition.

Programs such as the Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit, for example, grant wind and solar energy producers $23 per megawatt hour of electricity generated. To put that into perspective, the Department of Energy estimates the average cost of electricity in the state of Georgia at $92.30 per megawatt hour. It isn’t difficult for an industry to experience “boom times” when it’s receiving twenty-five cents in taxpayer money for every
dollar of sales.

Even so, the second article advocates that the government should do more to pull the energy industry towards clean power with so-called “financial incentives,” since expecting conservatives and oil and gas companies to “take the moral high ground and cut their profits” would be unrealistic. It should first be pointed out that what “financial incentives” amounts to is subsidies and tax exemptions for companies hand-picked by bureaucrats at the expense of taxpayers, inevitably leading to a brand of corruption comparable to that of fossil fuel.

Secondly, such programs already exist to the tune of tens of billions of dollars, yet clean energy remains economically inviable. Take solar power for example; according to the Department of Energy, electricity generated by the most advanced photovoltaic and thermal solar plants being built today will cost $144 and $262 per megawatt hour, respectively. The newest natural gas plants in contrast, cost only $66 per megawatt hour. Couple this with the pitifully low capacity factors and geographic limitations of solar power, and the infeasibility of solar as a major energy source — despite years of government “investment” — becomes painfully clear.

Finally, and most importantly in my view, is the absurdity of implying that the policies of the environmental movement own the moral high ground in the energy debate. The affordability and scalability of fossil fuels is what made possible the industrial revolution, and the resulting wealth and commerce has raised literally billions of people from poverty, and this still rings true today. In developed countries which have embraced clean energy, we find higher prices and fewer opportunities.

Germany — which had been pursuing an aggressive campaign to promote clean energy — reversed course earlier this year, and is now limiting renewables as a percentage of total energy production through at least 2025 due to high electricity prices and inconsistent output. Wind farm developments in the country’s north — the centerpiece of German green energy policies — have been plagued with difficulties adjusting to fluctuations in demand, and the costs associated with wind energy have led to some of the highest electricity prices in Europe, costing three-times the nationwide average in the United States and more than double that of neighboring Poland according to data from the European Union.

Hikes in energy prices and the resulting effect that they have on the costs of basic goods and services such as transportation and food are regressive by nature, and disproportionately impact the poorer members of society.

Likewise, the artificial disruption in the energy sector caused by government policies favoring renewables at the expense of fossil fuels harms the communities based around
their production.

One of last week’s responses made the case that workers such as coal miners could easily transition to new jobs being created in the solar industry. I’d wager that the bulk of the tens of thousands of unemployed or underemployed former coal workers and those in their communities — most of whom live in areas where geography and weather make large-scale solar power infeasible — would disagree.

The disconnect between environmentalists and the people whom their policies will impact is a key shortcoming of the environmental movement. This sort of armchair activism has become endemic to today’s environmentalism, and is a much more significant contributor to opposition to environmental causes than climate change denial.

It affords its practitioners a sense that they’re doing the right thing, despite ultimately harming the most vulnerable in our society. In the final paragraphs of one of the articles, An Inconvenient Truth — Al Gore’s Documentary on Climate Change — is praised, and the case is made that the “inconveniences” caused by addressing climate change cannot serve as a stumbling block to the proper course of action.

Indeed, it is easy to ask for a society to make sacrifices when the heaviest burdens can be expected to fall on someone else’s shoulders.

The National Invitation Tournament is over, and Tech basketball’s season is officially finished. That means an exhale, a reset and the gradual run-up to the next season already looming ahead.

Spend a few minutes with men’s basketball head coach Josh Pastner and it might be fair to wonder whether the season is over at all. His phone buzzes time and time again, vying for his attention vainly. One call, then another. Then a few more for good measure. Over the course of a 20-minute conversation, Pastner’s iPhone may well have blipped twenty times — and that might be a conservative estimate.

This is what the offseason looks like for Pastner, his first in Atlanta. That is, if you do not count last year’s, which was a transitionary period for both Pastner, who had to cut ties with Memphis, and Tech, which had to move on from incumbent Brian Gregory.

Yet the whirlwind pace — from scouting his own team to identifying flaws in his coaching to making in-house visits with recruits — suits Pastner, whose tenure has been marked by nothing if not energy. While he remains intensely focused on the year ahead, he cannot help but take pride in his team’s performance this year, especially considering the low expectations placed on the group.

“Three games stick out in my mind,” Pastner said. One was the team’s win at Virginia Comonwealth after losing two games in a row early in the season. Pastner has never endured a three-game losing streak in his entire head coaching career, and a victory in a hostile environment prevented exactly that.

The second was the team’s second-round NIT win over Belmont, which set a team single-season record for home wins. And the last? A win against Pittsburgh on Senior Day, a game that confirmed how far the Jackets had come from season’s beginning.

“For the type of year we had, the success we had, the overachievement we had, to beat Pitt on Senior Day,” he says, was a meaningful experience and one hat provided the team’s veteran leadership with an appropriate send-off. Had the Jackets not gotten the chance to host two NIT games, it would have been a fine way to finish the McCamish Pavilion slate.

Yet save for perhaps a national championship, there is no such thing as a happy ending in the ACC. Pastner has been liberal in his praise of the conference throughout the season, using its rigor as an unsuccessful argument for Tech’s inclusion in the NCAA Tournament. He even seeks to pattern his program after that of conference rival Notre Dame.

“They’ve done a great job,” he said. “They get some under-the-radar guys that develop, that get better, that improve. They’ve got great shooters, they space the floor, and [Notre Dame head coach] Mike Brey is obviously one of the elite coaches out there.”

Pastner acknowledges that the recruiting environment at an ACC team like Tech is much different than it was in his previous stint at Memphis. While the Tigers were a relatively big fish in the American Athletic Conference’s small pond, Pastner finds himself in the opposite position in Atlanta.

“This league is a monster,” he says with a laugh. “There are no nights off, and we’ve got to do a great job — a near-perfect job — on evaluations.” And, of course, it is difficult to evaluate players when the game is so dynamic. The astounding success of Golden State Warriors guard Steph Curry, for example, has inspired a generation of aspiring athletes to take more three-point shots. And an increasing focus on analytics means that there are new performance insights for teams to glean.

“It’s an evolving sport, and you’ve got to stay ahead of the curve,” he said. “Whether it’s through technology or on [players’] views on life, it’s constantly changing day by day. That’s part of us staying relevant as a staff.”

One of the biggest changes Tech basketball will endure this offseason is the graduation of a number of key players. Dependable starters and role players such as Josh Heath, Quinton Stephens and Corey Heyward will bid farewell to the Flats. And the Jackets, among the youngest teams in the country, will have to find leadership in a number of places.

One source would have seemed exceedingly unlikely a year ago: freshman guard Josh Okogie, whose exciting on-court performances will have to be matched by his guiding hand off the court.

“He’s going to be a key guy for us to do what we need to do. We need  him to really step up that leadership role. He’s going to be a team captain, and he’s got to take advantage of that.”

Josh Pastner is taking advantage of the offseason to critique everything. That includes himself.

“Personally, I need to eat better,” he said. “Professionally, I need to keep growing as a coach. I think I need to study the areas where I felt we didn’t have success on the court. Did I not hold true to something that was important to me?”

The answer is likely “no.”

Yet another softball season draws closer to its end and once again, it seems that the Jackets have struggled competing away from home. While homesickness has cost them, Tech has still carried some of the momentum they developed last season onto the field this year.

The Jackets got off to a rough start, beginning the season far from home at the Puerto Rico Tournament and coming home with a single victory out of six match-ups. With nearly half the line-up in their debut season, some growing pains were to be expected.  Having more home games in the schedule than last year alleviated some of the pressure on the ten freshmen, who could focus better in the comfort of friendly confines.

However, it has not been enough to prevent road struggles from affecting Tech’s standings.  More than half of the games the Jackets have played out of state have been losses. With only two victories out of eleven match-ups away from home this season, hope for a chance at post season championship competition is running low.  There is no time to rest and certainly none to concede defeat, but the chances of putting up a fight in ACC play are waning for Tech softball.

Second in the ACC, Boston College will be the hardest match-up left in the season for Tech. The eagles will also be Tech’s chance to turn around the season and prove themselves as ACC competitors. It’s been two years since the jackets competed in an ACC championship and the jackets will leave everything on the field in their end of season scramble for a chance at a championship spot.

The Jackets are well-versed in the art of the last-minute scramble this season. Nevertheless, if Tech hopes to turn a chance at ACC championship competition into an ACC championship title, the jackets will need to bring more consistency onto the field in their three final games than they have all season.

Last-ditch efforts have not been enough to reverse Tech’s consistent difficulty reaching home plate this season. After a dismal start to the year, Tech rallied in the fifth inning of their second game against FSU. The scoreboard read 8-0 when the Jackets walked on to offer a final effort. Tech loaded the bases and earned three runs in the fifth inning and four more in the sixth. In the seventh inning, Tech had little difficulty reaching base, but its push fell short just before home plate, only earning one run. All eight of the runs tallied by the team were earned by different athletes.

Tech illustrated great talent throughout the lineup through the last three innings of the game, but the team was nonetheless unable to scrap together a sufficient performance to carry it to victory over the ‘Noles. The Jackets carried that poor luck into their third game of the weekend and left Tallahassee with three losses.

After going 4-5 against their next three ACC opponents, Notre Dame, Syracuse, and Virginia Tech, the Jackets got another chance to bring out a miracle victory at the last minute against North Carolina State. In its ninth extra-inning game this season, the team had no intention of submitting to defeat. Straight zeros lined the board for the first six innings before the Jackets picked themselves up in the seventh inning. Tech ended the drought with three runs on four hits in the seventh, tying the score with the Wolfpack and earning an extra chance at gaining an edge.

The teams traded runs in the eighth and ninth innings, but the Jackets gained the edge in the tenth inning. The team outhit NC State 14-4, and junior Emily Anderson demonstrated tremendous skill on the mound through all ten innings.

Consistent hitting and pitching secured the first victory of the weekend, but without consistent movement around the bases, the Jackets would be unable to rally through the next two games of the weekend.

Pushed by their victory, Tech kicked off the second game with a remarkable seven runs in the first inning. By the fourth inning, the jackets had lost their momentum. They played through the last three innings with only two hits and no runs. A small rally in the last half of the game could have compensated for poor pitching earlier in the contest. Game three was plagued by the same inability to move from base to base. Outhitting the Wolfpack for the second time out of three games, the jackets failed to earn a run through all seven innings, extraordinary considering their hitting.

The Jackets will need to muster consistency through every inning if they are going to have a chance at earning a victory against Boston College. The team will get to practice putting together two good halves against Virginia before travel to Massachusetts to compete for their chance at an ACC championship spot. If Tech can manage to play through all six innings with the same ferocity that they played in the last half of their first game against North Carolina State; they could turn around the season in a single game, a truly momentous event.

Tremendous skill is present through the entire lineup. Two experienced pitchers, and seven returning players, who have demonstrated raw strength at bat, welcomed ten talented freshmen to the lineup. Growing pains can be an issue every season, but with the level of skill that each player brings to the field individually, Those pains should soon ebb, at least in time for next season.

Few college athletes arrive on campus knowing that they will be top performers on their team. They certainly aspire to be there, but rarely do they accomplish that feat in their first year on Tech’s campus. Junior men’s tennis player Chris Eubanks is one of those few elite athletes.

In his first year at Tech he played most of his matches in the one slot, accruing a 7-11 record in matches in a slot usually reserved for seasoned veterans. His sophomore year he only played in the top slot, going 21-2 in his matches there and earning himself a bid in the NCAA singles tournament.

When you meet Chris, his demeanor and actions don’t convey the competitive spirit that lies within. Standing at 6’7”, the lanky junior from Atlanta, Ga. looks like he would be more likely to be found on a basketball court, but a simple conversation with him changes that perspective. He goes from bubbly describing a 6-1, 6-2 rout of Louisville’s Christopher Morin-Kougoucheff the day prior, to walking through what he and the team should work on if they hope to top the ACC and the country.

Per Oracle ITA, Eubanks is currently ranked No. 5 in the nation in singles play. Additionally, Eubanks has seen success against other top players this season with a win over No. 2 Petros Chrysochos of Wake Forest. Despite this, Eubanks is sure of what he still needs to improve upon, a crucial trait for any player.

“I think one of the main things I have to improve on and that I’ve done a good job getting better at is building my body,” he said. Eubanks is currently listed as weighing 165 lbs., and one look at his lanky frame confirms that. He continued, “Once you get to a certain level of tennis, all of the guys can hit a forehand or a backhand, it’s just about being able to do that under pressure.” That is both a physical and mental obstacle that must be overcome.

Mentally, Eubanks has had more to deal with beyond just his matches. While tennis is not a traditional team sport with the group competing towards one  goal together, leaders still emerge. Despite that expectation, there has not been much stress placed on Eubanks due to the team being so cohesive.

“We have a really close knit group of guys, and a very, very close team,” he said. “We all chip in at different times and assume leadership roles; we have four guys my year, … we all of kind of know when it’s our time to lead and take on that responsibility.”

As Eubanks continues to grow at Tech, his talent has allowed him experiences nationally and beyond. The thing he values most about these outside experiences is the perspective and motivation it gives him.

“I played in the US Open. I played in the BB&T Atlanta Open the past four years. Each of these things … shows me that I have a lot of work to do to continue to improve if I want to be able to play at those tournaments and at that level more consistently.” This motivation is a hallmark of many great athletes and leads Eubanks to wanting to play against the highest level of competition.

“I think, obviously the best, would be able to play Roger Federer someday,” he said when asked about his aspirations. “But just any of the top guys, to be able to see … how far I am from being one of the best players in the world. Hopefully I would put up a pretty good fight and reassure myself that I’m not that far away.”

That perspective gained from professional tournaments combined with his thirst for victory comes to a head when discussing what the team needs to do to win the tough ACC tournament. The No. 18 Jackets have been dominant in the ACC, their only loss coming (at the time of writing) against No. 1 Wake Forest.

“The biggest thing is we’ve just got to close out,” Eubanks said plainly. “On two courts, we had two guys serving for their matches, if they just serve those matches out we beat Wake Forest 4-1. I think it’s just realizing it’s just realizing and coming to grips with the fact that we are one these very good teams and we have to try and continue to put that together and show the rest of the country … that we belong here.”

Finally, Eubanks looked at his goals for the rest of the season.

“My top goal is to win NCAA’s. I think if I can continue to progress and do the right things that I’ve been doing that’s a definite possibility.” As the end of the season draws near, there are a number of distractions that might push a player one way or another. From finals approaching to the competition intensifying to fatigue building from the accumulation of match play, it is easy to lose sight of the goal. But one thing is clear: Chris Eubanks is peaking at just the right time to make a run.

From March 3–5, students may have noticed that the CRC basketball courts were closed. That weekend, Tech hosted the National Intramural-Recreational Sports Association (NIRSA) Championship Series Regional Basketball Championship. NIRSA was founded in 1950 by representatives from 11 Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). Now, NIRSA holds intramural tournaments in basketball, flag football, soccer, tennis and cricket for college students. NIRSA also hosts regional and national conferences centered around increasing participation in campus recreation programming.

The regional basketball tournament featured both men’s and women’s pool and bracket play with teams representing colleges from all over the southern United States. Teams of at most 15 players first participated in pool play. The top three teams in each of the four-team pools and the top two teams in three-team pools advanced to a single-elimination tournament.

Awards included first and second place team awards, team sportsmanship awards for each division, tournament champion award for first place team members, all-tournament team and MVP awards and all-tournament officials. The each champion also received a paid team entry free to the NCS National Basketball Championships at the Ohio State University in Columbus, which will take place April 21–23.

The memory of former NIRSA champion Sarah Fain was celebrated throughout the weekend. Fain was a fixture at NIRSA events until she finally lost her battle with colon cancer. Those involved with NIRSA took the opportunity to reflect on her tremendous impact on NIRSA and on campus recreation at Sam Houston State University, Georgia College, and Georgia Southern.

Matt Jarman, the intramural coordinator at Emory University said that “Sarah taught me so much in the time I was her student … she taught me how to be detailed, diligent, determined and accountable,” courtesy of nirsa.net. At Tech, tournament director Joshua Hamilton said that “she has done so much for the world of NIRSA and has been very essential to the success of intramurals across the country.” Often, the work of intramural directors goes unnoticed, but everyone involved in the NIRSA community knew exactly how valuable Fain was to promoting NIRSA’s goals.

On the women’s side of the bracket, GT Women’s Basketball, GS Dream Team, the Columbus Lady Cougars and VSU Power of Persistent qualified to the final four of tournament play. In the championship game, GS Dream Team beat Columbus to win the tournament. For the men, the Ivy Tech Bears, UNC Pembroke, Columbus Running Cougars and Single-A Allstars were in the final four. In the finals, UNC Pembroke won over Single-A Allstars with a score of 67-52 when all was said and done.

This regional tournament is hosted by a variety of schools around the South. Each school hosts the tournament for two years at a time before rotating hosting duties to the next school. Hamilton says that his favorite part of the tournament “was of course the dunks and multiple one point game winners.”

Although Tech is not lined up to host the tournament for another five years, Hamilton already has his sights set on some improvements he would like to see. As tournament director, he wants to expand the use of the televisions in the CRC for highlights and displaying player and team statistics. He is also interested in the potential to broadcast the championship games live and hiring a DJ for the weekend of the tournament. Tech’s hosting stint half a decade from now may be a very different one indeed.

It started with an episode of Survivorman, an eleven year old kid who was bored as hell, and a dead frog.

“I saw him make a bow in the woods and he shot a frog,” said Kolby Hanley, second-year MSE and professional archer sanctioned by the National Field Archery Association (NFAA). “And then he ate the frog. I thought that was the coolest thing ever and being bored as hell, I went out into the backwoods and started making bows out of little saplings based on the episode. But I’ve never killed an animal with a bow.”

The Survivorman episode made quite an impact, sparking a passion that led to months and months of making bows, until Hanley went to the local archery range to start training with a standard hunting bow.

Before coming to Tech as a second-year transfer student, Hanley began his archery career through the Junior Olympic Archery Development (JOAD) program. “It was the first sport I was pretty good at and I could stand out among other people,” he says.

Over the past three summers, however, Hanley found a new home at the Archery Learning Center in Snellville, GA, forty minutes east of Tech. He has been using the Center as a hub for participating in national and international competitions and has found tremendous support through the program.

“My main role model is George Ryals IV — the head coach and owner of the Archery Learning Center,” said Hanley. “He’s played such an influential role in that he’s not only helped me to be a phenomenal shooter, but he’s also helped me in my life too—to get to tournaments, to give me exposure. He’s always pushing me too. I meet people who tell me I’m driven, people who don’t push me as much, but he’s really the only person who keeps poking me to keep doing a little bit more.”

Despite the proximity of the Archery Learning Center to Tech’s campus, Hanley was often discouraged from applying as a transfer because it was “impossible” to get in.

But defying seemingly formidable odds, Hanley applied and received admission. “The transition was seamless; it felt like it was meant to be,” he said.

Hanley often practices with Tech’s archery team, which meets three times a week. “I’m shooting a lot more than I used to at my old school, just because it’s easier with the Learning Center and practice at Tech,” said Hanley. “I’m actually seeing an incline on my skill since I’ve gotten here.”

On top of shooting at a professional level, Hanley is balancing a rigorous curriculum, is currently pursuing a position in undergraduate research, and puts in thirty hours a week, working nights at his part-time job downtown.

An accomplished shooter in many respects, Hanley won the National Outdoor Championship for two consecutive years, and the National Indoor Championship in 2014, for which he made a perfect score on the last day of the competition, a personal accomplishment in which he takes great pride.

But what Hanley believes was the most significant moment at the National Indoor Championship and in his archery career was when he was approached by the head coach of the Archery Learning Center.

“Right after I had received my big bowl on the podium, that’s when I met the head coach … and honestly, if I hadn’t won National Championship that year, I probably wouldn’t be here,” Hanley said.

Hanley hopes to continue archery as long as he can. “I’ve pretty much already decided it’s one of those things that I’m going to be doing for the rest of my life … there’s something about it that I just enjoy too much and it makes me too happy to not do it for the rest of my life.”

Hanley describes archery as a martial art, as a meditative type of sport. “It’s almost like yoga in a sense. It calms you down and mellows you out…It’s made me more self-aware, both mentally and physically, just because it takes so much body control in the form of being still under high pressure. It’s made me perform better under a high level in everything else that I’m doing,” he added regarding the advantages of his craft.

Hanley is currently experimenting with something different than the stereotypical thirteen-hundred-people-shoot-at-five-hundred-targets-at-the-same-time type of archery, with a new form known as 3D Archery.

3D Archery includes shooting at foam targets of animals in the woods, with four or five other people on the course.

He is currently training to compete in World Trials this upcoming June in hopes to make the team that will travel to South America for the World Cup.

Mexico City is sinking. Resting on an improperly managed aquifer, the city is gradually sinking into the Earth at a rate of around 3 feet a year. Along with the surrounding area that makes up the Valley of Mexico, Mexico City is the focus of the film “H2Omx.” The documentary explores the way this ancestral heartland of Mexico, which was the center of a number of pre-Columbian civilizations including the Toltecs and the Aztecs, is now struggling to bear the weight of its residents.

Looking through personal and population-based lenses, the film explores water mismanagement in Mexico’s largest city and issues a call to action to both the government and the general populace. If something is not done, the film warns, the city’s collapse is only one of a number of terrible water management issues that could jeopardize the infrastructure of Mexico’s capital and, by extension, the country itself.

As the film reveals, the issue lies in the city’s origins. The Spanish conquerors sought to defy Mother Nature by building Mexico City in the middle of a series of interconnected lakes that were gradually drained in order to prevent flooding.

The methods used by the historical invaders continue to be used today in order to maintain the city, but these methods are no longer sustainable as water levels fall and more and more land is subsidized to make room for the city’s rapidly rising population.

New urban neighborhoods require water to be pumped from hundreds of kilometers underground or shipped from far away. Vendors profit off the delivery of fresh water as the populace struggles to access a basic necessity
for survival.

The film attacks this idea from two fronts. Much of the content of the film is focused on an individual scale. Following a Hidalgo farmer, a water truck driver or a pair of design entrepreneurs working to introduce rain collection to impoverished communities, the documentary weaves a collective narrative for the city as it struggles for its lifeblood.

Water is universal, and the producers paradoxically highlight the global relevance by zooming in. Interspersed between these interviews and segments are stunning aerial shots of the city. The heavily polluted canal that weaves its way down the sprawling metropolis and the miles of concrete and tarmac that roll down the Mexican plateau create a remarkable juxtaposition that emphasizes how severe of a problem the city faces.

While solutions exist, they struggle to gain traction because of a collective lethargy from the government and populace. The film seeks to remedy this attitude by highlighting organizations like the Isla Urbana that are helping to install rainwater harvesting systems. Mexico City receives five months of rain a year, but a lack of resources and support makes it impossible for citizens to take advantage of it.

Other initiatives, such as those seeking to empower a local database of knowledge about water management, are also mentioned. However, it is made quite clear that the issue still exists on a massive scale; therefore, current efforts can only curb, rather than fix, the problem.

“H2Omx” is an intelligently constructed, thoroughly researched documentary that effectively explores a serious issue in a way that informs viewers. Without taking sides, it presents a compelling argument for action of any kind and emphasizes that the problem is one that has extensive repercussions for all of Mexico.

As the capital and center of much of the country’s commerce and industry, Mexico City’s problems are the country’s problems. As a whole, the film collectively functions less as a manifesto and more as a plea, depicting the struggle of a city and a people for water — a basic human right.

After nearly a year of anticipation, “Your Name,” or “Kimi no Na Wa,” premiered in select U.S. theaters this past Saturday, April 7. “Your Name” can be seen at Midtown Arts Cinema either in English dub or in Japanese with English subtitles.

Viewers may choose to watch it in Japanese to try to catch some of the nuance in the wording of the title, which in Japanese is actually a pun; when the characters ask for each other’s names, they are also asking “Who are you?” Additionally, there is a comedic scene where a character is confused on what form of gendered Japanese pronoun to use that does not properly translate to English. These distinctions do not translate well to the dub and are subtle for the English speaking viewer, but they can be fun points to pick up on if one knows a little about the Japanese language.

This movie has received much praise at home and abroad with a nomination for an Oscar and the title of the top grossing anime movie in Japan. However, the basic concept of the film is nothing new: two people switch bodies, and shenanigans ensue.

However, “Your Name” avoids cliché by only using this trope as a grounding point around which the remainder of the plot quickly evolves past. The honesty written into the characters, their relationships and their personal development throughout elevate the movie past its cliched premise.

Super fans may have already seen the film since it has been available on several dubious websites online. However, viewing this specific film in theaters is a worthwhile experience because “Your Name” surpasses expectations with its cinematography
and scenery.

On the big screen, the gorgeous colors of the movie’s signature meteor pops in the night sky, and viewers can better appreciate the dazzling country landscapes, the urban cityscapes and the marvelously detailed backgrounds for which director Makoto Shinkai is so well known. Shinkai excellently captures that wistful feel, characteristic of many of his previous works, partly due to the juxtaposition of these cityscapes and sprawling countrysides, which are always lit by the waning light of evening.

Unfortunately, one problem that this movie suffers from is its somewhat sudden tonal shifts and awkward pacing. The extensive plot has some fairly clear “chapters.” Each of these chapters has a distinct mood, beginning cheery and comedic and midway through the movie becoming much darker and more suspenseful, losing all of its humorous tone.

The one consistency may be the fact that the scenery always seems to be lit by the wistful waning light of evening. Though this harsh transition may be the director’s intent, it is considerably jarring for viewers.

Additionally, some sections of the movie seem rushed due to time constraints. The run time is an hour and 47 minutes, but at times, it feels much longer. Some sections of the movie feel rushed and underdeveloped, like Mitsuha’s relationship with her father which ends with an unresolved cliffhanger. On the other hand, other parts, like Taki’s countryside searching and the movie’s resolution, seem to drag on unnecessarily. In fact, it feels like the movie’s production was being rushed in the later stages because the second half of the movie seems much less tightly written.

While Shinkai is not necessarily breaking any new ground with the themes of “Your Name,” tackling such controversial subjects as love overcoming obstacles and the existence of destiny, for the most part he explores them with maturity and nuance. Some more subtle takeaways, though, were more interesting, such as the benefit of androgynous characteristics and the value of both rural and urban lifestyles.

Though he used many extremely fantastical elements as plot points, Shinkai successfully grounds the movie in its relatable characters and captivating scenery. Overall, despite its pacing and unimaginative premise, “Your Name” skillfully exhibits what a modern animated film can accomplish in terms of stunning visuals and engaging character development.