Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Friday, January 11, 2019
F
or a state known as the
“Great
Lakes
State,”
the
current
state
of
water in Michigan is terribly
concerning.
Growing
up
in
Grand
Rapids, some of my favorite
memories are from when my
family and I would pack up
chairs, snacks, books and toys.
We would drive west until we
reached towns like Holland or
Grand Haven and spend the
whole day on the white sands
of Lake Michigan. This was
probably the setting where my
interest in the environment
was planted inside me. It is
an emotional sentiment that
has grown over the years and
I always feel happy thinking
about looking out onto the
expanse of blue waves along
the shore.
The
Great
Lakes
—
consisting of Lakes Michigan,
Huron,
Superior,
Ontario
and Erie — are the largest
bodies of water in the entire
world, making up one fifth
of the Earth’s total surface
freshwater supply. The lakes
were formed more than 10,000
years
ago
from
enormous
glaciers that melted and molded
the landscape into the familiar
mitten shape we all know and
love. Their size and beauty
have earned them nicknames
like “the nation’s fourth coast”
or “the fresh coast, best coast.”
Our entire tourism campaign
is based on these images —
we’ve all heard the calming
voice of Tim Allen on the radio
give a picturesque description
of our landscape followed by
the soothing tagline: “Pure
Michigan.” Pristine water is
woven into the very fabric of
Michigan’s identity.
However, a quick Google
search about Michigan water
would have any reader believe
the
Great
Lakes
State
is
anything but pure. The Flint
water crisis, Asian carp and
other invasive species, the Line
5 oil pipeline debate, the Nestle
bottling plant controversy, or
the recent frenzy about the
PFAS contamination statewide
are but a few examples of
how
environmental
issues
surrounding our water over
the past decade have been
less than ideal, and frankly,
disheartening.
We need to start taking the
cultural weight of water into
consideration
when
having
these debates in order to save
what has become our most
historically significant icon.
Now, these crises are mostly
independent of one another
and would be tragic no matter
where they occur (Minnesota
is
running
into
their
own
pipeline issues with Line 3,
and PFAS contaminations are
a developing story nationwide).
However, there is something
uniquely troubling about the
bombardment
of
bad
news
in association with the state
of Michigan water. How can
Michigan be the Great Lakes
State if we cannot get a handle
on our own water?
Take
the
recent
debate
about the Enbridge Line 5 oil
pipeline, for example. For those
unfamiliar
with
the
story,
the abridged version is about
how an old pipeline, Line 5,
carries large amounts of oil
underneath
the
Mackinac
Bridge, through the Upper
Peninsula, and then the Straits
of Mackinac to Canada, putting
the
Great
Lakes,
and
our
economy, at major risk if there
is a spill. This topic was on the
front lines of the 2018 Michigan
gubernatorial
debate,
with
newly-elected Gov. Gretchen
Whitmer
vowing
to
take
measures to shut down Line
5 on her first day in office. It
should be noted that as of Jan. 2
Governor Whitmer announced
on Twitter she is honoring
this promise and has formally
asked Attorney General Dana
Nessel for legal options moving
forward to shut down Line 5.
Proponents of the pipeline,
such as Enbridge and former
Gov. Rick Snyder, however,
claim that actions such as this
would be drastic, and have
set up plans to build a tunnel
around the pipeline to ease
the risk of a potential spill. In
the debate over the pipeline,
figures and statistics are often
thrown
around
about
the
economy, cleanup times and
insurance plans, all of which
are extremely important to
consider.
But
what
if
we
took
into
account
the
cultural
significance of a spill as well?
Michigan’s blossoming tourism
industry would be dealt a fatal
blow and thousands would
lose their jobs. Furthermore,
it would say a great deal about
us that we would leave such
possibilities up to chance. I find
it hard to imagine we could, in
good faith, listen to another
Pure Michigan ad and pretend
the idealistic vision presented
is anything close to reality. Is
that something we are willing
to accept as Michiganders?
2018 was one of the most
divisive and contentious years
in modern history. The left and
the right seem to be slipping
farther apart than ever before,
and finding issues that can bring
us together is more critical
than ever in 2019. Water could
be one of those issues. While
there may be disagreements
on how exactly to get there,
a future with cleaner water
is something everyone from
this state should support. If
we don’t start standing up for
what is truly important to our
collective identity now, we
may no longer have anything
worth championing in the
future.
State of the Great Lakes
TIMOTHY SPURLIN | COLUMN
Timothy Spurlin can be reached at
timrspur@umich.edu.
Emma Chang
Joel Danilewitz
Samantha Goldstein
Elena Hubbell
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
Sarah Khan
Lucas Maiman
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland
Anu Roy-Chaudhury
Alex Satola
Ali Safawi
Ashley Zhang
Sam Weinberger
FINNTAN STORER
Managing Editor
Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.
MAYA GOLDMAN
Editor in Chief
MAGDALENA MIHAYLOVA
AND JOEL DANILEWITZ
Editorial Page Editors
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of The Daily’s Editorial Board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
Not so open mic
CAROLINE LLANES | COLUMN
W
hen I heard about
the
leaked
audio
from Louis C.K.’s
big comeback set (or second
comeback,
if
showing
up
unannounced at New York’s
Comedy Cellar is considered
a comeback), I labeled it in my
brain as one more thing not to
interact with.
Comics like Louis C.K. are
intentionally
inflammatory,
aiming
to
provoke
with
comments ranging from blatant
transphobia
and
racism
to
digs at millennials and their
obsession with “PC culture,”
a term I did not realize meant
“political correctness” rather
than
“personal
computer”
until embarrassingly recently.
Not only is paying attention to
comics and instigators giving
them exactly what they want;
it’s
downright
exhausting.
Every day, the news cycle
churns out some fresh hell, and
you have to prioritize what’s
going to get your emotional
attention that day.
Louis C.K. did not even
crack my top five list of News
Items to be Upset About. Sadly,
these things are unavoidable,
as people post screenshots of
transcripts and write think
pieces and generally make it
impossible not to interact with
this god-awful set. So I found
what I could of the bootlegged
audio and listened to it. It
was so…not funny. Even for
comics who like to walk the
line between what’s acceptable
and what’s not — who claim
to occupy an edgy space — it
was just completely devoid of
humor.
Judd
Apatow
called
it
“hacky, unfunny, shallow” and
he’s right. Not only is it all of
these things, it’s also tired.
C.K. brings absolutely nothing
fresh with transphobic and
racist comments about Asian
men, especially when there
are so many Asian comics.
Gay Asian men like Joel Kim
Booster and Bowen Yang, as
well as trans Asian women
like Patti Harrison, are able to
deliver comedy that is actually
funny
while
addressing
their
identity
cogently
and
genuinely, bringing empathy to
their sets. C.K.’s return also got
me thinking about how openly
hostile comedy is to those who
aren’t straight white men.
Gilda
Radner
was
an
iconic comedian, one of the
original seven cast members on
Saturday Night Live. So many
comics today, male and female,
cite her as an inspiration.
Watching clips of her perform
as wacky reporter Roseanne
Roseannadanna on Weekend
Update still makes me laugh.
She absolutely steals whatever
scene she is in and exudes
a
hilariously
chaotic
blend
energy and charisma. Radner
also famously struggled with
an eating disorder. She says it
best: “Because I’m not a perfect
example of my gender, I decided
to be funny about what I didn’t
have, instead of worrying about
it.”
So much of comedy depends
on subversion of norms in order
to get laughs, which leaves
women in comedy with the
quandary of either attempting
to perform womanhood as
they’re supposed to without
making waves or eschewing
the portrait of traditional
womanhood,
upsetting
people along the way.
Radner
faced
enormous
obstacles.
During
National
Lampoon Radio Hour, male
cast
members
and
male
writers
would
collaborate
on sketches without the help
or presence of the female
cast
members.
Radner
would then volunteer to be
on the typewriter in order
to
transcribe
the
ideas,
inserting her own ideas and
bits
whenever
she
could
She was a trailblazer in the
comedy world, a world where
“Animal
House”
was
the
standard for how women were
treated. John Belushi asked
her to move to New York
to be a part of the National
Lampoon Radio Hour, saying
that he wanted her to be “the
girl” — as in, the only girl.
This was all happening in the
early days of SNL in the 1970s.
Has anything changed? C.K.’s
return suggests no, things
have not changed.
During
his
set,
Louis
C.K. blamed the loss of $35
million on the cancellation of
his forthcoming TV special
and movie. In addition, he
lamented that he had been
out of the comedy scene for
so long (11 months). What is
$35 million to Louis C.K., a
man whose comedy career
is long and illustrious, who
has been a producer on many
successful television shows
and has had many a stand-up
special on HBO?
What about the women
who
were
subjected
to
C.K.’s behavior, having to
endure humiliating displays
of
power,
unnecessarily
sexual situations and hostile
work
environments?
These
women’s careers have been
sidelined
and
shattered
because they dared to speak
up. What did Gilda Radner
and her co-stars Jane Curtin
and Laraine Newman have to
deal with during their time
on SNL? What drove Gilda
Radner to so closely control
her diet because she felt it
was the only thing she could
control?
Looking
at
these
patterns, it becomes clear
why women must struggle to
be represented in a pool of
comedians crowded by men.
Women have to get a leg up
in the world of comedy, while
Louis C.K. gets a standing
ovation
after
destroying
multiple
women’s
careers.
Is it worth $35 million? I’m
certainly not the one who
gets to make that call, but
I’d take even five more female
comedians
over
another
angry, bitter, hacky white man
lashing out because he can’t
get away with his bad behavior
anymore.
Caroline Llanes can be reached at
cmllanes@umich.edu.
SAMANTHA SZUHAJ | COLUMN
H
ome
from
college,
I
walked
into
my
shared room to see my
sister and her friends seated
among a strewn lot of clothing
on
our
shag-carpet-covered
floor. They seemed to be in an
incredibly
heated
argument
about what to wear for their
impending “photoshoot” and
needed outfit advice.
“Ugh,” my sister let out with
a sigh of familiar frustration.
“None of these outfits will
photograph well. I need a good
picture for my Instagram.”
The
obstacle
my
sister
and her friends faced is not
unfamiliar
territory
for
millennials
and
younger
generations, that have been
exposed to social media in
various forms since middle
school or even earlier. The
desire to appear a certain way
on the social media platform of
their choosing has evolved from
a way to share one’s interests
and whereabouts with others
to a societal norm. An event
can no longer occur without
the
importance
of
getting
a
“post-worthy”
picture
or
sharing a video of whatever we
are attending to prove we have
been there or done that. What
becomes of the self and self-
worth in this age of sharing one
fine-tuned, filtered perspective
of our lives with others?
Coming to college last fall,
this pressure loomed over me.
There was this inherent need
to share with everyone back
home what I was up to, and to
indicate how much fun I was
having in this new chapter of
my life. Despite the pressures
I was facing — struggling to
figure out where I fit in at a
school 30 times the size of my
high school over halfway across
the country, or to determine
who my friends were — I could
hide behind a manufactured
Instagram post or Snapchat
story. Social media allows for
us to display this altered reality
to fit a mold society has shaped
for us. My persona online did
not demonstrate the difficulties
I faced in the classroom, the
tears I shed over stressful
nights or friendship issues.
No, my social media upheld an
expected façade of someone
constantly happy, surrounded
by friends, adventuring, and
living only the best life a college
student at a such a renowned
university could.
This is not just a surface-
level,
adolescent
issue,
but rather a deeply rooted
problem with larger societal
implications.
Individuals
of
all
ages,
gender
identities,
nationalities, ethnicities and
economic statuses are faced
with this dual identity crisis.
With the maturation of social
media has come the implication
we must dedicate time and
energy to keep an image of
ourselves that may be entirely
inauthentic. So many of us are
guilty of buying into this idea.
We
sacrifice
our
opinions,
feelings and beliefs to show
we are doing “the next coolest
thing.” We smile regardless of
what may be happening in the
background.
In
maintaining
this image, we lose a sense
of who we are off-screen.
We
become
caricatures
of
ourselves in the pictures we
share with others. Ultimately,
we sometimes forget to show
we are not that person, even
though it may seem that way to
our hundreds of followers.
Yes,
there
is
no
issue
in taking a picture for the
memory, and there are some
who use their media platforms
for voicing their opinions or
advocating for causes, but they
are not the majority. Most of us
— many of us subconsciously —
find the need to demonstrate we
are living an enviable version of
our lives.
Would you ever post a
picture of yourself without
makeup or an aesthetically
pleasing outfit? Or post a
Snapchat
story
about
how
you actually are not happy
or having a good time? At
the risk of sounding bold or
oversimplifying the issue, what
would happen if we were to try
and step away? Perhaps we
would have a grand realization
that the amount of energy and
time allotted to social media is
absurd, and that in this time
wasted, we have missed out
on the opportunities life has
presented us. But realistically,
we won’t do this.
I am not suggesting there
is a blanket solution for this,
or even that it is a problem for
everyone. Rather, I am stating
my personal goal to ease away
from this version of myself
and the tendency to give into
the pressure to maintain an
inauthentic persona for all
of my “closest” friends on my
Instagram or Facebook. Yes,
there may be the chance I
disappoint my lab partner
from the seventh grade with
my social media hiatus or
realism, but I think at the
root of it all, I will be able
to get in touch with a truer
version of myself. With that,
I am pledging to spend more
time
in
conversation,
and
not on my phone. More time
dancing to the music, instead
of filming from the corner of
the party to post another one
of those Snapchat stories. I
pledge to live in the moment
and continue to work on
myself in the present, instead
of worrying about how my life
will appear in perfectly edited
squares.
A necessary hiatus
Samantha Szuhaj can be reached
at szuhajs@umich.edu.
CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONVERSATION
Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the
editor and op-eds. Letters should be fewer than
300 words while op-eds should be 550 to 850
words. Send the writer’s full name and University
affiliation to tothedaily@michigandaily.com.
A future with cleaner
water is something
everyone from this state
should support
We smile regardless
of what may be
happening in the
background
JOIN OUR EDITORIAL BOARD
Our Editorial Board meets Mondays and Wednesdays
7:15-8:45 PM at our newsroom at 420 Maynard St. All
are welcome to come discuss national, state and campus
affairs.
Comedy can be
openly hostile to
those who aren’t
straight white men