Adam Wheeler’s CV
Adam Wheeler lied his way into Harvard College. Along the way, he applied for an internship at The New Republic, which declined, but kept his resume.
The resume looks ridiculous, but if you cribbed bits and pieces of it for your own CV, it would be undoubtedly improved.
Dr. Amy Bishop: Cursed.
The Huntsville Times has identified the likely shooter in the University of Alabama shootings: Amy Bishop, a Harvard-trained neuroscientist.
At Harvard, we learned quickly that all female graduates are cursed: too smart to keep good men, too in-their-own-heads to get out of their own way. Assuming Bishop is the shooter, we can surmise that she felt she was doing the University of Alabama a favor by teaching there — “Deny me tenure? You looking to die today?”
Quantum Leap
The precise energy of a hydrogen molecule has been calculated using a quantum computer.
Hint: you don’t have to know what that means, really. Just understand that your children, one day, will tool you over how little you know about modern computing — and that that shift in understanding began with this.
Oh, just fuck me.
I’m watching a lecture video, and every time the prof uses the words “the situation” all I can think of is Jersey Shore. FML
Not to be outdone, YaleFML.com
And hey, since Facebook isn’t exclusive to Harvard anymore, something had to replace it. This is it.
Naturally, Yale has followed suit.
Lo, the sad face of America’s future.
Harvard Quidditch.
RIP: M. Brooke Halsey
The Crimson reports the passing of former Cabot resident M. Brooke Halsey ‘06. While it doesn’t add to the peculiar number of deaths of current students this year, it is unsettling nonetheless.
Cut those tails
Harvard’s endowment took a $11Billion hit this past year.
Now will you please stop waving those “Harvard is rich, don’t cut our jobs” signs?
John Harvard Bank
Harvard gets a new lending service. Hope they have the wits to increase the maximums.
Note: Facebook started the same way.
Chanequa. Continued.
Regarding the recent murder at Kirkland, the NY Times has published an article that gives a bit more regard to what Chanequa Campbell has to say about her ordeal. The problem now, however, is that she (unfortunately) refuses to share the contents of the letter she received from Harvard with the public.
Harvard tends to be meticulous. Its first rule is, generally, to cover her own ass. Hence, the letter may have detailed some things that justify her not receiving her diploma (albeit in Harvard’s inimitable vagueness), despite Campbell’s claim that no reason was given. Moreover, I find it strange that there is no mention of Campbell defending her integrity. One of the first things Harvard teaches you is how to put up a fight — that’s the whole point of Expos.
The issue now rests with Campbell. She needs to detail, explicitly, why she thinks Harvard is being unfair (and corroborate that detail) before anyone can further risk their reputation to defend her — including me.
Calling Out Chanequa
The Harvard Crimson reports Chanequa N. Campbell ’09 is being barred from graduating because of her alleged involvement with the recent shooting at Kirkland. This is bullshit. Her involvement, it seems, is based upon evidence pointing to her (and another, Brittany J. Smith ’09) as the means to which the victim, Justin Cosby, was able to get into the dorm. The problem is that all kinds of non-Harvard people sneak into the houses. You can’t use that as a basis for kicking someone out — what if you need 25 pizzas delivered? I sure as hell ain’t going to carry all that into the dining hall myself (that’s the DELIVERY guy’s job).
Moreover, crime, in America, is judged by a jury of one’s peers.
So let’s say Chanequa is exonerated in the end. She’ll get her diploma and (probably) a very nice apology letter, as well as a lifetime of these never-ending e-mails and letters from the Alumni Association asking for money. And let’s say she’s not, and this emboldens Harvard to continue judging without balanced review. Either way, something substantial is lost.
Bottom line: believe it or not, people invest a lot to go to Harvard. There are sleepless nights and impossible loans and all those goddamn tourists with their goddamn cameras. The transaction is not one-sided. Harvard does indeed brighten the lives of her graduates, but Harvard sometimes forgets that her reputation is burnished by these very same lives. We bet on you, Harvard. Would it be too much to ask that you, perhaps, at times, go out on a limb and bet on us?
Kirkland is straight hood
What kept me astonished — flabbergasted — during my years living in Cambridge was the obvious targeting of Harvard students. Here you have a population of skinny, socially-inept kids who, for the most part, are from bourgeois homes couched in “typical” (read: bourgeois) American neighborhoods, the kind of people that are taught to give up money and not resist; in other words, perfect victims. It is not difficult to predict how easily, then, they can be victimized — and they often are, leaving one to wonder if HUPD does anything more than put out warnings.
Anyway — The Crimson reports that someone was shot at Kirkland house. This does not surprise me, given that just about anyone can walk into the houses. Hilariously, it wasn’t even a Harvard student.
Note: I always wanted to cart five or six large chemical barrels (empty, of course), marked “EXPLOSIVE” into Emerson and the Science Center — just to see how easily it could be done. Alas, this is a prank likely destined to be carried out by some poor, hapless Yalie.
Meeting Goliath
When I was an undergrad, I knew I wasn’t the smartest or fastest or best student. What I did know was that I trained with a world-champion Thai boxer and he taught me to be tough; tough enough to stay up all day and all night, studying.
Malcolm Gladwell explores this concept, of using effort to supplant weakness in skill, in his latest New Yorker article.
“And it happened as the Philistine arose and was drawing near David that David hastened and ran out from the lines toward the Philistine,” the Bible says. “And he reached his hand into the pouch and took from there a stone and slung it and struck the Philistine in his forehead.” The second sentence—the slingshot part—is what made David famous. But the first sentence matters just as much. David broke the rhythm of the encounter. He speeded it up. “The sudden astonishment when David sprints forward must have frozen Goliath, making him a better target,” the poet and critic Robert Pinsky writes in “The Life of David.” Pinsky calls David a “point guard ready to flick the basketball here or there.” David pressed. That’s what Davids do when they want to beat Goliaths.
What Gladwell is getting at is that you, as an underdog, cannot play by the rules of Goliath — doing so only ensures your loss. What you must do, instead, is exploit weaknesses — lapses in logic — within the context and apply effort in those instances (”look for strengths where things are naturally weak”). Wonderfully, Gladwell describes Rick Pitino’s (yes, the coach) use of frame control to dominate stronger teams.
Pitino trains his players to look for what he calls the “rush state” in their opponents—that moment when the player with the ball is shaken out of his tempo…
In effect, Gladwell is talking about intelligence. Why, then, does this sound so fresh and new? Because there is a dearth of intelligence in our world.
Another Death at Harvard
The Harvard Crimson reports the death of sophmore Kathlene Joo ‘11 as the fourth undergrad to pass this year. FOUR? Does that not seem disproportionate?
Some commentary on the Crimson’s website suggests neuroenhancing drugs may have been at play. If so, shame on Study Council and the UC (and, really, HUPD) for not doing more to address the issue.
UPDATE (May 8, 2009): The Crimson did not make an error; there are are indeed four: Joo, Peter Cai, and Clarel Antoine and M.J. Friedman. (Thanks J.A.P.C.K.)
Growing Up Goldman
I just came back from an event at Goldman Sachs’ London office, and boy do I feel itchy. The Harvard Club of London, together with Goldman, hosted a talk by Jack Meyer, former caretaker of Harvard’s endowment. While I was intrigued by his perspective on risk management, which took up the first 20 minutes of the talk, Meyer spent the rest of the time trying to sell a really bad idea.
Briefly, Meyer’s involved with the Asian University for Women, and tonight’s talk was really an AUW fund-raiser. I’m fine with that — I’ve been to Tupperware parties before — but I was disappointed by the lack of foresight on this project. Specifically, Meyer is talking about setting up a world-class university in Bangladesh to serve the needs of women (presumably) from disadvantaged Asian communities. Here are the problems:
1. Why a university? If you have to go through the trouble of recruiting applicants throughout Asia, why not just institute a scholarship program that utilizes existing resources? Just develop a course curriculum at an American university and send your selected scholars there.
2. AUW states that the minimum criteria for acceptance, for their undergraduate program, are:
- Age: 17-26 years
- Education: 10+2, a total of 12 years’ education
- 65% or above marks in Secondary School Certificate (SSC)/10th Grade/equivalent and Higher Secondary Certificate (HSC)/12th Grade/equivalent result
- 70% marks in English of HSC/Year 12/equivalent (If your medium of instruction was NOT English)
- Experience and aspiration to lead and contribute for own country and society
The problem with these criteria is that they select for females who have access to 12 years of education — something extraordinarily difficult to come by and NOT A FUNCTION OF MERIT. Being able to access education in developing countries is largely a function of money: you have money, you go to school; you don’t have money, you go to work. Worse still is that (presumably) you’re asked to get first-class marks in English IN COUNTRIES WHERE ENGLISH IS POORLY TAUGHT.
3. Why put the university in Chittagong, Bangladesh?
I understand the desire to locate the institution in a hotspot, but doing so unfairly disadvantages the students. Being in Chitta-middle-of-nowhere means that you make it unnecessarily difficult to retain talented faculty, unreasonably cumbersome to maintain world-class facilities, and, hell, do you even have consistent electricity in Bangladesh?
I think it’s another irrational idea being sold by otherwise rational people. (Jesus! Why is it so difficult to find financing for good ideas? Like building a waste-management infrastructure that generates almost no waste and employs hundreds of disadvantaged people? Ahem.)
As an aside, I wasn’t surprised by how many douche-bags showed up at the event. I think the guy from one of the earlier (season 2?) Apprentice shows was there too. What really gets me is how some of these people never learned social-savvy. For instance, one of the women there approached me at the elevator and tried to start a conversation by asking if I thought the room was too hot. I replied with the obvious: “oh, that’s just me. I have that effect on people.” Which subsequently paralyzed her with nervous giddiness — the same feeling you get when a crush calls you out for dropping a pen to look up her dress. And that’s when it hit me: these may be the Masters of the Universe, but, in a way, they’re still just kids.
UPDATE (April 24th): O.K. I concede. It’s frame control, actually.