On Saturday, Feb. 21, the Golden Eagles tennis team was able to complete a full sweep, despite less-than-favorable conditions. It was cold and windy as JBU competed against Southwestern University at the JBU Tennis Facility arena.

The match day started with the doubles games in which JBU players Andrew Aylor and Spencer Keeter won 6-2 for an early victory. In the second game, Grant Hinkle and Jonathan Hillock won 6-1. For the third game, Lucas Machado and Santiago Jaime were supposed to play, but Southwestern University didn't have enough players, so the game was won by forfeit.

After the John Brown University men’s tennis team swept the doubles games, the singles games began. Machado dominated the contest, winning the first set 6-3, the second set 6-1.

“In the first few games, I noticed that his backhand was his weakness. After realizing that, I started serving to his backhand to begin the points, which allowed me to open up the court and take control of the rallies. When returning his serve, I focused on hitting through the middle of the court at first, and then I began creating wider angles to his backhand. Overall, my strategy was to target his weakness and use it to my advantage,” Machado said.

For the second single game, Hillock won both sets 6-1 for a quick victory.

In the third single game, Jaime won the first set. Then for the second set, Jaime was able to have a bigger lead, winning the set 6-3.

“I felt really good during the game, and I think I did well overall. In the first set, I didn’t play so well, but in the second set I improved a lot by focusing more and playing smart,” Jaime said.

For the fourth and fifth singles games, which were played by Aylor and William Prochazka, they were able to complete a full sweep. Both won their singles games 6-0 in both sets.

For the last single game, Hinkle won the game by default because they didn’t have enough players.

The Woman's tennis team won by default all of the games because Southwestern University didn’t have enough players to play the games needed.

Photo by David Camacho Padilla

A couple weeks ago Variety and CNN hosted a conversation at the University of Texas with Matthew McConaughey and Timothee Chalamet to talk about their careers and what they have learned within the industry. The two actors shared an insightful conversation, each reflecting on their craft and the amount of work they have put in. However, during their conversation, Chalamet commented about opera and ballet, claiming they are “dying” art forms that “no one cares about.” His comment has sparked major backlash on the internet and across social media platforms, and, was even joked about in the 98^th Oscars opening monologue on Sunday by Conan O’Brien.

For two weeks, multiple major opera houses and ballet companies, including the Royal Ballet and Opera, the Metropolitan Opera House, Paris Opera, Los Angeles Opera, the English National Ballet and more have made direct comments to Chalamet. From offering free tickets to flaunting their sold-out theatres, these major established companies have not allowed Chalamet’s disparagement to go unchecked. Several celebrities have even made public comments about it to the press, including, Stephen Spielberg, Josh Groban, Doja Cat, Jamie Lee Curtis, Whoopi Goldberg and acclaimed dancer Misty Copeland.

When I first heard this, I was personally shocked. Timothee Chalamet is an actor I highly respect, who usually has good things to say about. Before I knew the context, I thought Chalamet was speaking from a place of ignorance. I assumed he did not know the level of work and practice put into these beautiful and profound art forms. However, Chalamet has a deep family history with ballet and attended a performing arts high school; he should know how much work is required for these practices. His background with the arts then makes his careless remarks about these practices shocking and inconsiderate.

In the interview leading to his controversial comments, Chalamet was speaking of Gen Z’s short attention span and how that has and will continue to affect the film industry, mentioning how more and more audiences want the action quicker. This was in response to his thoughts on how impactful slow-paced movies are and their popularity despite the shortened attention spans of the younger generation. When he said his infamous statement against opera and ballet, he said so in response to what he believed about the attention spans of the younger generation (and apparently himself).

In the context of the statement (spoken around 45 minutes into the interview), I understand what Chalamet is trying to say, and it is quite possible he did not really mean his words the way the world has responded to them. However, for an actor, who within the same interview talks about respect and the importance of taking one’s craft seriously and putting in time and effort, to call out ballet and opera the way he did was unacceptable. Though it appears he does so in a joking manner, the way it comes across, without context, and even within context, tears down another art form in a harmful and ridiculing way.

I find his remarks even more disappointing because of his statement within the same interview, claiming to be a fierce protector of all artists and the art that they create. He should know better than to forget that ballet and opera are not practices to be joked about, but deeply respected art forms that are a core part of theater history and will continue to be for a long time.

To some degree, I understand what Chalamet was trying to convey. Really, his words came from a place of belief that no one cares for these classical art forms anymore because they require more attention than these generations have capacity for. If that is all one knows about the impact of opera and ballet, that would make sense. However, he clearly doesn’t understand just how impactful and relevant these art forms are today, as the world’s reactions have now displayed.

Classical art is so important. Not only does it have centuries of history, but these art forms are also the inhabitants of Gesamtkunstwerk, meaning total work of art or total completeness. It’s when something uses all or many art forms to create a piece of art. This includes any aspect of a production, the composition, the lyrics, the costumes, the set, the lighting, etc. The art forms work together to completely complement each other and create a masterpiece. As someone in the theatre and music world, there is so much more that happens behind the scenes than what will appear on stage to an audience. Here at John Brown University, production and design take months, and that’s not even close to the scale of work that classical art requires.

Ballet and Opera are art forms that require years upon years of persistent training. These art forms strive for excellence in all things, in all areas. That training requires hours of practice and repetition every single day. These are respected and highly honored practices and have been so for over 400 years. People, despite what Chalamet has claimed, sell out theatres for operas and ballets. They are art forms substantially more relevant than what he has claimed.

By dissing these art forms on live television, not only has he just insulted generations upon generations that have dedicated their lives to these art forms, but he has humiliated himself as a respected actor.

There is something about live performances that grabs an audience more than any movie could. Many times, I have heard talk of theatre as community. The actors and the audience are all in community with one another and therefore experience the story together.

In conclusion, I do truly think that Timothee Chalamet did not mean to disrespect the classical art forms, but he should have refrained from making such comments anyway. Interestingly, we can be grateful that his words have sparked the conversation and opened up a possible new era of love and appreciation for the classical arts despite his criticism. 

Photo provided by by Kazuo ota on Unsplash

Another St. Patrick’s Day is here and past! But who was he, and why is he still so celebrated? Saint Patrick is the patron saint of Ireland and is known for several legends that surround his life, the most popular being that he drove the snakes out of Ireland and used the shamrock to explain the Trinity. However, few know the true story behind this Irish mythic figure.

Who?

Patrick grew up in the church in Glasgow around the 5^th century in a practicing Christian family. However, during his teenage years, he denied Christ because of his love for earthly pleasures. But when Patrick was kidnapped by pirates and sold into slavery, he turned back to his Christian roots.

"I was 16 years old and knew not the true God and was carried away captive; but in that strange land the Lord opened my unbelieving eyes, and although late I called my sins to mind, and was converted with my whole heart to the Lord my God," Patrick wrote.

After this event, he was rescued from his misfortunes and returned home with a new heart to spread the gospel. However, his influence has lived on beyond his life, with many traditions that honor the legacy of St. Patrick.

Wearing Green

Interestingly enough, if Patrick were here today, he would probably not understand why people wear green in his honor, as most artistic depictions and accounts of him show him in a blue robe. The green that is sported by holiday enthusiasts all around the world is representative of the Roman Catholic majority in Ireland at the time of the 18^th and 19^th centuries.

Wearing Orange

Around the same time that green was adopted as a St. Patrick’s Day icon color, Protestants rebelled by sporting the color orange. This was in reference to the great William of Orange, who conquered the English monarch King James II in 1688 in what is called the “Glorious Revolution." This event was a key, rare point in history where a Protestant became the ruler of England, Ireland and Scotland.

The Shamrock

It is almost impossible to go anywhere on March 17 without seeing a three-leaf clover. Some say it brings good luck, while others say it explains complicated theological doctrines, but it is really a symbol of Irish pride. In the 16^th Century, England was increasingly assimilating Ireland into its territory, language and religious practices. Consequently, Irish folk adopted the symbol of the shamrock to display their Irish nationalism as a sign of rebellion.

The Leprechaun

The Leprechauns, despite having their own holiday, are associated with St. Patrick’s Day because of their ties to Ireland’s Celtic roots. Leprechauns are mythological fairies that originally were called “lobaircin,” meaning “small-bodied fellow.” They are said to be makers of shoes and brogues, which is a specific type of stitching pattern in leather shoes. Legend suggests that the sound of the Leprechaun’s cobbling hammer is a sign of his presence and that his treasure resides with him.

Now you know a bit of the long-lasting tradition of honoring the patron saint of Ireland. Have a happy St. Patrick's Day!

Photo by Hope Brittenham