Before we go any further, let me answer the question you just might be wondering—Why Minerva’s Owl? Minerva’s Owl—sometimes also referred to as Athena’s Owl—represents wisdom, knowledge, and scholarship. What better name for a journal that represents the DHC, an interdisciplinary honors college whose motto is Sapere Aude, Dare to be Wise, and whose foundational pillar is Undergraduate Research? Of course, it should also be noted that our campus is home to a number of barred and great horned owls.

I have the absolute joy of teaching amazing students at the DHC, as the work in this first issue demonstrates. Here you will find fascinating essays on scientific history by Gabby Triana and Lauren Taracka, who write about the work and legacies of Rita-Levi Montalcini and Charles M. Bogert, respectively. In the world of literary analysis, there’s Anthony Krueger reflecting on the implications of Caliban in Shakespeare’s The Tempest, and Rebekah Janway pondering the relationship between faith and liberation in the fiction of Alejo Carpentier and Toni Morrison. There is music here, too, as Elijah Jarreau Bergevin and Alison Banchero have both shared original works that I guarantee you will want to listen to more than once. And speaking of music, don’t miss the joyful, appreciative essay on AJR’s “Burn Down the House” by our recent graduate, Olivia McDougall.

Some of these works, in the spirit of the DHC, are harder to categorize. These include Yuheng Changyun Chen’s book jacket design for Frankenstein, Daniel Caldeira’s analysis and implementation translating the poetry of Han Shan, or David Wacker’s ruminations on Elon Musk’s similarities to comic book legends. Check out, too, Dominic Choi’s essay on democracy and Emma CrowE’s on young people in leadership—both students remind us of what is at stake in our world, but that their generation is up to the challenge.

Our students care about our earth and its inhabitants, so it’s a treat to see Kimberly Barnett’s research into Hawaiian monk seals and how they can be Preserved, not to mention Therin Lucas’ academic ruminations on empathy in the modern age. But it is also a joy to see what interdisciplinarity means to some of these students, who wrote climate-themed fiction (cli-fi) to discuss the growing threat of climate change. Authors Fiona Fualaau, Piper Rutzer, Logan Vosburg, Noah Christy, and one anonymous student, wrote fictional tales that are hilarious, sad, or sometimes strange, but all quite entertaining, thoughtful, and well-informed.

Like I said before, it’s a great group of students. But I would be remiss if I did not give an especially giant THANK YOU AND WELL DONE to one of the students mentioned above, Elijah Jarreau Bergevin, who is graduating in a few short weeks but somehow managed to spend an inordinate amount of time helping put together this first issue of Minerva’s Owl. Elijah hounded his peers to submit work, then to submit their bios; but he also designed our entire first issue and edited essays! I’m not sure how we’ll manage to publish the next edition, but that concern is for another day. Thank you, Elijah, and thank you to all the students who took the brave step in sharing their work. I am very proud to be a part of such an amazing college, and I hope you enjoy our first issue. Welcome to Minerva’s Owl!

Matt Martinson, Editor of Minerva’s Owl ∎

IT WAS 2006 in the heart of New York City. The New York Knicks failed to make the play-offs for the third consecutive year. President George W. Bush’s approval rating had hit at an all-time low. Panic! at the Disco released “I Write Sins Not Tragedies” and Justin Timberlake performed “SexyBack” on the MTV Video Music Awards—hosted by Jack Black—at Radio City Music Hall. For the American people, it was the best of times, it was the worst of times… and three young kids were out pursuing their dream in the streets of Manhattan.

Adam, Ryan, and Jack Metzger were trying their hand at busking in Central Park and Washington Square. The youngest at nine years old, Jack led vocals while his older brothers backed him with instrumentals. The boys played covers of songs old and new, anything to get enough money for new instruments with which to experiment. The brothers spent many years on street corners serenading strangers, earning their 10,000 hours. In the following years, when YouTube started gaining traction, the boys put up videos of their covers: more and more inventive spins on pop songs. Jack and Ryan also started trying their hand at writing, directing, and acting in their own little sketches for video content. At that time, the boys had very few followers, but nonetheless continued to play, to save up, to buy more equipment, to make more music.

As they grew, the boys were exposed to their parents’ old records and the sounds of a very different generation influenced their style. The Beach Boys; the Beatles; Peter, Paul, and Mary among many others inspired them, but more contemporary artists like Kanye West also came into play. Later, while eldest brother Adam pursued his degree at Columbia University, the younger two brothers took note of sampling—the music trend of artists taking sound clips and reusing them in their songs. Jack mentioned to his brotherhow cool it would be if someone sampled Spongebob Squarepants on a track.

“Well, why don’t we do it?” was Ryan’s reply.

In spring of 2013, the brothers, naming themselves AJR after their own initials, released a video of their first single “I’m Ready.” The song sampled the popular Spongebob catchphrase, and became a classic, upbeat, dance-floor pop song. The brothers sent the link to their video to several celebrities over Twitter, until famous singer-songwriter Sia noticed them and passed it along to her manager. The song was then commercially released that summer and began to see regular radio play, and the band was labeled as the next up and comers in the music scene.

After “I’m Ready,” AJR released a five song EP of the same name. Their first song continued to grow, receiving millions of views on YouTube and going platinum in Canada and Australia. The brothers continued to create music (and go to school; the eldest was only in his early twenties at this time), releasing another single and EP titled Infinity in 2014. The majority of the band’s music was pop songs, easy to listen to with familiar rhythms and lyrics of love and youth. Remarkably, the boys chose to mix and record all their own music in their NYC apartment living room, instead of paying for studio time. Paying homage to their workspace and independence, the band released their first album Living Room in 2015. Except for some bouncier, odd-duck tracks like “Big Idea” and “Thirsty,” most of the songs fit the same earlier patterns of the pop genre. However, in 2016, the band experienced the shift that would change their music career forever.

Before the What Everyone’s Thinking EP came out, AJR had little recognition beyond their break-out hit. However, the tracks on the latest EP sounded entirely evolved from the brother’s previous style. The lyrics were brimmed with honesty, abandoning the emptiness of many other pop tunes. The boys sang about missing out on their friends while pursuing their dreams, about being unsure about what love means, about not trying so hard to be cool, about being human. Their style of composition had also matured. The band would release videos on how they made their songs, revealing that they took whatever strange sound they could make and mix it however they could to make it new and interesting. They had people who were not musicians or artists, such as their ever supportive father, come in and sing to add a new dimension to their songs. They used something they called “spokestep,” a technique of recording a someone singing, then cutting it up over a beat in editing. They continued to utilize sampling, taking bits of anything from Fountains of Wayne to yodeling competitions. The EP was well-received with hundreds of messages from fans who deeply related to the music. This was all the push the brothers needed to keep writing freely, and not what they thought would sell.

On June 9th, 2017, the three brothers dropped the album that would unknowingly launch their music career to a unimaginable level. Several songs on the album made it to regular radio play, giving the band more recognition and growing their dedicated fan base. The Click clearly communicated AJR’s desire to get real in their music, with songs about the detached feelings of growing up or distaste toward the typical party scene. One of their most successful songs, “Sober Up,” featured Weezer’s Rivers Cuomo and paved the way for more collaborations with artists such as Steve Aoki and Lil Yachty. The band had been on tours before, playing small venues where the opener drew more fans than they, but now they began to sell out everywhere. The kids who had been playing to no one on street corners now began to sing for thousands.

Shortly after their album The Click debuted, AJR announced that they had been asked to create the theme for Supersize Me 2: Holy Chicken, a documentary attempting to expose the fast food industry’s lax safety regulations. The band had been asked to write for other people before, but never for a movie. The theme song, “Burn the House Down,” would live to surpass its original purpose and become the honest encapsulation of the political attitudes of its time. “Burn the House Down” expresses the band’s indecision to either “keep things light” or to get involved in important issues. The song, with compelling lyrics such as “Or should I march with every stranger from Twitter to get shit done? / Used to hang my head low / Now I hear it loud / Every stranger from Twitter is gonna burn this down” further cemented the band’s dedication to revolution and their abandonment of passivity. The song called out deception plaguing the media cycle and public affairs, and the need to burn it all down in order to expose the truth.

*   *   *

The election of Donald Trump in 2016 acted as a catalyst for various protest movements around the country. Marches have occurred on the White House doorstep since the signing of the Constitution, but the Trump administration triggered a marked influx. Beyond Washington, protests like the Women’s March and National Pride March were seen nation-wide. People from all over rallied together to advocate for science and evidenced-based policies, for immigrant’s rights and racial justice, for transparency over Russian involvement in elections, and even for the publication of Trump’s tax returns. People, especially those liberal-leaning, felt that their voices weren’t being heard and that the President was not reflective of their values. Change in politics is gradual and incremental, but it felt like everyday a new injustice was being thrown at the American people. Families were being separated at the border, more evidence that Russia swayed the 2016 election came to light, allegations of sexual abuse from the President were revealed, racism, sexism, and hate seem to run rampant and unchecked, and overall many people felt disheartened and disgusted with the state of the nation. So, with the power of social media, users of popular sites such as Facebook and Twitter planned protests. The marches drew thousands of people together, uniting many for a common cause. Today’s youth, often labeled as lazy and entitled, came together in the March for Our Lives, an empowering result from one of many tragic school shootings. High-schoolers fed up with feeling unsafe on their campuses advocated for stricter gun control laws and led the biggest youth rally since the Vietnam War, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of people. Americans refused to take anything sitting down and demonstrated their needs loudly to those in charge.

The effectiveness of these protests is a tricky one to determine, as many perceived different goals for the marches. Some believe getting people out on the streets and building a community of like-minded people is a strong start, but others think success is nothing less than immediate change and tangible evidence that they have been heard. Further, some argue that current protests lack the solid political backing that are required to enact true change, and that the marches will never be as powerful as they mean to be without that factor. However, even though many of the things modern protests have demanded have yet to come to fruition, it does not necessarily mean the marches have been for naught. Many of the marches throughout history that today are viewed as world-shattering did not see the change they were fighting for immediately. Politics take time, and the justice and change in policies the people demand to see might still be a long time coming. However, it is necessary to take up the fight, for the people to demonstrate that enough is enough.

Protest songs in the past like “Fortunate Son” by Credence Clearwater Revival or “The Times They are A-Changin” by Bob Dylan rallied people for their cause, stoking the flames of change in hearts across the nation. Music was a way for artists to contribute to the fight, giving a voice to those silenced and reflecting the opinions of the oppressed or wronged. Protest songs today have the same effect, uniting thousands to sing in one voice and empowering movements. “Burn the House Down” provides a battlecry for a whole new generation of people. It is a warning of accountability for those in the corrupt establishment; the harbingers will burn it down.

Works Cited “Burn the House Down” Music Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnyLfqpyi94 AJR Zach Sang Interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQnXGsKwaIU&t=1725 Recent Marches Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rallies_and_protest_marches_in_Washington,_D.C.#2018 Supersize Me 2 Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Size_Me_2:_Holy_Chicken! Article on political protests, bustle.com: https://www.bustle.com/p/do-political-protests-actually-change-anything-29952 2006 NYC Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:2006_in_New_York_City AJR Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AJR_(band) One of AJR’s “How We Made THE CLICK” Vidoes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YWj3DAo6xM  ∎

I wave at absolutely everyone, have for a long time. I remember my friend once asked me why I did this, and we joked that it was a secret ploy to mess with people, that I wanted people to question if they had met me before. But there is no trick, no selfish intent, and in time I came to realize why I wave: it is a show of empathy. In fact, the majority of my daily interactions with other people are related to empathy in some way: my smiles, greetings, and hugs are all underlined by a feeling of empathy. I say it is empathy because performing such acts helps me connect to other people and show them goodwill.

By now, many of us, myself included, are asking what empathy is. While we would all agree that it is beneficial to ourselves and society, most of us would likely be at a loss for words trying to define it. And that is not a bad thing. Scientists, philosophers, and researchers have been trying to define empathy with words for years, and its true definition is still hotly debated. Many people want the universality of language to mold empathy into a recognizable whole. That is a valid desire, as a consistent definition would allow humans to understand and develop empathy more readily. For example, S. Natale, a researcher of empathy, presents his research toward establishing a method of teaching empathy to the general public in An Experiment in Empathy. He writes that “members of the general public were found to be functioning midway between levels one and two on a five-point scale of empathy” (15). This extreme lack of empathy drives Natale to perform an experiment in developing empathy. However, before he displays his research, Natale explicitly outlines the specific definition and parameters of empathy used in the experiment. Because of the nature of science as a consistent and repeatable process, he must use a single definition. In this way, a universal empathy is much more open to proper study and debate. Ezra Stotland and his colleagues likewise base their research in measuring empathy in Empathy, Fantasy and Helping on a single definition. They also express that “[t]he meaning and measurement of emotion is crucial” (12) in regards to said definition. In other words, they must always measure and define emotions and empathy consistently throughout the experiment.

While Natale and Stotland both follow the principle of carefully keeping to one definition, their empathies are not quite the same. For instance, Natale’s first phase of empathy involves “the ability to sense the emotions of another person” (16), while Stotland’s definition includes the “observer reacting emotionally” (12) to another’s emotions.  To sense and to react, while related, are two separate actions. “Sense” does not imply that the person reacts—visibly or internally—to said sensation, while “react” does. Moreover, Natale splits empathy into three distinct phases, while Stotland relies on a single, more broad definition. It is difficult to judge the quality of both definitions, but the fact remains that despite their differences, they are both employed in important research and experiments. And both sets of research aim to expand our understanding of empathy. If their definitions were one and the same, such discrepancies would not exist.

Or would they? Natale uses his definition to learn how to teach empathy, while Stotland uses his to develop a method of quantifying empathy. Even if the definition of empathy was the same for both, their goals are a guiding factor in how they gather and interpret their data. Furthermore, Natale and Stotland are different people with different experiences, so this same definition would most certainly have a different meaning to each of them. And they would likely describe this underlying meaning with different words as well.

Many other concepts have been referred to as ‘empathy’ before. Daniel Batson, in his essay “These Things Called Empathy: Eight Related but Distinct Phenomena,” compiles a helpful list and analyses of several of these concepts. He explains that such a comparison helps “reduce confusion by recognizing complexity” (8). Essentially, if we are to discuss empathy, we need to disentangle the various concepts we call “empathy” from each other. He also claims that the term empathy is applied to a multitude of concepts in our attempts to answer two fundamental questions: “How can one know what another person is thinking and feeling? What leads one person to respond with sensitivity and care to the suffering of another?” (Batson 3) Batson’s reasoning regarding these questions is valid, as humans have always been interesting in the inner workings of their minds and those of others. What Batson does not mention is that these questions, lingering in the back of humanity’s collective mind for decades, are a cause of our difficulty in creating a universal empathy because they have ambiguous answers. Uncertain questions are subjective; uncertain answers are subjective. And subjectivity means many interpretations, as seen in the comparison of Natale’s and Stotland’s works. But, most importantly, subjectivity inhibits the concept of a fully objective definition of empathy.

Some have embraced this subjectivity. Leslie Jamison, for example, in her book The Empathy Exams, presents several scenarios involving empathy in both her fictitious medical patient lives and her real one. But ultimately, her stories do not culminate in one overarching meaning of empathy, nor does she intend them to. Instead, she interprets empathy based on her own feelings or the backgrounds of her patient roles. It changes depending on the scenario given. Her first interpretation of empathy emphasizes this fluidity: “empathy requires inquiry as much as imagination [and] means acknowledging a horizon of context… beyond what you can see” (5). Jamison believes that empathy is not a fixed, quantifiable object of our psyche, but rather a dynamic body that relies on both context and imagination, two variable attributes of any interaction. And Jamison is right to accept empathy’s changeable nature, because context and imagination are rarely neutral variables. Context is the setting in which events present themselves to someone. While it can be objective in the sense of foundational facts or clear societal labels, context often involves the personal and internal perceptions and reactions of those involved, which are not objective. Imagination is likewise a highly individualized notion that, given no bounds, can go almost anywhere. If we are to rely on context and imagination to be empathetic, then subjectivity will invariably dominate such interactions. And if this is the case, objectively defining empathy may very well be impossible.

Many would argue that the act of putting empathy into words means making it objective, but I would disagree. We may speak the same language, but it is not right to say that we interpret this language rigidly or equally. English has many words that, from an objective point of view, have the same meaning but, in practice, have differing meanings because of context. Context makes words and ideas subjective because the same situation, the same words, are colored with a different coat of paint each time they are utilized, and each time they are experienced. As appealing as this diversity may seem, there are inevitable issues involved with such fluidity. Friedrich Nietzsche recognizes these problems in his essay “On Truth and Lies in an Extra-Moral Sense.” His essay overall concerns the underlying subjectivity of human languages, but in one paragraph he directs his criticism at “the formation of concepts” (Nietzsche 61). He claims that the terms we use for abstract concepts are supposed to “fit innumerable, more or less similar cases… in other words, a lot of unequal cases” (61). Essentially, he means that these terms are meant to characterize a whole concept, and yet are built up from wholly different and unequal examples. He further adds that such language practices undermine a concept’s true meaning because the definition of it that is given is unclear.

Empathy is much the same as the terms described by Nietzsche: a word that is required to describe many situations that ultimately have many differences. As it stands, empathy is now considered by many to be an ‘umbrella’ term. It is used to classify many smaller, more particular terms, but it itself is vague and generalized. Jamison’s example as a medical actor reflects this when she acknowledges the evaluation “checklist item 31” (3), which is “‘Voiced empathy for my situation/problem’” (3). She points out that since the item is ultimately about “say[ing] the right words” (Jamison 3), many of the students use vague and rigid phrases such as “that must be really hard” in response to what would be overwhelming and stressful circumstances. Jamison’s example shows that, in this case, the usage of the term empathy is a problem. Empathy today has become such a broad concept that when confronted with it on a test, many students are unable to decide what it means, and instead use vague phrases in the hope that they will work. This is not empathy’s fault, as its broadness is the result of the subjectivity we apply to it every day. Empathy is waving at someone; now, it is holding the door for someone; now, it is saying a greeting; now, it is buying your hungry friend food; now, it is a compliment. These may seem like similar actions, and some of them are, but they are still different actions with different contexts, connotations, and outcomes. And more than that, these same actions are performed by a multitude of unique and personalized individuals every day. Even if two actions seem in every sense identical, they are still performed by different people. As a result, subjective empathy is as hard to comprehend as objective empathy.

If empathy cannot be one or the other, what if it is both? In our need to classify empathy so precisely, we have overlooked another option: empathy as a concept both subjective and objective. And such a thing is not impossible if we consider empathy on a personal level. Something personal is unique to a person, so subjectivity is present, but opinions and preferences are not solely based on a person’s feelings. A person is free to define empathy in their own terms, but that person likely does not derive such terms solely from internal forces. These terms also come from the people around a person, commonly held assumptions in society, and, in some cases, facts. Objectivity is present as well, albeit in smaller doses.

I do not mean to say, in my consideration of personal empathy, that humans cannot have a standard concept of empathy. Without such standard, we cannot teach new generations this vital skill and quality. It would even be a great notion to agree on a loose definition; but to confine this concept to narrow-minded and overly specific terms is to push away the understanding of our fellow man, for their empathy, however different, will always be empathy. Nevertheless, a definition that is too loose will grow to mean nothing, replaced by more specific and specialized terms. A balance is most certainly needed, and personal empathy is simply one way to achieve it.

Empathy is a strange concept. Sharing in the feelings of others? Feeling how others feel? Acting on such perceptions? It is a complicated puzzle of feelings, actions, and reactions that, even as science continues to advance, has never quite been solved. It is difficult to treat empathy as a neutral concept because of the varying ways in which it is defined and expressed. But if empathy is purely individualized, then it cannot be defined at all. We have all known about empathy since we were young children, but many of us have brushed it off as something we know and recognize, despite our inability to voice its meaning. But that inability should be an advantage, as it is exactly what gives empathy its flexibility. Because we cannot utter the definition, we simply show empathy, and see it, and react on it instead. We hug, we cry, we laugh, we thank, and we wave. And that is the beauty of empathy. It is not locked behind words with no meaning, or a door that cannot be opened—we have already found it. I have found that I wave because there are so many overwhelming days where that is all I can manage. So many days where I simply have too much to think about to do anything else. That is my flexible empathy at work. I show empathy in other ways, of course, but at my core, empathy, to me, is acknowledging other people, showing that I am thinking about them somehow, even if it is only through a hand gesture. This, too, may change with time. But that is me. And you are you. Your own brand of empathy, regardless of others, deserves to be seen. The world, now more than ever, is in desperate need of empathy. Rather than debate its meaning or judge others based on it, we should be showing it instead. So, show your empathy; the world will thank you for it. 

Works Cited Batson, C. Daniel. “These Things Called Empathy: Eight Related but Distinct Phenomena.” The Social Neuroscience of Empathy, edited by Jean Decety and William Ickes, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 2009 Jamison, Leslie. The Empathy Exams: Essays. Graywolf Press, 2014 Natale, S. An Experiment in Empathy. National Foundation for Educational Research in England and Wales, 1972. Nietzsche, Friedrich. “On Truth and Lies in an Extra-Moral Sense.” Oregon State U, oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/Nietzsche/Truth_and_Lie_in_an_Extra-Moral_Sense. Stotland, Ezra, et al. Empathy, Fantasy and Helping. Sage Library of Social Research, vol. 65, Sage Publications, Inc., 1978. ∎