You start small by gathering in someone’s garage or apartment clubhouse and writing some music. You score a gig opening for a semi-known local act on a Thursday night at the dumpiest venue around. Maybe a handful of your friends come, enjoy, and request a CD that you don’t yet have. You can’t afford the studio quite yet, but your bassist has a camera that records sound, so you set it down during practice and hope for the best.

You determine that the next best thing to a CD is a Myspace band page so — ignoring the poor recording quality — you don your page with all sorts of band branding and upload your tunes. Now you can tell potential fans where to find your music after shows. You book your second show, feeling a bit more prepared and ready to blow the crowd off their feet. You text everyone in your phone and wait for the inevitable throngs of people ready to support you, but by the time you strum your last note, there are two in the audience other than the other bands — and they’re sitting down in the back of the room rolling their eyes.

Welcome to the world of the musician.

Anyone who has played in a band knows that with any one step forward there seem to be ten steps back. There are no breaks, there are no handouts, and there are no special tricks that will guarantee you power, fame and money.

Take, for example, a band called “Trik Turner.” Trik Turner, a rap/rock band from Tempe, Ariz., got their first big break with a song placement on the Adam Sandler movie “Mr. Deeds,” and from there they were on the fast train to a record deal. Then two things happened: their frontman left, and the nation realized that rap/rock sucked. They were as dead as a seal during Shark Week. They weakly attempted a second album and marketed everywhere they could, but it was clearly over before they even started.

What does it take, then, to make it as a musician? Here are three points I would consider to be the most important.

1. Blood, Sweat and Tears

If you aren’t fully invested in your project, you may as well give up right now and save yourself and your band mates the time and trouble. Being serious about music is an understatement of what you need to keep things going. You will want to quit at least every other month, and if you don’t keep your eye on the big goal you’ll do just that.

In my own experience, working with a band is always hard. Just think about it — you have to deal with two, three or four other people all wanting different things and usually never as invested as you are. There will be times where you will be the only thing holding it together, and you may feel that no one else is even attempting to help out. Just keep your focus on the end goal, and remember that the constant feeling of failure is pretty normal… at least in the early stages.

And most importantly, be patient. On average it takes a band four years to get anywhere noteworthy — including Neon Trees.

2. Business-minded Mentality

You may think you’re avoiding the corporate world by not getting a real job and just doing the band thing. Newsflash — running a band is running a business. There’s marketing, accounting, public relations, sales, development, human resources… you’re not weasling out of anything at all if you’re doing it right. So read up — if you run a business successfully, you can run a band. It’s that simple. It’s the same gig, just a different product with some slightly different ways to pitch. That doesn’t necessarily make it simple — keep in mind that at least two-thirds of all businesses fail within two years of starting.

3. Being “Social”

A lot of band members out there would sit well on the cast of The Goonies as far as their level of misfitery. Many of us never had social lives, friends or any extroverted tendencies whatsoever. That’s why we start bands, so we can express our weirdness through music. But the day you want success is the day you change all that.

People are over 10 times more likely to accept something or purchase from a friend than a stranger or mild acquaintance, so start making some friends. Some of the things that work best are hanging out at other bands’ shows and shooting the breeze with their fans, being active on a couple social media outlets (don’t just talk about your show next week and how badly you want them there, be a human), and — believe it or not — blogging. And when you think you’ve reached the point of rock-god status and no longer have to interact with your fans on a personal level, just remember that even cute little Justin Bieber spends well over two hours on Twitter every day.

Feel free to comment below what you would add to this list.

On the university’s home page recently — as well as in the alumni email I got earlier this month — I read about a new study by professors Jason Carroll and Brian Willoughby that argues that waiting until marriage to have sex benefits couples later on. The study was published in the Journal of Family Psychology.

The study was probably legit. It was published in a reputable journal, and my experience as a student at BYU (for more years than I care to admit) was that professors genuinely try to do serious scholarly work.

But whatever the study actually included, the uber-popular news website Gawker discovered it and expressed suspicion over how the scientific research “hews so closely to the Mormon church’s position on sex before marriage.”

All organizations draw some flack from time to time, but the point Gawker makes is one worth taking seriously. After all, if BYU wants to be a top tier school, an example to other institutions, and a leader in the sciences, perception does matter. And Gawker, though not the biggest media portal out there, is a major news player. In reality, many more people have undoubtedly read the Gawker piece than have or will read the study itself.

Whether or not the professors behind the study were actually influenced by official LDS policy is beside the point. (As is the argument some in the LDS community might make that in this case science merely confirmed “truths” religion had already indentified.) The reality is that Gawker is right to be suspicious — after all scientists at BYU clearly have a conflict of interest when researching issues the LDS Church describes as “moral.”

And as in any situation, a conflict of interest doesn’t automatically preclude honest investigation, it just raises suspicions. Could the researchers have published contrary results if they had them? What role does the church take in BYU research? Do scientists at BYU feel pressure, either explicitly or implicitly, because they’re being funded by an organization that is openly partisan on some issues? In what ways does LDS culture and policy inform the methodology these professors used?

The questions could go on and on, but unfortunately BYU has been raising these kinds of suspicions for a long time. There are a lot of people out there that look at the LDS Church’s stance on gay marriage (and consequences some BYU professors have faced by supporting it), BYU’s lack of diversity, speakers the school invites (Dick Cheney, for example), the hegemony of the Republican Party in Utah, etc., and think that BYU couldn’t possibly produce objective research.

They look at the fact that BYU is currently censured by the American Association of University Professors for issues relating to academic freedom, and that the school has occasionally engaged in (multiple) firings of professors for publishing controversial research. When they see these things, some people see a school that is aberrantly restrictive for the scholarly world. In the end, if the Gawker article was the first time these suspicions were raised they could probably be ignored, but sadly this sort of thing comes up again and again.

As an alumnus of the school, I choose to believe that, despite these concerns, BYU can still produce valid research. I don’t think the school is a joke. And, in reality, true objectivity is a myth and all fields are rife with subtle conflicts of interest.

But if BYU’s level of perceived objectivity is significantly lower than that other institutions, its opportunity to do good in the world is diminished. It’s research is less influential. No one doubts the school’s ability to produce great athletes or MBAs, but in the sciences — and in my field, the humanities — politics, ideology, and associations matter.

None of this is to say that BYU needs to forfeit its values or give up research. But the school needs to recognize that its reputation isn’t perfect. When publishing research that seems to strongly tow the party line, BYU needs to be aware that it’s fighting an uphill battle to be taken seriously. The school needs to tackle that reality head on. Ignoring it won’t change anything, but acknowledgement might.

Jimmer Fredette’s brother T.J. has always said he is amazing (see rapper T.J. Fredette’s song that is, interestingly enough, titled “Amazing”) — and after seeing Jimmer put up 39 points on UNLV last week in Las Vegas only to follow it up with the madness that was last night in Salt Lake City, I think I have to agree.

Fortunately for me I am not alone on this one. Jimmer and the BYU Cougars were the lead on SportsCenter last night, beginning the show with highlights of the BYU-Utah game, only to be directly followed by an interview Scott Van Pelt of ESPN had with Jimmer.

Despite embarrassingly missing a wide-open dunk late in the second half of last night’s game, Jimmer was able to do just about everything else. He had 47 points (32 of which came in the first half alone — more than any other Mountain West player has scored in an entire game this season), 6 assists, 4 rebounds, 2 steals and, for good measure, a 42-foot shot at the buzzer to complete the run Jimmer BYU made to end the first half.

My favorite part about last night was not only his stellar performance, but the attention he is finally receiving from the media outside of Utah. The Twitter universe was flipping out as soon as the halftime buzzer sounded, and the nation began spreading the word that the All-American guard out of BYU had 32 points… in the first half.

I recognized that ESPN and CBS analysts like Andy Katz, Scott Van Pelt, Jalen Rose, Billy Packer, current NBA players, and even a few underground rappers I had never heard of were all tweeting about the show Jimmer was putting on in Salt Lake City. For example, I am sitting here eating lunch this very second listening to a group of girls (yes, females) talk about how Jimmer’s half-court shot was the #1 play on Sports Center last night. With an appearance on College Basketball Live late last night and an interview with Dan Patrick this morning on ESPN Radio, it is safe to say that Jimmer and the 10th ranked Cougars are receiving some well deserved attention.

Maybe the best part of last night was that all this took place in Salt Lake City — at the Huntsman Center on the Utes’ home court. Jimmer’s 49 points last year against Arizona was as impressive as any game I had seen from a college player. He set a personal career high in points and set the BYU all-time single-game scoring record. But last night, the same night teammate Jackson Emery passed former BYU great Danny Ainge as BYU’s all-time steals leader, against the Cougars long-time rival the University of Utah, on the Utes’ home court, his 47 points in 35 minutes of playing time could not have been sweeter.

Dear Utah, you have officially been Jimmered.

The news is in. Not only was the entire offensive staff for the BYU football team released this afternoon by head coach Bronco Mendenhall and encouraged to search for job opportunities elsewhere, but my fellow colleagues here at Rhombus Magazine are starting a boy band. We plan to dedicate our first cover of the ground-breaking hit “Bye Bye Bye” from none other than ‘N Sync to BYU’s very own Robert Anae.

The news broke about 3:00 p.m. today from the Deseret News. Funny enough however, at 5:41 p.m. when I went to check the article before writing my thoughts here, the page that broke the news officially can “no longer be found” or “may not exist.”

Really? Is this going to be a major let-down to BYU football faithful everywhere? Let’s face it — Robert Anae has been a suspect (to say the least) play-caller for years. Thanks to a few questionable games he called this season without veteran quarterback Max Hall or running back Harvey Unga there to bail him out, Anae’s ineptitude was on full display and, thankfully for us, Bronco realized this… or so we thought.

I was on cloud nine for the last two hours. Robert Anae, finally gone. This is what BYU needed. I have been saying it for the last two years repeatedly. Not only was he asked to leave, but the entire offensive coaching staff was asked to seek employment elsewhere while Bronco evaluated each member. In my opinion, this could not have come at a better time for the Cougars.

We have a promising future on the offensive side of the ball with quarterback Jake Heaps, wide receivers McKay Jacobson and Cody Hoffman, and the entire running back core returning for at least one more season. Why not put the best possible coaching staff together now when the team looks to be making big steps onto the national scene going independent next season? Reassessing things on the offensive side of the ball is exactly what Bronco needs to do.

Many believe that quarterback coach and former BYU quarterback Brandon Doman would be the perfect man for the job. He has a brilliant young mind, is liked by the players, and is said to be BYU’s best recruiter as well. The story that broke the news this afternoon also mentioned that each coach is encouraged to reapply, hinting that Doman could be hired back on to the staff to be the Cougars new offensive coordinator.

Before we determine anything else, we need to clarify if the report that “is no longer” is valid.  For our sake and the sake of the BYU football program, let’s hope that it is (otherwise our future smash cover of “Bye Bye Bye” may have to wait.) We will keep you posted as we receive updates, but until then, I want to know your thoughts:

1) Good or bad move to get rid of Robert Anae?

2) Who would you like to see take over the play calling for the Cougars?

3) Or more importantly, how do you think BYU will fare next season with the new independent schedule in 2011-2012?

———————

UPDATE: 8:24 P.M.

BYU has issued a statement through football sports information director Brett Pyne regarding reports in The Salt Lake Tribune, Deseret News and elsewhere that coach Bronco Mendenhall met with members of his offensive staff this morning and advised them to pursue other employment opportunities outside BYU.

Here is the statement issued by BYU:

Any reports that BYU football coaches have been released from the staff are inaccurate. BYU head football coach Bronco Mendenhall has begun the evaluation process of the recently completed season. As part of the process, Mendenhall met with offensive coaches and indicated a restructuring of the offensive staff is being evaluated. Mendenhall told the coaches this includes possible changes in assignments and personnel. The review will continue after the holidays and has no specific timetable.

I found the video on the excellent, Provo-centric blog CJane’s Guide to Provo, where the author aptly points out that BYU culture and Provo culture are two very different things. Though C Jane doesn’t put it this way, I basically understood her point to be that if BYU students want to look like imbeciles, they oughtn’t presume to represent the larger community. I agree.

(It’s probably worth mentioning here that I did smile as I watched the video. I’ve also had a bunch of friends in BYU’s Divine Comedy over the years, and without exception they’ve been smart, witty and very cool people.)

However, a larger issue with this video — and with other, similar BYU humor — is that it actually perpetuates and reinforces the disparaging stereotypes it aims to mock. Or, put another way, these ideas about BYU wouldn’t exist without organizations like Divine Comedy keeping them alive.

As per its name, the video describes Provo girls — or, more accurately, BYU girls — who go to college mostly to get married. They’re depicted as unafraid of commitment, wanting an “MRS” degree, willing to marry a tree as long as it went on a mission, etc. These girls even spend half the video in wedding dresses. Along the way the video also takes some pot shots at broader BYU culture by pointing out that there’s basically no diversity at the school, that Provo landmarks (the dollar movie, etc.) lack coolness, and so on.

If you went or go to BYU, you’re probably familiar with these ideas. And there is probably some truth to all this. Provo is a fairly small town, BYU really doesn’t have much ethnic diversity, and some people might go to BYU with visions of wedding bells dancing in their heads.

But apparently in an effort to keep their humor clean and tame, BYU students sequester themselves in a series of insular, negative stereotypes. I was genuinely surprised to hear things like “sweet spirit” — an antiquated and marginalizing label used almost exclusively for women — in the video. Hasn’t that phrase died yet? Like, in the ’80s when my parents were at BYU?

Apparently not, but the reason isn’t so much because people use it, it’s because Divine Comedy et al. ensures that it remains a part of the BYU vocabulary. If BYU groups weren’t constantly bringing this stuff up, it would probably change and become more dynamic as students cycle in and out of the school (sort of like the SFLC, or the “syphillis” building that used to be on campus and was the source of so much humor at one time). As it is ,however, this video is part of a larger, probably unintentional inculcation of students with idiotic ideas that have been floating around for a couple of generations.

And that has some negative consequences. Obviously — because the video sort of went viral — it means people outside of BYU come to see the school as being represented by strange things like “sweet spirits,” “MRS degrees,” and ignorant crackers. If people know one thing about BYU students after this video, it’ll be that they’re into… hasty marriages?

But more importantly, it turns every BYU student into an ambassador of weirdness. By constantly bringing up these tropes it ensures that every student has contact with them. Even if you never go to Divine Comedy, no one can walk through the Wilk without seeing some poster featuring a marriage gag. As a result, no matter what you do at BYU, these things will be part of your experience and these stereotypes become a recurring part of the culture.

Is that a bad thing? I think so. After all, do BYU women want to be known as marriage-obsessed crazies? Do they think of themselves that way? More broadly, is having a complete lack of ethnic diversity a good thing? Does BYU generally want to be thought of as strange, backward, out of touch, and un-urbane?

It must, because BYU students keep describing their school that way, in a mocking-but-sort-of-affectionate tone to boot. And though my experience suggests that few BYU students would actually describe themselves with the sorts of things in this video, by making and supporting this type of thing that’s basically what they’re doing.

Ultimately, every place in the world has strange idiosyncrasies which are often the source of humor to people living in those places. But in this case, the ideas represented in the “Provo, UT Girls” video are neither timely nor accurate. They’re artifacts from the past that would probably disappear if we just stopped using them. And in the end, as the de facto kings and queens of BYU humor, it really seems like Divine Comedy could come up with a new joke, because this one was worn out a long time ago.

Stats that need to be thrown around:

1) BYU’s record under Bronco Mendenhall when leading after three quarters prior to Saturday’s BYU-Utah game?  48-1. Last loss was in 2005 vs. TCU in overtime, 50-51.

2) Not since BYU’s 23-20 overtime loss to Boston College in 2006 had the Cougars lost a game decided by 7 points or fewer. That is absurd.

3) Bronco Mendenhall’s November record?  20-3 — all losses to Utah (2005, 2008, 2010).

4) Jake Heaps on Saturday: 22/37 passing for 228 yards, 1 touchdown, 1 interception.  Utah’s Wynn/Cain QB combo: 15/37 passing for 207 yards, 1 touchdown, 3 interceptions.

If you were to ask me who won this game after hearing about the QB play and BYU’s 13-0 lead entering the fourth quarter (especially after seeing Bronco’s career stats in that regard), I would have picked BYU 100 times out of 99. No typo there — I would have been that sure of it.

So how is it that Utah pulled out the victory over BYU 17-16 last Saturday? Was I dreaming? What does this mean for the future of each program and the rivalry? Knowing I probably needed a weekend to think this game over and let it settle in so that I am not overly biased toward BYU and a few suspect plays that occurred late in the game, I decided to wait till today to address these questions.

Unfortunately for Ute fans, it has only gotten worse.

My response in regards to how in the world Utah got the victory on Saturday? Luck, fate, destiny, whatever you want to call it. I will call it luck. There were four particular plays that prove this to be a valid conclusion:

1) Early in the fourth quarter with Utah trailing 13-3, the great Jordan Wynn threw up a bomb down the sideline to DeVonte Christopher. The only problem with this play was that BYU’s Brandon Bradley was all over Christopher. In fact, his coverage was so good that he was able to deflect the ball… right into Christopher’s hands for a touchdown.

2) Following a BYU field goal that put the Cougars up 16-10 with about 7 minutes left in the game, the Utes needed to drive 80-plus yards to score a touchdown. Three brilliant defensive plays later from BYU (or three terrible Jordan Wynn balls that missed receivers by a mile — however you wish to look at it, I look at it both ways), Utah was forced to punt in hopes that their defense could get a stop and give their offense another chance to win the game. Fortunately for the Utes, they shanked a punt about 20 yards that happened to find the leg of a BYU player who was blocking a few yards from the sideline.  The Utes recovered the fumble and got the ball back with great field position and plenty of time on the clock.

3) Two stellar Jordan Wynn passes later, Brandon Bradley intercepted a pass that, in my opinion, was thrown to one of three BYU defenders, not a Ute wide receiver. The instant I saw Bradley intercept the pass I stood up off my couch and yelled at him four or five times to GET DOWN. The last thing I wanted was the Utes to catch some lucky break and have Bradley fumble the ball he had just intercepted right back to Utah. Of course, he fumbled the ball right back to Utah.

4) Fortunately for Cougar fans, after seeing the replay of this specific fumble mentioned above, we had no need to fear as it was very clear Bradley’s knee was on the ground well before the Utah player forced the fumble. I was not even sweating it. I had no doubt. Three different camera angles, almost a full second of knee-ground contact before the ball was stripped, no problem. BYU ball, 100 times out of 98. Interestingly enough though, despite the advantage of video replay — in slow motion, viewed multiple times — the booth review official ruled the play a fumble, and the Utes were given the ball. At that point there was no question, they were going to score. They did, and won the game 17-16. BYU was not meant to win this game.

To the Ute fans that want to argue that this was actually not luck, I want to ask them what the odds are of Bradley deflecting a perfectly played ball upwards right to the falling Christopher for a touchdown. I want to know what the odds are of the Ute punter shanking one of many punts he kicked all game directly off the BYU player’s leg with such impeccable timing. I want to know the odds that an interception is fumbled right back to the same team that had just turned the ball over — in the same play.

I looked this one up to help you out. It is less than 2 percent.

I want to know, first, the odds that the review booth official assigned to this BYU/Utah game did not have a brain, and then, second, the odds that despite clear evidence the play should be reversed, he decided to call the play as stands. How many times has this happened? Two or three maybe? Ever? Then, after all is said and done and you have calculated the precise numbers in each of these situations, I want you to tell me the odds that they all happen, in the same game, in the same quarter, benefiting the same team. I am 100 percent serious. I want a number.

Aside from dwelling on the past, I decided it would be better for me to take what I learned from this game and figure out what it means for the future of the programs at BYU and Utah. I was not being sarcastic throughout the entire article in reference to Jordan Wynn by accident. If he is the future of the Utah football program at quarterback, then the move to the Pac-12 next season could be a brutal one. He has yet to blossom into a QB that you can trust and that can make big plays, and he definitely has not shown up for any big games (see TCU, Notre Dame, BYU).

I do not and will never blame Utah for bailing on the Mountain West Conference to accept the Pac-12 invitation and, despite the attitude of the majority of this article, I actually will root for Utah to do well in the Pac-12 and represent the MWC and smaller schools in the best way they possibly can. Unfortunately for them, however, I do not foresee anything great in the near future.

BYU, in my opinion, has a much brighter future. The way Jake Heaps played Saturday in his first ever BYU-Utah rivalry game, and considering it was at Rice-Eccles Stadium, was impressive to say the the least. Even after the Cougars found themselves down one point with a couple minutes to go and after two absurd play calls from Robert Annae to start the potentially game-winning drive, Heaps stepped up and looked as poised and composed as any quarterback in the nation playing at any level. His arm is there, his accuracy is there, the IQ is there — but what I had not seen prior to this game was how he would perform in crunch time.

He stepped up. Big time.

Oh yeah, I do not think I mentioned this either, he is still a 19-year-old true freshman.  The independent schedule that BYU will face in the near future will make it tough to win every game, but one thing I do not doubt is that Jake Heaps gives the Cougars the best chance to do just that.

Many people are wondering what will happen to the BYU-Utah rivalry. I personally do not think it is going anywhere. Yes, it is true that both schools have parted ways and left the MWC, but if last Saturday’s game showed us one thing, it is that both schools — players and fans united — care about this game more than any other. I do not see that changing whether they meet in November or September.

To end, I would like to share one last final stat, perhaps the best of them all:

1) BYU-Utah in the last 15 years: 12 games decided by 7 points or less, the most by any two teams that have faced one another in the nation.

I learned that this is what counts. This is what the rivalry is all about.

You can stream the podcast by simply clicking on the link below, or you can download it to your computer by right-clicking the link and selecting “Save Link As” from the menu.

Listen to: Rhombus Podcast 023 — The PB&J Report (2010.09.10)

CBS’s often display neurophysiological symptoms — both psychiatric and somatic responses. Arctic hysteria is one that is frequently studied, or a more well-known example of a CBS in the United States is anorexia nervosa or bulimia.¹ Culture-bound syndromes are reputed to be induced by stress that occurs when there is an incongruity between role expectations and how a person feels they measure up to those expectations.

As a participant-observer in the bizarre culture that is Provo, I’ve often heard people describe students at BYU as “the cream of the crop.” Granted, any student at any university probably feels pressure to excel from parents, peers and teachers — but BYU students have the added pressure of a common religion in which strict moral standards are known and enforced.

There are certain side effects resulting from this situation that spur a cultural epitome of lifestyle.² In reality, fluctuations from the norm are bound to happen in such a population. However, the bar has already been set and many people find themselves falling short of rigid cultural envisages. Such high expectations are the perfect recipe for mass neuroses of cataclysmic proportions.

Now that we have some of the anthropological mumbo-jumbo out of the way, let’s examine a few of the syndemic nuances limited to the BYU/Provo culture , or Provo-bound syndromes:

Obsessive Dating Compulsion Disorder: If you observe Provo City itself, you will notice that many of the surrounding retail businesses are marketed towards facilitating courtship rituals. An outsider might consider Provo obsessed with dating and completely fixated on marriage as the end goal.

From my time as a participant-observer, I can’t remember a single BYU devotional in which dating/marriage was not mentioned. I’ve had professors encourage students to date and even offered extra credit to do so. The pressure to participate in courtship rituals is so palpable it’s impossible to ignore.

Old Maid Stigma: A product of the Obsessive Dating Compulsion Disorder, the Old Maid Stigma arises from feelings of inadequacy or guilt for not being married or not dating as frequently as expected. This stigma occurs in the young female population in Provo.

Typically the Old Maid Stigma is expressed at a comparatively young age — I’ve heard females as young as 19 express their feelings of insufficiency for being single. The Old Maid Stigma is sometimes self-inflicted, although informants discussed with me the interrogations they receive pertaining to their marital status on a constant basis.

Pedestrian Deviancies: Pedestrians at BYU have a reputation for being oblivious to traffic, so much so that they have been dubbed “Zoodestrians.” This behavior can mostly be attributed to general distractions and absent-mindedness; However, I’ve heard it conjectured that it comes from the feeling of invincibility — being protected by God.

RM Adjustment Syndrome: Adjusting to life after a mission can be extremely difficult for some people.  Essentially, missionaries are prescribed a certain role with rigorous duties to fulfill, and transitioning to another role (that of a returned missionary) is sometimes an arduous process. Returned missionaries cope with the adjustment in various ways. Some find laborious door-knocking reminiscent of their mission days and become salesmen.

BYU Big Brother Paranoia: Like unto Orwell’s 1984, students and professors are paranoid of BYU Big Brother. One line in the school’s Honor Code (“Encourage others in their commitment to comply with the Honor Code”) certainly doesn’t help ease this paranoia. I’ve seen professors look around suspiciously while they whisper opinions to their class in fear of an eavesdropping institution. This paranoia is rumored to have come from the Wilkinson era where purported “spies” were placed in classrooms to ensure that professors were not teaching heretical ideas.

Suppressed Rage Against University Parking Enforcement: Here, here, here and here. Enough said.

The discordance between role performance and role expectations is the basis of these neuroses, which is subsequently compounded by the dialectal relationship of the religion, the institution, and the people. These are just some of the many culture-bound syndromes that inflict the idiosyncratic culture that is Provo. And that’s why I love it.

———————

¹ You wouldn’t find anyone in Ethiopia barfing up meals on purpose.
² Quintessential checklist: go to BYU, go on a mission, get married immediately thereafter, and reproduce like rabbits.

In an area where dates and weekend activities are purely based on cost and not quality, people are more likely to go see G.I. Joe for a buck rather than see a play that will cost them $10. If you enjoy mindless spectacle and exploding buildings, then the dollar theater is the place for you. However, I believe there are a few of you out there that actually have a few ounces of self-respect and are willing to pay a couple bucks more to do or see something worthwhile.

For those of you who fit into this second category, I strongly recommend that you go see BYU’s production of Moliere’s Tartuffe. Not only is it thought-provoking and engaging, but it is also significantly more fun than going to the movies. I lost count of the number of times I laughed out loud and not once did I check the time.

The play is centered on a man, Orgon, who has decided to disown his son and make a pious holy man named Tartuffe his one and only heir. It turns out Tartuffe is an infamous fraud and Orgon’s family tries to convince him to sever ties with the imposter before it is too late.

Not only is this play one of the finest works of French Neo-Classicism, but this is also one of best performances I have ever seen at BYU. Everything about this show is top notch, from the stellar performances by Andrew Veenstra (Tartuffe) and Dallin Allred (Orgon) to the unique set design. Trust me when I say you will be surprised by the talent on display in this performance. BYU has always been known for its singers and dancers, but it’s time the students and alumni recognize the students in the theater department for their acting prowess.

The style of the play takes concepts from many different time periods and mixes in modern elements that make certain ideas more relatable to the audience. Director Stephanie Breinholt said Cirque de Soleil and Tim Burton were two of the main influences of the performance. If that doesn’t intrigue you, I don’t know what will. Oh, and don’t let me forget to mention the original music, written by cast member David John Banks, that adds to the plays amusing personality.

While this play will make you laugh with its quick-witted humor, it will also make you think. There are many things the audience will take away from this performance, but one of the overall themes is that of religious hypocrisy, a topic that is always very relevant for us here in Provo.

So, my culture-seeking friends, do yourself a favor and go see Tartuffe before it closes this weekend. As economically appealing as a dollar movie sounds, this performance is well worth the extra couple dollars.

Tartuffe will be performed at 7:30 p.m. on BYU campus in the Pardoe Theatre in the HFAC until Feb. 6th. Purchase tickets online at byuarts.com/tickets or call the ticket office at 801-422-4322.

Jake Welch is a regular correspondent for Rhombus.

This index, according to the World Economic Forum’s Web site, “assesses countries on how well they are dividing their resources and opportunities among their male and female populations, regardless of the overall levels of these resources and opportunities.” The index also takes into account life expectancy, education, purchasing power, and standard of living for women in every country.

In Sweden, one of the top-ranking countries, women have it great. They get year-long maternity leave, receive equal opportunity in the workplace, and don’t have to choose between a dream home-life and a successful high-profile job — they get both, and (gasp!) men are equally responsible for the daily tasks of childcare. In the working world, women aren’t expected to behave like men — their difference is respected and they are “rewarded for being themselves.”

However, in Sweden, men don’t pick up the checks on dates. They rarely hold open doors for women or pull out chairs. Men hardly pursue women to ask them out; women are the aggressors in relationships. I’ve heard that male tourists love going to Iceland (the number one country on the UNDP list) because the women are more forward.

Chivalry as we know it doesn’t exist in these countries, yet life is apparently better for women. It makes me wonder if gender-equality and chivalry are inversely affected by one another — increase one and the other goes down, and vice-versa. I know part of the reason why men always paid for dates was that women weren’t typically allowed in the workplace and, once they did start working, women made significantly less than men. Today, women only make 77 cents for every dollar men make. It seems logical that a man would pick up the check on a date.

But examining the powerful, prosperous women of Iceland and Sweden makes me wonder if chivalry may be the cause of inequality? Must it be sacrificed in order to gain a better, more broadly equal life for women? Is it because of a belief that women are not equal that men perform these certain acts? Does it enforce our differences?

Since its conception in medieval times, chivalry has been a code of respect and honor. But I’d like to re-frame the question — does this respect and honor breed inequality of the genders? I personally love it when a man is chivalrous to me and, yes, I would think less of him if he weren’t.

Yet, while courteous manners may not be the reason the United States holds a relatively abysmal ranking on the UNDP index, the intentions of the man behind the manners might have something to do with it. For instance, a man who adheres to the chivalrous status quo because he thinks women are somehow lesser or weaker and must therefore be treated in a certain way. I believe this type of thinking perpetuates inequality.

I’m not advocating the dissolution of chivalry at all. I love chivalry. Chivalry is not the problem, and it doesn’t need to be sacrificed to achieve gender-equality. Chivalry is but a mere long-standing cultural tradition that I hope sticks around. But is it too much to ask for my door to be held open and to receive equal access to a high-powered executive job that allows me maternity leave? Men, the next time you hold open a door for a woman, I hope you do it out of recognition and respect for her powerful femininity, which is equal to but very much different from your masculinity.

Kristin Clift is a regular correspondent for Rhombus.