By Molly Grosskreutz

A&E Editor

For many, the holiday season is a time of merriment and cheer. At least it should be. Everywhere you look, there are countless performances carrying out the rituals of the season. Store displays, choir concerts, Rotary Lights…

My 16-year-old brother and I recently took part in such a ritual. We attended the Manheim Steamroller concert held at the La Crosse Center two weeks ago. I was so excited to spend some quality time with my brother, ushering in the sounds of Christmas and getting pumped for our upcoming winter break.

The performance was spectacular. The lighting effects, the impressive versatility of the musicians…but there was one aspect of the night that significantly impacted my entire experience: the annoying, middle-aged lady who wouldn’t put her digital camera down.

Picture this: a pitch-black theatre space, with colorful lights dancing behind the performers, in time with the music. Now, add an aggravating orb of white light directly in your line of vision. No matter how hard you try to look away, or concentrate on the sounds, that little light keeps shining. Better yet, it flashes every few moments, distracting your attention from the stage.

That was my concert experience.

Which brings up my point: since when do we as a society feel the need to document every little thing that happens to us? Why are we so inclined to step out of the moment, affecting the moments of others?

Giving up on the concert, I watched the woman in front of me in amazement. What in the world is she taking all these pictures of, I asked myself? After each flash, I scrutinized each after image that showed up on her LED screen…only to discover that all her pictures were exactly the same.

I am not trying to say the woman shouldn’t have taken any pictures, but I am saying she should have limited herself to five or fewer. Dozens of flashes later, the performers have moved merely pixels from their previous poses.

What resulted from her obsession to record everything almost real-time made it miserable for me and everyone around her.

“How does this apply to me?” readers may be wondering? Our generation is equally as obsessed with documenting every little thing that happens. As you participate in performances of your own this holiday season, I invite you to stay mindful of others, and remember to put your cameras down and enjoy the show.

By Jessica Schurmann

Lumen Assistant Editor

Have you ever done the math to see what you are actually paying for you cafeteria meals? Did you know that some students wind up paying up to $17.26 a pop just to enjoy our cafeteria’s finest?

I sat down and calculated out the total cost per week and per meal for the four possible meal plans at Viterbo (not counting the V-Hawk bucks). For the 19 meals/week plan, the cost is pretty reasonable at $5.66 a meal. Even the 14 meals/week plan is acceptable at $7.77 a meal. However, the cost becomes pricier when students buy plans that offer fewer meals per week.

For the lowest meal plan, the 80 Flex, students will pay $17.26 per meal, which includes the four guest passes they receive. If you don’t believe me, do the math: $1,450 (not counting the $100 V-Hawk bucks) divided by 84 meals.

Currently, I am paying $9.60 a meal with my 10-a-week plan. I live in one of the on-campus apartments; therefore I have the convenience of cooking for myself most of the time. However, we are forced to adopt a meal plan and thus, I chose the 10. I refuse to pay $18 a meal even if I do not use all of my 10 meals a week.

During a typical week, I eat about 6-8 meals in either the Caf or Crossroads. I lose money by not having the opportunity to eat all of my meals during the designated hours.

One of the other problems that I have is with the guest policy for meal plans. When I have a visitor at Viterbo and we would like to eat in the Caf, I have to either use my V-Hawk bucks or pay out of pocket for the second meal. What does it matter if I am paying for my 10 meals already, $9.60 each, don’t forget? Shouldn’t I be able to spend MY money how I want? Why should I pay for a meal twice, when I don’t even use all of my 10 as it is?

I feel cheated out of my money for the meal plans. If we want to have two lunches one day, why can’t we? We’re paying for them by checking the meals off our weekly allowance. If we want to cover the meal of a visitor, why can’t we? We shouldn’t have to pay out of pocket when we have a paid balance ready and waiting.

Viterbo should reconsider the requirement for on-campus residents to have meal plans when the majority of its housing consists of apartment buildings, and it should also allow those who do have a meal plan to use their meals (since they are all paid for) however they like.

By Jordan Weiker

Campus Life Assistant Editor

Dec. 21 is approaching, and some people have suggested that this year we’ll be receiving an early Christmas present: a catastrophic end to life as we know it.

Doomsday prophecies have existed for centuries. The Dec. 21 prophecy is perhaps the most famous in recent times because it was predicted by the Mayans, a Mesoamerican civilization that once flourished in the modern-day Yucatan peninsula.

The Mayans excelled at mathematics and calendar-making, according to history.com. The best known of these Mayan-made calendars is the long-count calendar, which is also the source for the Dec. 21 apocalyptic prediction.

“The calendar is based on a set of calculations that counted the number of years since a mythical creation date of Aug. 11, 3114 B.C.,” according to Agence France-Presse News. “The creation date is written as 13.0.0.0.0 on the long-count calendar. Nov. 13, 2720 B.C., is written as 1.0.0.0.0, while Feb. 16, 2325 B.C., is written as 2.0.0.0.0. Dec. 21, 2012, is written once again as 13.0.0.0.0.”

Because the long-count calendar stops at 13.0.0.0.0., the 2012 doomsday argument has surfaced as a result.

Some of the doomsday theories for Earth’s end on this day include a killer solar flare, a comet heading for Earth (possibly unleashing a monster ocean wave) and a geomagnetic pole reversal, according to Discovery News.

The question, though, is whether or not the 2012 phenomenon is just another nonsensical doomsday theory.

“It is true that the Mayans were knowledgeable about celestial movements and calculations, which surprised the Spanish conquistadores, but Mayan narratives on world destruction are pedagogical mythologies, as many other ancient cultures and civilizations had,” said Jesús Jambrina, coordinator of the Latin American Studies program at Viterbo.

“The scientific community agrees on no existing evidence whatsoever on any cataclysmic event on that date,” Jambrina told Lumen.

“Just as the calendar you have on your kitchen wall does not cease to exist after Dec. 31, the Maya calendar does not cease to exist on Dec. 21, 2012,” according to NASA.gov. “This date is the end of the Maya long-count period, but then—just as your calendar begins again on Jan. 1—another long-count period begins for the Maya calendar.”

Scientists from NASA also agreed, “There are no credible predictions for worrisome astronomical events in 2012. Solar activity has a regular cycle, with peaks approximately every 11 years. Near these activity peaks, solar flares can cause some interruption of satellite communications, although engineers are learning how to build electronics that are protected against most solar storms. But there is no special risk associated with 2012.”

“The next solar maximum will occur in the 2012-2014 time frame and is predicted to be an average solar cycle, no different than previous cycles throughout history. The Earth’s magnetic field, which deflects charged particles from the sun, does reverse polarity on time scales of about 400,000 years, but there is no evidence that a reversal, which takes thousands of years to occur, will begin in 2012.”

“I don’t think we should worry about anything else that day other than getting close to a good fire at home to fight winter outside,” concluded Jambrina.

And if scientists are wrong, at least students won’t have to worry about paying back their student loans.

By Molly Grosskreutz

A&E Editor

and

Valerie Groebner

A&E Assistant Editor

Transported into the unknown and crafty utopia of video games, “Wreck-It Ralph” (directed by Rich Moore) and its vibrant animation tells the story of the quirky ups and downs of video game characters.  Ralph (the voice of John C. Reilly) plays the destructive and disliked bad guy in his home-game “Fix-It Felix” (Jack McBrayer). But once Ralph realizes that he is tired of the villainous lifestyle, he eagerly sets out to prove himself to those who have no faith in him.

Ralph begins his journey and encounters characters of vastly different-themed video games, but things take a major turn when he stumbles into “Sugar Rush” and meets little mischievous and outcast Vanellope von Schweetz (Sarah Silverman).

Through each other’s company, Ralph and Vanellope realize they have much in common, and Ralph is heartbroken to learn some unexpected facts about Vanellope and her candy-coated world, giving him the opportunity to show his inner hero.

VG: The concept of seeing the world of a video game from the characters’ end was really intriguing, and something I hadn’t ever considered before. The way they made the video gaming world a reality was so unique and eye opening.

MG: I agree 100 percent. The concept of this movie is brilliant, and employs a vast treasure trove of locales and characters that had, up to this point, remained untapped. It was really neat to see iconic video game characters such as Pac-Man and Bowser transplant themselves from arcade screen to movie screen.

VG: I was pleased to see that this film incorporated an aspect of “disabled” individuals (*Spoiler*: Vanellope suffers from
“pixel-exia”). Most children-oriented movies don’t really embrace or demonstrate common imperfections, let alone attempt to send across a positive message, but this movie does both. However, I feel as though this storyline has been used many times throughout previous children-oriented films, and I would have liked for a new or different teaching to come of it.

MG: There’s a lot of talk that “Ralph” is starting a new chapter for Disney. I think that’s true in a lot of ways. Not only is the Disney team redefining animation, they are also making their movies more dynamic than they used to be, shirking away from simple storylines and embracing tough issues.

VG: Although there are many popular video games out there, I was relieved that very few characters from the real world made an appearance in this flick. Should animations from Call of Duty, Super Mario Bros., Donkey Kong, etc. have shown up, the movie would have had zero originality and spunk.

MG: I admire what the writers did with this storyline. They didn’t use pre-existing games and characters as crutches. Instead, they used those successful examples as archetypes, drawing elements from them but then constructing entirely different worlds.

VG: Fix-It Felix was my personal favorite little character. I enjoyed how his persona matched up perfectly with McBrayer’s other personality, Kenneth Parcell in 30 Rock. Reilly pleasantly called my attention with his “softy” side; I had only ever seen him in suggestive, politically incorrect, inappropriate-for-children essences, but he cleans up nicely.

MG: I thought Reilly was perfectly suited for his role as the well-intentioned ex-villain, but for me, Jane Lynch’s and Sarah Silverman’s voices really stole the show. Lynch shines as Calhoun, a bitter and world-weary alpha female. Silverman’s Vanellope is exactly the opposite: a bubbly, refreshing optimist. I found both characters remarkably endearing.

Final Verdict

VG: Thumbs up.

MG: Thumbs up.