Let’s face it. We came to college to go to class and get a degree. The easiest question to ask a fellow student you’re first meeting is, “So, what’s your major?” Although the ensuing conversation is not usually very entertaining, it can at least lead to the occasional, “Oh, I had that professor, I swear no one ever went to that lecture,” or, “Yeah, no … I don’t really take any science classes…”

The trouble with attending class these days is the presence of alternative entertainment available to us at any moment. I doubt there’s a student here who hasn’t tried to sneak a look at Facebook in class between typing notes on lecture slides only to look up and realize 20 minutes have passed. Even if you’ve forgotten your laptop, there’s still a tempting smartphone lingering in our pocket. Angry Bird levels are similar to Lay’s Chips because I bet you can’t have just one.

So how do we resist the pull of the oh-so-many things more entertaining than the lectures and classes we regularly attend? Throughout my years here I’ve learned two techniques to stay focused, attentive and alert with a minimum amount of strain on your fragile young mind.

The first technique I recommend is snacking. While it may seem as simple as bringing a bag of Doritos from your dorm in your backpack, if you pull an amateur move like that you’ll end up with a hand full of book-crushed crumbs in a loud bag which will irritate your fellow classmates. There is some serous etiquette associated with snacking in the classroom, and I am ashamed to say I have broken it a few times.

An easy mistake to make when bringing food into an academic environment is not realizing its smell potential. I’ve probably been “that guy” who brought a pungent box of Chicken Strata from the CoHo into a discussion, but I like to think I’ve paid it forward by enjoying a fragrant mandarin orange or cutie in a large lecture hall.

Unfortunately, bringing a snack to class nowadays isn’t as easy as it was when I could make the somewhat questionable trade of an all-you-can-eat DC swipe for a one-time-only bag of M&Ms on my way out from the dorms. To combat this, use Ziploc bags. It’s easy to bring an ample portion of grapes, carrot sticks or even just cereal, while catching envious glances from your neighbors.

If we could always snack in class, then paying attention in lecture would be no less entertaining than catching dinner and a show. We all face the perils of lectures, however, which occur just after a meal. This can put you further at risk of falling asleep during that surprisingly un-entertaining GE class on Dinosaurs.

In this case, keep yourself inspired by what you’re learning by combining it with art. I can draw about as well as my dog can play basketball (not very well), but that hasn’t stopped me from attempting to spice up my note-taking by splitting a page between text and relevant doodles.

If you’re stuck in a psych lecture, then why not draw a cartoon of a brain explaining something about itself or a dog drooling onto a bell? And if you’re not the artistic type, then why not take a stab at comedy? Accompany your geology notes with a snappy one liner like “The only thing that blows more than the Stromboli Volcano is the food at the Cuarto DC!”

Trying to write jokes about your lecture notes or planning ahead to figure out the best way to bring that leftover macaroni and cheese to discussion might seem a bit silly, but we have to remember what we’re fighting for. The better we stay focused in class, the less time we’ll have to spend, as they say on Facebook, “chillin’ with Peter J” during midterms and finals week. So remember, kids, be cool and stay in school.If you have had a class with AARON WEISS, then feel free to tell him how he is a hypocrite for writing about paying attention at atweiss@ucdavis.edu.

Yes, readers, it’s that time of year again. That spooky night is coming where you can see that girl in your psych class dressed up as a slutty nurse grinding with some guy dressed up in a makeshift bed-sheet toga. That’s some scary stuff. With the big weekend coming up, you might be wondering what or whom you can dress up as. If you’re at a loss for what to be for Halloween, I’ve compiled a list of relevant costume ideas below.

Remember those nights when your parents bought you that brand-new Barney costume before heading out to fill those Jack-o-lantern baskets with yummy candy? Nope? Oh, guess that was just me.

College has made all of those memories of trading Three Musketeers for Kit Kats seem like a distant memory. Hey, at least this way we no longer ingest all those calories from Sour Punch Straws and Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups, right?

If wearing a costume for one night can prevent me from hitting the ARC after stuffing my face-full of candy, I am so down.

Since Election Day comes about a week after Halloween, why not make your costume a little political? As a poli sci major I’m pretty biased, but the idea of carrying a pizza box and yelling “9-9-9” at random passersby sounds like a damn good Herman Cain costume.

Not sure about pulling the Herman Cain off as a girl? Never fear, there’s always the Michele Bachmann; after that infamous Newsweek cover, all you need is a pair of crazy eyes. If you’re more left-leaning like myself, you may try to pull off the classic President Obama (but beware of that guy in the John Boehner mask) or even the scandalous Anthony Weiner. If you’re feeling especially controversial, put on a Gaddafi mask or picket with “Occupy Wall Street” signs. Just don’t expect to be getting with any Libyan girls or hot financial executives that night.

Not interested in politics? (Who are you people?!) There’s always the option of going as a celebrity. Although beware: wearing a black turtleneck and holding an iPhone may be a little too soon. Wearing a hoodie and jeans may be a sufficient Mark Zuckerberg, but do some Facebook lurking of his profile before trying to pull this costume off.

Perhaps tech celebrities aren’t for you. Maybe you’re better suited to be sports personalities like Mark Cuban, holding the NBA Championship trophy for the Mavs, or Michael Vick, trying to stay on his feet after the “Dream Team” Philadelphia Eagles fell flat. If you’re in a couple, try going as a couple in sports. Many of us are over the Beckham fever, but how about Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries? Or even Tom Brady and Gisele Bundchen?

If you’ve been listening to the radio recently, you could easily find a musician to dress up as. Rebecca Black is bound to be a popular costume, but try to avoid it. Ladies, guys love the Katy Perry in her “California Girls” music video, however ridiculous it is. Some guys are into big butts, and we all know that Nicki Minaj has one that cannot lie. Stuffing a pillow in the back of your pants can’t hurt, especially since it cushions any type of fall you may experience on that night.

Men, if you’re feeling particularly bromantic, find a partner and you can go as Jay-Z and Kanye West. Or you may prefer to go with a pregnant Beyoncé. Not feeling it? Never fear, Lil Wayne’s dreads will surely be a hit, more of a hit than some of the songs on Tha Carter IV (FYI: not bashing, I love Weezy).

If you’re just not feeling any of the aforementioned costumes, there’s always the typical Tom Cruise in “Risky Business” (which, I’m not ashamed to say, I did last year) or the Angry Birds group costumes that you’re planning with your frenemies, the Green Pigs.

Long gone are the days when we would wrinkle our noses at the candy haul after trick-or-treating, but that doesn’t mean we can’t still have fun dressing up on Halloween. So before you hit the parties this weekend, put some thought into your costume. You never know who might be watching.

MEDHA SRIDHAR is now imagining an evil laugh ringing out through the night. Happy Halloween! Contact her at mdsridhar@ucdavis.edu.

Tuesday morning marked the end of a long period of captivity for Israeli Seargent First Class Gilad Shalit. Shalit was taken captive on June 25, 2006 when his batallion was ambushed by a group of Palestinian militants in Kerem Shalom Israel, a few kilometers from Gaza and Egypt. One thousand nine hundred and forty two days after Shalit was taken captive, he finally returned home to Israel where he was warmly embraced by his family, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and the rest of his country. The release of Gilad Shalit came at a very high cost though, as Israel released 1,027 Palestinian prisoners. 

Among these prisoners were several convicted felons who were found guilty in being directly involved with acts of terrorism. The list includes: Abbas a-Sayed, the mastermind behind the Park Hotel suicide bombing in Netanya that killed 30 Israelis during a religious holiday; Abdullah Bargouti, a bomb builder who is responsible for building bombs that killed 66 Israelis; Hussam Badran, former commander of Hamas in Samaria who was found responsible for the Tel-Aviv Dolphinarium massacre, Sbarro suicide bombing and the Matza restaurant bombing.

For this reason, the Israeli people are in a state of joy and discomfort.  While the Israeli people are excited about the return of their lost son and soldier, they fear for the potential terror the former prisoners can bring upon Israeli society. The past few days people have asked me, “How could Israel make such an extreme exchange when they get so little in return?” The answer is simple. For a long time Israel’s policy has been “no man left behind”. This policy continues to be a stronghold that Israel prides itself on, considering every Israeli citizen over 18 knows what it means to serve their country, and the danger this includes. 

A second reason for this prisoner swap is in hope for a step forward in the peace process. Even the former captive soldier seeks peace rather than vengeance after his five years in captivity. Gilad Shalit said himself that he would be happy if all Palestinian prisoners were released to return home to their families, so long as they wouldn’t go back to fighting against Israel.   Shalit’s words encapsulate the feelings of young Israeli soldiers who are a dominant voice representing their country. Having several friends currently serving in the Israeli Defense Force, I speak with confidence when I say that Israelis are proud of this exchange, as they believe it will bring Israel a step closer to peace. However, the other side did not share the same feelings of pursuing peace. During the prisoner exchange, a live BBC field correspondent reported that Hamas militants and their supporters were yelling for “a new Shalit”. How can we expect steps toward peace when a political party uses kidnapping and violence as a means to gain legitimacy? 

A second example comes from a woman who was released from prison as part of the prisoner exchange. Wafa al-Biss is a Palestinian woman who was sent to prison after she was caught attempting a terrorist attack. Wafa was en route to a hospital in 2005 when Israeli soldiers noticed the young woman was walking in a peculiar manner. After investigating the situation, Israeli soldiers found 22 pounds of explosives attached to her undergarments.  She was en route to the hospital to commit a suicide attack. A day after her release from prison, she visited a young school and told the children, “I hope you will walk the same path we took and God willing, we will see some of you as martyrs”. This “path” that Wafa took was one to kill innocent civilians. Does teaching children this message really show an attempt to pursuing peace? 

I understand that these two scenarios alone do not speak completely for the Palestinian people, but why have Hamas officials not come out explaining that they consider this a step in the peace process? Why haven’t the Palestinian people expressed their willingness to accept this as a step in the peace process? I only hope that the case of Wafa and that of Hamas supporters protesting at the boarder become overshadowed by stories of joy for the return of Palestinians to their homes. I hope that the prisoner exchange shows the willingness Israel has to make extreme sacrifices in the peace process. And I hope that soon we can see a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Since mid-October, Davis residents and students have been occupying Central Park to show solidarity with the global Occupy movement that originated on Wall Street. As a result, local activists have added Davis to the list of over 1,500 cities and towns worldwide that have similar demonstrations underway.

The movement itself is unique in that there are no concrete objectives or demands. Exact aims vary from person to person, but what distinguishes the protesters is their dedication to the broader idea of redirecting social and economic growth to better represent the 99 percent.

The engagement of the local community in a global movement is admirable and appeals to college culture, even if the effects of such participation will likely not bring about any immediate change. It is commendable that some of those most committed to the movement are students who are already busy with the stresses brought upon by school. However, those who support the movement need not feel pressured to sleep in the park. The use of the internet and social media in promoting the movement makes it possible for people to participate without pitching a tent. Those interested can join the Facebook group, retweet updates, express themselves in the online forum, make donations and watch live streaming of other demonstrations worldwide.

The Occupy movement as a whole highlights the recent shift to the use of the internet and social media as a tool for the promotion and organization of protests and demonstrations. By using the World Wide Web, movements can be organized more efficiently, be better publicized and garner more support. There are also ways to become involved offline. Attending general assembly meetings, bringing material support such as food and simply visiting those occupying the park are all alternate ways to contribute.

By lending a voice to a growing global movement, Davis activists are showing that the movement’s ideals are not absent from this small town. Active participation from interested students is encouraged – just don’t fail your midterms.

The dedication of the new Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. national memorial sculpture in Washington D.C. last week drew both reverent praise and ire. Martin Luther King III claims the statue is within his top three of 50 statues he’s seen of his father. If you’re like me and you’re wondering just how one ranks statues of his or her father, he claims it actually looks like his dad. But others are less impressed.

One criticism frequently heard could be captured by the take of Ed Dwight, a Denver-based sculptor who made renderings of Dr. King himself. Invoking the posture of the D.C. sculpture, which arranges the Reverend standing, almost emerging from the granite with a determined (or is it stern?) look and arms folded across his chest, Dwight sees arrogance and confrontation. And so it goes with other critics, the vast majority of who take offense at the sculpting of Dr. King as an aggressive figure, one that resembles the tenor of Malcolm X more than his own peaceful form. Could it be that the critics themselves are recalling a false past?

Dr. King’s iconic stewardship at the head of the Civil Rights Movement forms the American archetype of a social justice leader. This remains the case despite more recent protests. We don’t accord the same status to Vietnam War protestors as we do to Martin Luther King Jr. No other social justice leader, be they from the Civil Rights Era or any other movement before or since is honored each year with a federal holiday. What distinguishes the perch of MLK is the retelling of his story. This alternate history reconstructs the civil rights leader as peaceful through juxtapositions.

First, both during and after the Civil Rights Era Dr. King was presented distinct from Malcolm X. Given that the latter was the radical, Dr. King became the moderate. If Malcolm X was separatist, Dr. King was integrationist. If Malcolm X advocated violence, Dr. King advocated peace. While this became the truth of our grade school textbooks, reality bore a more complex dichotomy.

Toward the end of his life, Malcolm X had grown increasingly moderate. This shift began when he went to Mecca on religious pilgrimage. Upon seeing people of all colors and social positions praying together, his notion of militant separatism began to fade.

In contrast, the final years of Dr. King were characterized by increasing radicalism. Toward the end, he drew focus to the “…giant triplets of racism, materialism and militarism…” in a 1967 speech. On April 4, 1978, the day he was assassinated, Rev. King was drafting a sermon titled “Why America May Go to Hell.” Should he have lived longer, there is little doubt he would have played a prominent role in the Vietnam War protest.

That’s why it’s crucial that the second movement to which MLK is juxtaposed to is the anti-war movement. I think the distinction drawn between Dr. King and the anti-war protests is the genesis for the artificially peaceful MLK. Both the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War protests were almost exclusively non-violent. However, no one in their right mind would identify the anti-war protesters as peaceful. By a function of draft-dodging, flag-burning and heated run-ins with authority, this was a both a confrontational and non-violent movement.

Because anti-war protesters were denied the same moral plane, the Civil Rights Era, and Dr. King along with it, has been re-branded as peacefully non-violent. Somehow this frames the jailing, beatings, bombings and other Bull Connor-isms of the time all the more dramatically. For Dr. King to have succeeded despite those conditions seems to impute an exceptional level of moral fortitude, placing him above the crude, non-violent tactics of the protests that followed his death.

But the method to his movement was hardly peaceful. Take the “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”. In it, he calls for protesters to collectively create a “crisis-packed situation,” arguing that ” . . . freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” Dr. King wasn’t just kind of aggressive, his success was a product of his confrontational approach.

It’s easy to write off the debates over criticisms of his memorial statue as semantics. But if any topic deserves splitting hairs, it’s the legacy of Reverend King. He’s held as the epitome of change. If that epitome is not an accurate way to achieve change, then we’re neutering a generation of protestors, eager to exercise their democratic right to assemble in ways that worked in the past. In this sense, perhaps the unveiling of Dr. King’s statue bears special meaning to the protestors occupying Wall Street.

If the sculpture makes King look confrontational, perhaps that’s because he really was.

If you write to RAJIV NARAYAN at rrnarayan@ucdavis.edu he will judge the content of your character by the characters of your content.