Ethan McGlone, Staff

Reliance on cell phones and technology is a serious pandemic that plagues our society. People are being transformed into incoherent zombies while scrolling through their “For You” pages on Tiktok watching other zombies dance for a living. However, La Salle’s own Financial Aid Office has combated this issue head first in a truly inspiring fashion. For the last two weeks they have vowed to put the phones and computers away and enjoy life as it was meant to be enjoyed. “We really feel as though computers have become our whole life; our job even. This had to change,” someone close to the situation explained to me. They continued, “Why sift through email after email when we could be outside tossing a frisbee and admiring mother nature?” The Financial Aid Office is now two weeks clean of the filth that was their job of the past, and while many emails have gone unread and unanswered, many lifelong memories and friendships were made outside of the office. 

The office had a pizza party to celebrate this great accomplishment; the pineapple pizza was the big hit of the night. Of course, the only rule at the party was no technology. “Do we miss our old life? From time to time we get the urge to check our phones and scroll through our emails. However, we quickly remember that many people rely on us to do that, so we decide not to. It’s truly for the best in my opinion,” another participant in this technology cleanse told us. The night concluded with a bout of karaoke, with songs ranging from the ever so popular “Dancing On My Own” by Callum Scott to “Dior” by Pop Smoke. Even with the lack of phones, computers, and technology in the office that night, the environment and overall emotions shared were truly electric.

Nicholas J. Signoretta, Staff Infection

Before I even begin with this article, I would like to make it known that this article and its predecessors are not to be considered “Satire”, but instead “Arts & Entertainment”.  The notion that only the first article in this saga was a form of greater artistic, intellectual stimulation but not the following two reviews is an insult to Mr. Pants, Mr. McGlone, and myself after this article inevitably is placed in the “Satire” section of “The La Salle Collegian.”  Just let it be known that I fought hard for my fellow peers and my rights to be considered as something more than just silly, satirical comedy.  Upper management has been warned of my grievances.  Now, we may proceed with the main course of the meal.

To claim that a review that no one asked for of a review that no one asked for of a review that no one asked for of a review that some people might have been interested in reading is warranted in being written and edited would be a rather foolish sentiment.  While I understand how unnecessary the saga of reviews that Mr. Pants, Mr. McGlone, and I have crafted is, I do find it necessary to perpetuate this rather silly exercise just to see how confusing we can make the title of an article in an actual published newsletter.  While many thought the drama between Mr. Pants and Mr. McGlone may have been resolved in Mr. Pants’ follow-up article this past publishing week, I have decided to insert my opinion on their own for the sake of parody and increased confusion.  From the rafters I descend with this surprise article to not only review Mr. Pants’ most recent review but more importantly indirectly harass Mr. McGlone and his review considering it is one of the most jumbled works I have seen produced by a grown, twenty-year-old man.  It makes sense when considering his rigorous coursework that includes well-known courses such as “Love, Marriage, and Parenting”.  Whatever that means.

To begin his return review, Mr. Pants first references the intelligence of both himself and Mr. McGlone and gives the two men a fair bit of credit for their intellectual prowess.  While I cannot speak strongly on Mr. Pants’ mental abilities, I am rather familiar with the brain functions of Mr. McGlone after just over a year of sharing an apartment with him and there is nothing to write about.  The dichotomy between the two men’s reviews leads me to believe that Mr. McGlone is punching above his intellectual weight and should probably back out of the match before Mr. Pants runs circles around him.

As Mr. Pants’ responding review continues, it begins to show that the review he is reviewing is not quite the easiest of pieces to follow in terms of cohesiveness.  Mr. McGlone’s review shifts in a way that is almost violent to read, missing smooth shifts from topic to topic and instead transitioning as seamlessly as a 2013 Nissan Sentra.  This leads Mr. Pants’ response to almost read like a celebrity responding to their fan mail, answering jumbled questions with sloppy responses of advice.  Frankly, Mr. Pants’ response review may also lack sufficient transitions, leading me to believe he might as well have an empty shell of a cranium like Mr. McGlone, although the fact that I too have no idea what the word synecdoche means or who Charlie Kaufman is speaks to my intelligence being right on par with my fellow writers.

The one thing that my far from intellectual peers do get right in their pieces is their analysis of the show’s fourth episode.  The episode involving the teaching of Mr. Fielder’s patented acting technique is the peak of satirical genius and something I can finally agree on with these two bumbling buffoons.

In summation, I specialize in ad-hominem and hope whoever reviews me review is harder on me than I was on these two.

Review Of Mr. Pants’ Review Of Mr. McGlone’s Review Of Mr. Pants’ Review: 8.3/10

Review Of Mr. McGlone’s Review Of Mr. Pants’ Review: 5.7/10

Review Of Mr. Pants’ Review: 7.2/10

Sophia Conte, Staff Writer

The average American checks their phone about 58 times a day, however other surveys suggest the number is just a smidgen higher, about 344 times a day. Either way we should probably get off our phones. Except getting off your phone might entail  very dreadful FOMO, or the fear of missing out. 

Now it’s a Friday night, you need to get off your phone, so the question is what are people doing? And where are the people? Who are the people? A very ambiguous answer: people are out. Going out; people are going out and you should too. Not every night, because then you would be either the kid that dropped out or a pledging freshman to Chi Kappa No-Toilet-Paper-In-The-Bathrooms Kappa whatever. 

Go out in moderation. And meet some of the fraternity brothers, say “hi” to those sorority sisters, most of them are great people enjoying a social scene where college students get together to have rootin tootin good ole time. 

Don’t like frats? Do anything that’s social, on a night where you can forget about homework and school and your ex-girlfriend or that boy that has the personality of a middle school gym teacher. Get sushi in the center city, have game night with friends, and of course chat about whatever drama is plaguing your friend group at said time, etc., etc.  But why do anything over your weekend other than relax on your phone? Again, everything in moderation. 

You probably relax enough as is, since the average screen time on a phone, according to studies, is about three hours. Besides that, there is a time and place for sitting on your phone. It can be every other Friday night, maybe you relax Saturday and Sunday, or maybe you go out once every two months but at least go somewhere other than your rectangular box that knows every detail about your life. Also going out is the easiest to do while in college, in your 20s. 

So, while you’re still young, you should do what you can to enjoy that youth, however, don’t destroy it. Everything in moderation. Now, if you’re thinking when the weekend rolls around, which let’s be reasonable and say Thursday night to Sunday, should I stay in? Absolutely friggin’ not. 

Ethan McGlone, Staff

Anthony Pantalone is a smart man, far smarter than I. This will become evident as you read this article, an article reviewing Mr. Pants’ review of the critically acclaimed television series “The Rehearsal.” He begins his review with “Anxiety can be a prison. One that feels impossible to escape.” This is a valid point, and I understand the underlying meanings in the TV series. Although, when I was watching, I did not even consider this. My first sentence of a review would have been something like this: “Haha, Nathan guy funny. Good show.” This perfectly lays out my opinions on the host, Nathan Fielder, while also expressing my thoughts on the series.. This, however, is quite an advanced move, especially for a college student. After recognizing this flaw in Anthony’s review, it became apparent he never enrolled in the same rigorous courses I have, like “Love, Marriage, and Parenting.”

Later in the review, Mr. Pants compares the tactics used by Nathan as Charlie Kaufman-esque, more specifically his famous work “Synecdoche, New York.” I do not know who Charlie Kaufman is, and I cannot even pronounce “Synecdoche.” I do not have an opinion on this point.

Anthony’s section on the fourth episode of the series was very relatable. I have watched “The Rehearsal” and I would highly recommend it to anyone who appreciates comedy. “The Fielder Method” is the pinnacle of the entire series to me, and just when you thought Nathan could not get any more outlandish, he breaks into another man’s home. I would have put a spoiler alert, but if you are reading a review on a review of a television show, I believe it is expected that you have watched the show. Sorry, not sorry.

The last portion of Anthony’s review may be the most accurate piece of writing in the entire article. Nathan is playing a character (hopefully). He is going out of his way to act as insane as possible. But, of course, Nathan somehow surrounded himself with people even crazier than his own character, making him seem like the normal one in most situations. When his response to being told eating poop is a satanic ritual ends up being “Oh, ok,” the audience is left wondering, “What the hell am I watching?”

In summation, Anthony Pantalone is more intellectually competent as a human than I am. Review of his review: 3.5 stars out of 5.

Anonymous

Welp, it’s another week of being an Explorer fan. At the beginning of the week I was excited for the busy schedule of games ahead of me. St Louis at Home, Lockhaven and Temple Away, and even a few lacrosse scrimmages. It looked good.

Keyword: LOOKED

Just like every other week, I watched these games full of passion, only to be ultimately disappointed again. The Women’s Soccer team started the game looking good, going up 1-0 early in the game, only for St Louis to overcome them 4-1. Men’s soccer seemed to stand a chance for the first half, but ultimately lost 3-1 to them. Field hockey was able to keep themselves in the game, go through double overtime, just to lose in a penalty shootout. With this week of games behind us, not a single team holds a winning record.

I now propose a new chant for our teams on campus: “You’re not special, we lose every week”

(See below for video)

It perfectly encompasses how we all feel about the teams that come to La Salle and feel like hotshots for beating us. “You’re not special, we lose every week” perfectly shows how self aware we are, while also chirping the opposing teams. I recommend everyone take up this chant, and help chant it during the upcoming losses that our sports teams will suffer.