Results tagged ‘ USA ’
Suisse-Etats-Unis, un fiasco révélateur
Les Etats-Unis sont parvenus successivement à se défaire de la Suisse et de la France, chaque fois à l’extérieur et qui plus est sur terre battue, une surface qui n’est normalement pas leur tasse de thé, pour se hisser en demi-finale de la Coupe Davis. Si les Français n’ont pas à rougir de leur défaite outre mesure, les hommes de Severin Lüthi ont bien plus à se faire pardonner.
Les encouragements de Severin Lüthi à Stanislas Wawrinka resteront vains.
Depuis le week-end de Pâques, les Français se moquent un peu moins des Suisses et de leur choix discutable de la terre battue indoor et de surcroît en altitude pour affronter Jim Courier et ses boys. En effet, après la défaite en quatre manches de Roger Federer face à John Isner, à la surprise générale, le 10 février dernier à Fribourg, Guy Forget, notamment, y était allé de son commentaire. Même si la critique du capitaine démissionnaire des Bleus n’était pas infondée (le rebond haut dû à l’altitude avantageait Isner), il s’avère donc que la terre battue de Monte Carlo n’a pas davantage pu museler John Isner et les terribles frères Bryan. Penser que l’équipe de Suisse n’a finalement rien à se reprocher après la déroute de Fribourg simplement parce que la France n’a rien pu faire non plus face aux Etats-Unis serait toutefois un raisonnement bien simpliste. Car si une défaite face à la nation la plus titrée du tennis mondial n’a rien de déshonorant en soi, la manière bien plus que le résultat a cependant de quoi faire rougir Federer et les siens.
En effet, perdre 3-2 en ayant tout tenté en simple sans Monfils, blessé, et face à un Isner presque aussi injouable qu’au premier tour et fort de la confiance engrangée à Fribourg et à Indian Wells (défaite en finale face à Federer après avoir battu le numéro 1 mondial Djokovic et entrée dans le top ten) et en double face à la meilleure paire du monde est excusable. Surtout au vu de la rage démontrée par Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, tombé les armes à la main face au géant venu de Caroline du Nord. La rage. C’est en un mot tout ce qui a manqué à la phalange helvétique pour faire ne serait-ce qu’illusion contre des Américains qu’ils étaient tellement certains de vaincre. L’état d’esprit était en effet du côté des visiteurs à la bannière étoilée en terres fribourgeoises. Entre une équipe de Suisse sans passion et des Etasuniens à la culture de la gagne consommée, le verdict est sans appel : 0-5.
Certes, Stanislas Wawrinka a encore une fois raté le coche de peu dans une partie qui lui était promise face à Mardy Fish et Roger Federer a peut-être pris John Isner de haut (ce qui est un comble vu la taille du bonhomme) et n’a pas su changer son plan de jeu quand le numéro 2 américain l’a poussé dans les cordes le vendredi en simple. Certes. Cependant, la performance des deux compères en double, surtout, a été symptomatique de cette force mentale chancelante du côté helvétique. Auteurs d’un superbe début de match face à une paire américaine amputée de sa moitié gauche Bob Bryan et composée du duo hybride Mike Bryan-Mardy Fish, les Suisses ont flanché dès les premières difficultés. En effet, alors que Mike Bryan, par ailleurs homme du match, poussait tant et plus son coéquipier à la confiance en berne depuis la fin 2011 à se surpasser, les champions olympiques de Pékin en 2008 (où ils avaient d’ailleurs éliminé les frères Bryan) sombraient petit à petit. Pire, leur langage corporel prédisait la défaite bien avant la balle de match, c’est-à-dire dès la perte de la troisième manche. Ce qui n’a bien sûr pas échappé à l’expérimenté Mike Bryan (33 ans, 11 titres du Grand Chelem conquis en double avec son frère jumeau, 21 victoires et 2 défaites en double en Coupe Davis dont 11 victoires et aucune défaite sur terre battue) qui s’est en plus appliqué à « allumer » ses adversaires à deux reprises au filet, ce qui a suffi à achever de les déstabiliser. On croit rêver. Le palmarès de Mike Bryan est évidemment édifiant, mais il a été construit entièrement en compagnie de son frère absent ce jour-là, et, en regardant les débats, on a peine à croire que Roger Federer est détenteur de 16 couronnes du Grand Chelem et que son compagnon vaudois possède lui aussi une solide expérience des grands événements.
Que s’est-il donc passé ? La raison de cette déculottée est-elle tout simplement à aller chercher dans le contraste entre la naïveté et l’habitude de la défaite des « petits Suisses » et la culture de la gagne qui est inscrite dans les gènes américains et qui fait de cette nation une machine à gagner dans presque tous les sports ? Cela paraît encore une fois un peu simpliste, surtout quand la Suisse a la chance de compter un joueur comme Roger Federer dans ses rangs. Un rapide coup d’oeil aux statistiques du Bâlois suffit à se convaincre qu’il n’est pas victime de ce complexe d’infériorité typiquement suisse. La cause du mal helvétique est probablement à aller chercher ailleurs. Sur la chaise du capitaine par exemple. Quand on compare les capitaines adverses à Severin Lüthi, dont le CV est presque vide si on excepte une 622e place au classement ATP en 1995 et deux relégations (en 2007 et 2010, les premières après 13 années consécutives au sein du groupe mondial) au cours de son capitanat qui a débuté en 2005, le contraste est saisissant. En effet, Jim Courier (ancien numéro 1 mondial en simple, 4 titres du Grand Chelem, vainqueur de la Coupe Davis comme joueur) et Guy Forget (ancien top 5 en simple et en double, vainqueur de la Coupe Davis comme joueur et capitaine) ont une certaine expérience à faire valoir (c’est le moins que l’on puisse dire!) au moment de parler à leur joueur lors d’un moment crucial du match. A l’inverse, on a de la peine à imaginer ce que le brave Lüthi peut bien avoir à dire à Federer lorsque celui-ci est au bord de la défaite dans une rencontre disputée au meilleur des cinq sets. Et le problème est double dans le cas du capitaine helvétique. En effet, si en Coupe Davis les joueurs choisissent eux-mêmes leur capitaine, il paraît clair que Lüthi doit sa position à Federer et personne d’autre, lui qui est aussi son allié sur le circuit ATP à longueur de saison. Dans ces conditions, « secouer » le numéro 3 mondial dans un moment de crise s’avère une tâche encore plus ardue. La relation hiérarchique qu’entretiennent les deux hommes ne s’y prête pas. Si l’on ajoute à tout cela que Severin Lüthi n’est pas connu pour ses talents de motivateur hors-normes (il suffit de juxtaposer son attitude et celle de Forget pendant un changement de côté pour s’en apercevoir), le problème semble évident. Sa solution l’est toutefois bien moins. Car on imagine mal Lüthi prendre la porte tant que Federer sera un membre de cette équipe.
Malheureusement, il est peut-être déjà trop tard pour songer à tirer des enseignements. En effet, la presse helvétique n’a cessé de marteler que cette année 2012, la première qui voyait Federer participer au premier tour depuis 2004, était la dernière occasion pour cette génération de remporter la Coupe Davis et on ne peut que lui donner raison. La paire Rosset-Hlasek a eu sa chance en 1992 contre les… Etats-Unis et il paraît difficile de trouver une paire plus forte que Federer-Wawrinka dans un pays au réservoir aussi réduit que le nôtre dans un futur plus ou moins proche. Tout n’est peut-être pas perdu, il reste peut-être encore une année ou deux avant que la fenêtre qui leur permettrait de ramener le saladier d’argent ne se referme définitivement pour Roger (31 ans en août) et Stan (27 ans). Mais cela nécessiterait une auto-critique qui n’a malheureusement pas eu lieu après le fiasco de Fribourg. Car tant que le problème, qu’il soit partiellement dû au capitaine (on ne va quand même pas faire porter entièrement le chapeau au malheureux Lüthi, il n’est tout de même pas sur le court raquette en main) ou qu’il soit bien plus profond que cela, ne sera pas accepté comme tel, aucune solution ne sera trouvée.
Article publié dans le Cafignon de mai 2012.
“I think Barack Obama is a joke”
Karen E. Miller was born in Houston, raised and homeschooled in Trinity, Texas and is currently a senior at Sam Houston State University, studying communication and sociology. She is a Tea Party (populist, conservative and libertarian movement that started off in 2009 in the United States) activist.
How come you got involved with the Tea Party ?
Well, I agree with their platform. The original Boston Tea Party was formed because the colonies were taxed without political representation in England, there was no representative as a middle man between armies and the Parliament in England and it seems like the same thing is happening now, in a way. Politicians are proposing legislation without public support so we feel like, in a way, we’re being taxed or having legislation pressed upon us without our representation because our representatives are not representing us, which is their job. I think this movement is getting people active in politics in such a way that it hasn’t been in a long time, even people my age who haven’t been as involved in politics are becoming involved because they feel very strongly about the things that the Tea Party is presenting. So I think that at the very least it’s getting people knowledgeable about what their government is doing and it’s encouraging them to get involved. So I think that even if you don’t agree with the Tea Party’s beliefs, you can at least appreciate what it’s doing for the common man in regard to politics.
And concretely, how did you become an activist ?
Well, there was a proposal to construct a large road from Mexico all the way up to Oklahoma called the Trans-Texas Corridor and I went to protest for that and from there I became activist in political rallies and when the Tea Party movement really got started, I was at the first Tea Party in this city, Huntsville, a couple years ago and from there I went to a couple more. Just because I stay on top of politics in America, I think that young people should, or any American should, and I think it’s my duty to know what my representatives or my Congress or my President is doing and where and how I can change that if I don’t like it.
Is the Tea Party something particular about the South of the United States ?
I think that the South has this history of being rebellious against the Federal government. In the Civil War, of course, we were defiant toward the Federal government. Even though slavery was a main issue, the Civil War was actually fought over individual States rights and the Federal government not allowing the individual States to have their own laws governing their own particular land and it kind of becomes the same way with socialized medicine or abortion nationwide. If one State in particular doesn’t want that, then we feel like we shouldn’t have to have that. And this is a particular thing in the South because historically we felt that way. That’s why we seceded in the first place.
So if Texas was asking for secession today, would you be in favor of it ?
In principle, yes. I would support the thought but practically it wouldn’t make sense.
Why is that ?
America is way too strong, you don’t want to have them as an enemy, we’re right next to Mexico, which is dying to have Texas annexed into it so… We need America and America also needs Texas so there’s not going to be a secession but I would support the thought behind it, not the action though.
To come back to the Tea Party, what about the differences between the Republican Party and the particular branch of the Tea Party ? Is it really separate ?
When talking about Tea Party activists, I always refer to them as conservatives. They could be Democrats, it’s unlikely, most likely they’re Republicans because conservative ideology and Republicanism go hand in hand but it’s not necessarily a rule of thumb. I would say most Republicans are in favor of the Tea Party.
Do you think the Tea Party could separate completely from the Republicans and create a three-party system in America ?
I don’t think it’s possible. I think, if anything, it would just reform the Republican platform or maybe strengthen independents or conservatives. I think it would actually be detrimental if it formed its own party because politically speaking, I claim myself as a Republican when I go vote. People I support are Republicans most of the time. So there would be more of a chance for the Democrats to win an election if the Republican Party split up into mildly conservatives and Tea Party activists.
The Tea Party was created two years ago. Do you think it will be a long-lived important actor in US politics ?
I don’t think it’s going to be long-lived in the sense that the Republican and Democrat Parties have, they’ve been around for a long time. I don’t think that it’ll last that long, I think that this is a temporary movement seeking change and when that change comes about or there’s a compromise or a collaboration of some sort, then I think the Tea Party will eventually just die off. But I also think that it’s good, it’s taking the common persons in America and it’s giving them a voice of some sort and making the politicians listen to them and so I think that the politicians should learn from that and use it, at least listen to it. I don’t think that the Tea Party people want their way one hundred percent, that it has to be that way or they won’t be satisfied, they just want their representatives to listen to them and at least show that they’re listening and at least compromise on something. There could be some agreement there.
So, in other words, the Tea Party is bound to be a party of the opposition and could not be president material in the next election in 2012 ?
I think whoever is running as the Republican against Obama will most likely be somebody involved with the Tea Party.
So somebody involved with the Tea Party would be credible enough to be the President of the United States ?
Credible ? I don’t know why they wouldn’t be credible enough. I don’t think that Barack Obama was credible to be our president. So obviously that’s not a prerequisite.
Who would be the ideal Tea Party candidate then ? Do you have someone in mind ?
No, it’s too early. I thought that Sarah Palin would run , not necessarily that I would vote for her to be president, but I thought she would be somebody that would emerge. I’m not one hundred percent sure about that anymore. I don’t know who’s going to come out of the woodwork.
The Tea Party opposes a lot of things but how about suggesting solutions instead ? Isn’t it easier to say what is wrong than what would be right ?
(Hesitates)
In other words, can you give me an example of what the Obama administration is doing wrong and what you would do instead ?
I don’t know what I would do instead. And it is easier to say that’s not right than here’s something else we can do. I think that what they do is get their representatives to listen to them, get Congress to listen to the people and then at least be willing to discuss some other alternatives. I don’t know what in particular. There are problems in America that I personally have no idea how to solve. But that’s why we elect Senators and representatives, it’s because we trust them to have credible input in that. They work for us, we choose them for that purpose and when they’re not listening to the people that essentially are their boss, then that becomes a problem. First, we want the Congress to listen to us and then, when they do that, I think there can be an open forum as to what can we do differently, there’ll be more open minds to alternatives to these issues.
What are your hopes for America in the future ?
I think that America needs to reestablish their authority in the worldwide circus. Politically, militarily, economically. Our economy has become a joke, especially because of borrowing so much money from China. Military wise, we got ourselves into what I thought at the time a noble war, Afghanistan. We had to retaliate against the Talibans, we had to do that, otherwise it would just continue. I think George Bush’s heart was in the right place and I think it got out of hand. However, I don’t think that we could leave Iraq or the Middle East in the situation that it is in now. This is one issue that I don’t know how to fix. I don’t think that we should be there anymore but if we leave it’s just going to become worse. Barack Obama himself said that he would decrease troops numbers after he became president and in actuality he has increased the number of troops that we have in the Middle East because there’s really nothing else you can do. But I think America should reestablish itself as one a top if not the top world leader. I think that America has always been there to help other countries when they needed it and it has also been there to put countries in their place when they needed it.
So you think America has the right to go somewhere and “put countries in their place” like imposing democracy in Iraq for example ?
Well, I’m thinking more along the lines of the two World Wars that we fought in, America was a strong force ending those wars. It has worked in the past. Now, with Iraq it didn’t work because I think the people have a different want and need than before. But when Japan blew up Pearl Harbor we went and we retaliated and then we helped rebuild Japan and have played a huge role in their becoming one of the world leaders, it has one of the top economies in the world, even being such a small island it’s very efficient. Us helping them reestablish themselves pushed them forward.
So you want this leadership back ?
I think that other countries expect it and rely on it. We need it for ourselves and also for the people that need nurture.
Do you have examples of these “nurtured” countries ?
Well, going back to Japan since I know so much about that, they are not allowed to have a military, in turn, we take care of them. We help Israel a lot, we are allies with the United Kingdom and other countries in Europe. If something happens around the world, we give aid to anybody who needs it. If there’s a natural disaster, America is there, sending their military, sending aid.
So you think that Japanese people are glad not to have a military and to have you instead, taking care of them ?
Yes. I know enough Japanese people to say that yes. I think that’s the general consensus, that they’re glad that America is there.
Getting back to the American government, what’s your general opinion about Barack Obama ?
I think he’s a joke. I think he’s extremely charismatic, extremely manipulative and extremely unqualified for the job of presidency.
Can you give me concrete examples of what you think he’s been doing wrong ?
He didn’t do anything right. For instance, even if you didn’t like George Bush – he was an appallingly bad public speaker, I can admit that, especially being a communication major – after September 11, immediately, George Bush was there, at the scene, talking to people, talking on TV, showing the people that he cares, that he’s there, that America is not going to back down. After Katrina, he was there. He was in Louisiana, speaking of what to do, how to fix this. He showed the people that he was listening to them, that he cared about them. When there was the oil spill off of the coast of Louisiana, what was Obama doing ? He was vacationing. This was the worst oil spill in world history, I believe, and he’s taking a vacation ? It took him two weeks to get down to the coast to even evaluate, he was there for two hours. Anytime he does anything there has to be a camera around because he has to have recognition. I think that Obama cares more about how people look at him than what he’s actually doing for this country.
Tell me what George W. Bush did right during his two terms then.
Well, he imposed tax cuts instead of raising taxes. I was very young when he was elected president, I’m trying to remember… I think he was right to not show America as weak, especially in such a pivotal point of our history. If we had done nothing, it would have been a message to other terrorists, potentially, “if we do something to America they’re not going to do anything”. I think it was very important that we did what we did after September 11 to show that we’re not just sitting ducks.
But do you think that attacking a country is going to do something against terrorism ?
Well, we’re not necessarily attacking a country. We’re going in to find specific people. And, like I said, it evolved into something I don’t really know what it is now. But at the beginning we were just going to find certain people.
But the main problem with terrorism is that it’s an entity without country so do you really think it was the solution ?
Yes. To use George Bush’s words, this is a war on terrorism, not necessarily a war with Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan as countries. It was a war against the people that attacked us.
What about the “weapons of massive destruction” that nobody ever found ?
The one thing I can say is that it’s better to be safe than sorry.
Let’s talk about some major issues in the world of today. What do you think America’s involvement should be as far as the environment and global warming are concerned ?
I don’t believe in men cause global warming. I think that we could be more environmentally conscious, for example recycle more, use less energy when it’s not needed. I think that everybody can be more aware of the environment. However, I don’t think we should be charged for the amount of carbon we put into the air. I don’t want my government to tell me how to live my life, I don’t want my government that involved in my personal life. I think that they could make a regulation, and they have made regulations for oil refineries, when you have to reduce the amount of pollution that your putting in the air. Now that kind of stuff is acceptable but don’t start regulating things that happen in my house.
The huge crisis that Japan is going through has raised many questions about nuclear energy. Do you think a debate should take place ?
In the case of Japan, I know that the safety mechanisms were not meeting standards. As long as you have those regulations, again the government should step in as far as safety goes on a large scale, they are checked out, it’s going to work and they have a backup plan in case it doesn’t, as long as your realize the effects that could happen, have a plan for if it does and make sure that it doesn’t happen, then I think it’s okay.
Presidential candidates have to talk about their faith during their campaign. Do you think that religion is important in politics ?
We do have this notion of separation of church and state in America and I do agree with that. However, people that just vote for their candidate based on just a party affiliation, like “okay you’re a Democrat, I don’t have to listen to any of your speeches, I’m going to vote for you” or vice versa, then those people don’t care. But a lot of people, including myself, think otherwise. I want to know what kind of people the candidates are, what their family life is like, what they are interested in, what their religion is, because to me, if I know a little bit about the person, then I can better interpret them or expect things from them. Even though I don’t think religion should be a main issue in an election, I think it should at least be discussed because that lets you know a lot about that person’s core of beliefs. So that’s important. If a candidate refused to talk about his religious beliefs, that would bother me. I don’t care what religion it is but I would at least like to know so I know what kind of person he is or generally what to expect from his behavior or thought.
By the way, are you among the people who question Obama’s religion and birthplace ?
Yes. I don’t think he’s a Christian, I don’t think he was born in the US. The most compelling argument for his birthplace seems to be Kenya.
What is the evidence that leads you to this conclusion ?
Well, what is the evidence that he is an American citizen ? Why wouldn’t he just say “look, here’s my birth certificate” ?
I think he did.
I don’t think so.
Would that be a problem if he was a Muslim ?
Because we’re fighting a war in a part of the world that is predominantly Muslim, it would make me wonder how he would handle that war, if he would have special interests, so to speak.
Does the Tea Party have special views about religion ?
I think a majority of people would agree that “one nation under God” was formed as a Christian nation. I don’t think that people want religion taught in school, make it mandatory but I think that what they do want is more freedom with religion in public places. Like to be able to pray in school or that sort of thing. More freedom, not necessarily pressed on people, not like that, but if you do want to pray, then that should be allowed. I think that goes for any religion as well.
Still on religion, Sarah Palin doesn’t believe in evolution. Do you ?
No, I don’t. Okay, I believe in evolution to a certain extent. Do I believe that we came from monkeys ? Absolutely not ! I think that life forms have evolved, so to speak, to… I wouldn’t use the word “evolve”, I would use the word “adapt”. They have adapted to their surroundings, they have changed parts of the world, diets, of course genes mixing with each other, people marrying different races. We have adapted and changed over time but did we come from a completely different species ? I find that impossible. But then again I’m a Christian, I believe that everything is created.
To be politically incorrect for a second, you don’t have a problem with Barack Obama’s race, do you ?
No. I couldn’t care less. But I find it interesting that a lot of black people that I talked to have confessed to me that they did vote for him solely because he is a black man. And I have a problem with that.
But you know that he’s not a black man, he is as white as he is black…
Yeah, but physically he is black, he’s not Caucasian.
Do you think it should matter ?
No, I don’t think it should matter. I think that their beliefs, their platform, their goals for the presidency, that is what should matter. Just like I don’t think that religion should matter, but I think it should be discussed so you know what you’re getting.*
*Again, since MUSE died I thought it was really worth having this published somewhere, it’s really edifying. Interview conducted in Huntsville, Texas on April 8, 2011.
Raph @ SHSU – Winter thoughts on a few Southern clichés
The first striking detail to the eye of a Swiss guy lost in the South of the United States is that there is no such thing as a sidewalk in Huntsville, Texas. You can look for a trace of public transports all you want, you won’t find anything else than huge trucks competing for the biggest environmental disaster award. The first thing to do is therefore to find friends in possession of a car (“a single man in possession of a good fortune”, as some obscure European scribbler might put it, is not the best solution this time). Yes, to survive in Texas, if you’re an honest pedestrian like me, you need a ride. In a country where people drive to their mail box (true story, I’ve seen it happen), you might even be considered crazy for walking to campus (“you what ?”), if your Swiss passport wasn’t already enough to have you labeled as a touristic attraction. In the same line of thought, the phrase “within walking distance” takes a whole new meaning here. If you want to walk somewhere – sorry, let me rephrase that – if you have to walk somewhere, you might want to ask how long it takes to get there, in minutes. Yes, in minutes because otherwise you’ll get an answer involving blocks, yards or miles and you’ll have to do the math and you didn’t choose to study literature for that. The whole purpose of this precise question is that if the walk exceeds two minutes, your Texan roommate is very likely to tell you that it’s really far and that there’s no way one can go there on foot. Keep in mind that Dallas, a little less than three hours away from Huntsville (by car, I had to adopt the trend for this one), is almost considered as a foreign country for some natives of the area. I might be exaggerating a wee bit here but you get the picture. And that’s why when you want to visit cities like Dallas, Houston, Austin or San Antonio you’d better find some fellow international students who are motivated to leave their couch for the weekend. And a car rental of course.
What on God’s green earth am I doing there, might you ask at this point. That’s also what people tend to ask me a lot here. Let’s call that a happy accident. And this huge part of the country (about 17 times Switzerland !) was definitely worth the accident. As you might have already guessed reading the first paragraph, most of the clichés my classmates back in Lausanne were teasing me about prove to be more or less accurate. And I haven’t evoked the total absence of environmental consciousness as far as trash is concerned, the kids going to class wearing a cowboy hat and boots and the fact that I heard through the grapevine that Texas was supposedly the fattest State in the Union. To go beyond those juicy details, Texas is mainly a land of extremes. The best examples being the way the temperature in winter can vary between 22°C one day and -6°C the day after (it is worth stressing that once winter is over, the temperature basically never drops below 25°C and it NEVER rains) or having a conversation with your roommate about how accurate Barack Obama is about health insurance and how retarded Sarah Palin is and hearing a professor deny global warming the next morning. Talking about denying, some people here might also refuse the idea of evolution and call their fellow citizens from the North the Yankees (apparently Huntsville is planning to fly the Confederate flag in the historical cemetery). In other words, the New South hasn’t totally overcome some diehard concepts dating back to 1861. In the face of these observations, it is little wonder that the Tea Party has found its best support in the Southern States so far. Moreover, if you’re not too much into church stuff, you might want to be careful before attending a meeting of the International Student Friendship Ministry (the name already sounds suspicious, right ?) and discovering that it’s actually more like some sort of Bible study than anything else. In short, religion is really big in this State.
The campus is really a city in itself within Huntsville though. People say that there are two types of people in town, the prison people (you might have heard this one too, yes, Huntsville is the city where the chamber of execution of the State of Texas is located, along with 6 jails) and the university people. And they’re easily distinguishable… I hope I haven’t completely put you off about Sam Houston yet because I have to say that the English department is really good, small enough to create a friendly atmosphere, not unlike Lausanne as a matter of fact. Being able to study the literature of the American South (another Norton Anthology to add to my collection…) while actually being in the South offers a whole new and refreshing perspective on the subject in a classroom where students are much more reactive to discussion topics than back home and the professor is really able to trigger interaction involving the whole class. Well, at least during the first weeks of the semester because people tend to be a little less zealous after Spring Break apparently. Moreover, according to my advisor, I’m the first exchange student in the English department at least in the last ten years (I do know a colony of German exchange students mainly studying management or business though). Foreign people tend to enroll at Sam Houston but more likely as permanent students until they get their degree and a very large majority of them are Japanese, Korean or from Central and South America, according to my experience so far. This means that I’m the only non native speaker around as far as my field of studies is concerned, which makes things tough but above all really interesting. Another plus side is that you will find yourself eager to develop your cooking abilities as soon as possible after discovering that all the cafeterias on campus are actually some sort of fast food malls where Burger King, Starbucks Coffee or Pizza Hut are the best you will get. On the down side (some might think it’s a good thing though, at least you’re likely to avoid the last minute rush before the paper is due), it feels like high school all over again with actual homework (that you have to hand in before class starts) and daily quizzes that will be added to your final grade. Oh and if you fail to attend more than three sessions, you’re very likely to fail the whole class. I know some people back in Lausanne who wouldn’t like this system at all…
If I do have time to write this article though, it’s because it snowed last night and there’s probably one centimeter or less of white powder covering the roads this morning, which means that all the classes are canceled at Sam Houston. People really panic here when snow is expected, everybody’s been talking about that all week, professors have been giving more time to hand in assignments “because of the weather” and we’ve received an alarming notice from the University House where I live entitled “FREEZING WARNING !”. The mentality is also very different from Switzerland in the way Texans consider themselves “snowed in” (of course, they can’t use their car, the notion of winter tires being unknown here, what else would they do outside ?) in such conditions whereas one would imagine that some kids would like to enjoy a snowball fight at some point. Thank God I still have food and beer (not American light beer unless you just want water…) for tonight because nothing seems to be working around Huntsville today ! All right, that was my postcard from Sam Houston State University, see you guys in June !*
*Since MUSE (Magazine for Unil Students of English) seems to have recently died, I thought I’d still publish this article I wrote back in winter somewhere, I think it’s worth a look. Of course it’s only my highly biased opinion on Texas, nothing more.
It feels like 2001 again
2001
2009
Andy Roddick (USA/6) defeated Lleyton Hewitt (AUS) 6-3 6-7 7-6 4-6 6-4
Yes, it really feels like 2001 again. Let’s go back in time. September 6, 2001 on Arthur Ashe Stadium in the 1/4 of the US Open, Lleyton Hewitt (20 years old at the time), number 4 in the world defeated the newbie Andy Roddick (just turned 19), number 18 in the world, on his way to his first Grand Slam title and to the number 1 rank later that year. The match ended after five sets (6-7 6-3 6-4 3-6 6-4), as it did today. But with a different outcome and different players. Today, Andy Roddick (26) has been a confirmed top ten player for seven years and is currently 6th in the world whereas Lleyton Hewitt (28) is recovering from hip surgery with a current ranking of 56th. And this time the American won this thriller in the 1/4 of Wimbledon. There’s another difference though: this victory is less likely to lead Roddick to his second Grand Slam title (after US Open 2003) because Roger Federer (n°2) and Andy Murray (N°3) seem a bit too much for Larry Stefanki’s boy. But who knows ? In New York in 2001, Hewitt had to face Pete Sampras (n° 10 and with 13 Grand Slams in his pocket at the time), Marat Safin (n°3 and defending champion) and Yevgeni Kafelnikov (n°7) on his way to his Graal.
Let’s be honest, he deserves it. At the end of the day, he was probably the best player out there. He served amazingly well (43 aces including some on very important points), his forehand was at its best and his backhand and volley seemed better than usual. Hewitt was less brilliant than against Del Potro but he didn’t give up anything, as we knew he would. He started very badly with two double faults in his first service game, which helped his opponent to break him and cost him the first set. He was a break up in the second before almost dropping the set again. At 2-5 in the tiebreak, he pulled himself together to create one of the most epic moments of the match, eventually taking the tiebreak and second set 12-10. At 6-6 in the third set, the Australian seemed to lose his concentration, lost the tiebreak 7-1 and gave up his serve to find himself down 0-2 in the fourth set.
At this moment, A-Rod seemed on his way to a semifinal clash against Briton (and only hope of a whole people) Andy Murray. But Lleyton Hewitt is only beaten when the last ball is gone and there was no way he’d give Roddick an easy victory. He broke twice and took the set 6-4. Fifth sets are often great tennis moments, epic battles. This one was not different. There were break points on both sides but finally Roddick prevailed. A parameter might have been more important than others: serve. Hewitt’s serve was too weak (59% first serve, 9 double faults) for him to be able to secure his service games. He struggled to keep his serve during the whole match whereas Roddick could fire a big serve at any given moment.
If we were to draw conclusions so far in this tournament, we would say that the old generation is far from dead (also thanks to Tommy Haas (31 years old and former number 2 in the world) who upset world number 4 Novak Djokovic) and even on the contrary: Roddick has been improving his game, especially the strokes that were called weak not so long ago and Hewitt is still on his way up to the top 20 and maybe even better. It’s 2001 all over again !
Picture 1: http://photos.upi.com/slideshow/lbox/b32f56dd09ec88ac908fbac197b6f3b8/NYP2001090678.jpg
Picture 2: http://www.lleytonhewitt.biz/articleslleyton/images/uso2001/q14.jpg
Picture 3: http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Championship+Wimbledon+2009+Day+Nine+3MxULgNMTJtl.jpg
Picture 4: http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Championship+Wimbledon+2009+Day+Nine+gHV46vPauTHl.jpg
