Sunday 3rd May 2026
Blog Page 1025

One man in his time plays many parts

Earlier this term Worcester College announced that Sir Ian McKellen had been elected as Distinguished Visiting Fellow for an initial period of three years, set to visit twice a year for workshops and master classes with students. The appointment seems appropriate—the actor world famous for his Shakespearean roles will work alongside Provost Sir Jonathan Bate, who is himself a renowned Shakespearean Scholar, in a college steeped in Shakespearean tradition. Worcester’s annual garden production has traditionally been a Shakespeare play, with an acclaimed performance of Twelfth Night last year as part of Shakespeare’s 400th year anniversary celebrations. In anticipation of Sir Ian’s entrance onto the Oxford drama scene, it seems an appropriate time to reflect on some of his most important Shakespeare roles.

McKellen’s breakout performance came in 1968 in the title role of Richard II. The Prospect Theatre Company production—a low budget but well respected outfit—was directed by Richard Cottrell, whom McKellen had first met at Cambridge and whom he later described as the man “responsible for my becoming a professional actor.” The unbelievable success of the production led to a second tour at the Edinburgh Fringe in 1969, where it was performed alongside Marlowe’s Edward II, with McKellen again playing the title role.

Glowing review succeeded glowing review. Writing in The Sunday Times on 31 August 1969, Harold Hobson gave McKellen what must surely be one of the most pompous compliments in the history of theatre criticism: “The ineffable presence of God himself enters into Mr McKellen’s Richard.”

His Edward was more controversial. Director Tony Robertson, another Cambridge alumnus, took the courageous decision to stage Edward’s gruesome death, involving a red-hot poker thrust into an unspeakable place. The production’s unembarrassed grappling with the play’s homosexual themes provoked outcry but again reviews were excellent. On 19 September 1969 Time Magazine called it “sensuous, unpleasant, funny, guilt-obsessed, and intensely masculine.” After such a season, McKellen was firmly established as a rising star of British theatre.

Eight years later and McKellen was again benefiting from a relationship with another mentor from his student days, Trevor Nunn, now artistic director of the Royal Shakespeare Company. In 1976, Nunn directed McKellen alongside Judi Dench in Macbeth in what Michael Billington (Guardian theatre critic) has described as “a great production that reclaimed the play for the modern era.” Nunn’s concept was to focus on the play as a psychological drama—it ran uninterrupted for 135 minutes with a minimal set in the RSC’s black box theatre The Other Place, making for an intimate and claustrophobic atmosphere.

The success of the production led to a transfer, first to the Donmar Warehouse and then the Young Vic. McKellen once said that “Macbeth was a very lucky play for me.” Thirteen years later, McKellen and Nunn reunited in The Other Place for Othello, with McKellen playing the greatest villain of the English stage. The Jamaican-born American Opera star Willard White made his acting debut in the title role. Again, the black box theatre lent itself to claustrophobia, a domestic drama that spun out of control. Writing in the Times on 26 August 1989, Harry Eyres called it “a production of immense power and grandeur.” These roles are only a snapshot of McKellen’s phenomenal repertoire. If he chooses to get involved, it will be an exciting time for Oxford drama.

OUSU pronoun policy story revealed to be fake

11

The Sunday Times yesterday claimed that Oxford University Student Union (OUSU) had released a leaflet that “told” students to use ‘ze’ as a gender neutral pronoun in place of ‘he’ and ‘she’, however OUSU deny that any such leaflet was ever released.

OUSU assert that they would never insist on students using the term and that their policy has only ever been to encourage students to declare their chosen pronoun when they speak at OUSU meetings.

In a statement, OUSU said, “As far as we’re aware, the information which has been published is incorrect. We have not produced a leaflet implying that all students must use ‘ze’ pronouns to refer to others, or indeed to themselves.

“We would also like to clearly state that we would never tell anyone to use ‘ze’ pronouns instead of ‘he’ or ‘she’ if ‘he’ or ‘she’ is the pronoun someone wishes to use. That would be misgendering and would likely have the biggest impact on individuals (ie, some trans students) who may already be struggling to get people to use ‘he’ or ‘she’ for them. It would be totally counterproductive.”

Sunday Times Education Editor Sian Griffiths told Cherwell that the main source was an OUSU policy document published in June of 2016, which merely states that in OUSU meetings one should identify one’s preferred pronoun. The document makes no reference to ‘ze’ at any point.

The story was soon picked up by range of national and international media organisations including The Daily Mail, Russia Today, The Huffington Post, and The Times of India, who themselves provided no sources for the story.

The articles provoked a storm of angry comments bemoaning “special snowflake” students and “PC gone mad”.

One commentator on The Times article wrote of OUSU, “They are a bunch of teenage lefties whom no-one has ever taken seriously,  and that they should be given such publicity for their usual infantilism is bizarre.”

Another on the MailOnline declared, “The lunatics are taking over the asylum.”

This follows weeks of debate about the rise of so called ‘fake news’, stories that are either exaggerated or totally made up in order to attract greater clicks and a corresponding increase in advertising revenue.

Media commentators have expressed their worry that fake news will play into the prejudices of those on both sides of the political spectrum, contributing to polarisation and damaging rational dialogue.

The Sunday Times has been contacted for comment, as well as The Daily Mail, Russia Today, The Huffington Post, and The Times of India.

Giles Coren claims bad teaching ‘makes Oxford special’

1

Television presenter, food critic and writer Giles Coren has criticised an Oxford graduate suing his former college for his second-class degree.

Brasenose College alumnus Faiz Siddiqui is suing his alma mater for £1 million because he claims ‘apallingly bad’ teaching for his finals which he claims resulted in him achieving a 2.i  in modern history rather than the first he had hoped for.

He told the High Court that “negligent” teaching the History faculty during his Indian imperial history module prevented him from forging a successful career as an international commercial lawyer.

However, writing in the Times on Saturday, Giles Coren, who obtained a first in English at Keble college, has hit back at Mr Siddiqui, saying that ‘appalling bad’ teaching is what made his degree at Oxford ‘special’.

“One goes to Oxford precisely because the teaching is rubbish, nothing is compulsory, tutorials are optional after first week and nobody ever, ever talks about careers.

“If you want to be taught and pass exams and become a lawyer, don’t you go to a red brick? Or Cambridge? Oxford is for drinking and playing tennis and nicking books out of the Bod under your cricket jumper and lobbing them at punting tourists from Magdalen Bridge.

“If you ask me, Mr Siddiqui got the wrong end of the stick altogether with his tertiary education and is now just embarassing himself.”

Magdalen College JCR Vice President Amanda Turner disagreed, telling Cherwell, “the tutorial system in Oxford means students receive some of the best standards of teaching in the world, and there is a good feedback system for students to use if they aren’t happy with teaching standards. However, remarks like Giles Coren’s prevent students from speaking up if they aren’t satisfied with how they are being taught.”

OxFolk reviews: ‘Here We Go 1, 2, 3’

0

Here we go, 1, 2, 3, hold your hands out to me…” so opens this beautifully formed album ‘Here We Go 1, 2, 3’ by Heidi Talbot, a stunning vocalist whose gentle, sensuous voice really brings these songs to life. With a mixture of traditional and self-penned lyrics, Heidi takes the listener through an incredibly diverse range of styles, from folk to pop to American country, and through a broad range of stories and adventures, all set against the stunning music of John McCusker and friends.

Indeed, the sheer amount of musical accompaniment on these tracks reflects the breadth of this album — including cello, banjo, double bass, whistles and harmonium, the rich fullness of the music is expertly held together by the distinctive, soft vocals of Heidi, carrying the song onwards in perfect balance with the instruments.

The title isn’t just taken from the first song’s lyrics by chance: “it’s about that idea of jumping, whether it’s into new musical territories, new bands, a new studio, new label, new family — new everything, really”, Heidi says. Having written and lyrically shaped eight tracks on the album, it’s clear this is a personal project for Heidi: “it’s about taking a chance… it feels like — okay, get ready to jump!” And, as you listen to the songs on the album, it becomes obvious that Heidi’s journey is not only intensely personal but also universal, and something we can all engage with. Whether it be moving place and encountering new challenges as discussed in ‘Chelsea Piers’ (“When the smoke curls gather me / This city tale bewitches”), or the constancy of friendships in the story of ‘A Song for Rose’ (“Will you remember me / When church bells are ringing”), ‘Here We Go 1, 2, 3’ seems not just an accomplished musical creation but also an emotional journey.

However, Heidi Talbot’s playful, gorgeous tones lift this sometimes difficult subject matter up out of the everyday, giving it light and air and making it a real joy to listen to. It is, as Heidi herself describes, designed to express “the comforting, restorative powers of music”, with these various stories sending out an overall joyous, optimistic message of hope and rebirth.

Even the title track is inspired from an old gospel song, reflecting the album’s uplifting tone — despite the lyrics discussing death and moving on, Heidi manages to turn the story round into something beautiful and redemptive. This message of love and movement somehow sums up the album, and leaves the voices of Heidi’s songs echoing on long after the final track has ended. Just as Heidi encourages us to step out and enter new stages, I find myself wanting to return again and again to this beautiful album.

Were the Nazis on drugs?

0

The Nazi regime was permeated with drugs, from morphine to heroin, taken by almost everyone in the Reich, from soldiers to housewives. This shocking premise is more than enough enough to make Norman Ohler’s bestselling book Blitzed leap out at you, even without the fascinating biography of the author that sits beneath the image of a man with deep, piercing eyes on the back cover.

Norman has written, amongst other things, scripts for film and the world’s first hypertext novel, and has now plunged into archives in Germany and America to unearth new, ground-breaking sources that reveal a dark secret at the heart of Nazi Germany (if that phrase can be used with as little irony as possible).

Taking the reader swiftly through the murky history of narcotics production through to its use in the Third Reich, Ohler’s subject matter is as gripping and engaging as is his accessible writing style. Claiming that large sections of the German public, the army, high ranking Nazis and even the Fuhrer himself were all engaging in a ‘potentially lethal cocktail of stimulants’, and that these drugs were purposefully used to drive the Nazi war machine on to its utter defeat in April 1945, Ohler argues that the ‘wonder drug’ methamphetamine played a major and hitherto undiscussed part in the everyday lives of millions of Germans.

However, there is a twist in this story. This incredible tale of undiscovered drug use in (as every GCSE and A Level student knows) what must be the most studied portion of German history has been called out as being just that — incredible. Certain readers (here I must reference Richard Evans writing in the Guardian) have claimed that Ohler’s historical results are inconclusive and hyperbolised: that, for example, the 35 million tablets of Pervitin (a high-functioning drug inducing crazed energy) ordered for the Western Campaign of 1940 made little difference to the 2.5 million soldiers, as it levels out as 15 tablets per soldier for the entire period. In a similar vein, some onlookers have accused Ohler of going some way to morally absolving the German people, and even Hitler himself, of the actions of the Nazi state: if everyone, as Ohler claims, was almost constantly drugged then they cannot be held entirely responsible for their actions.

These historical and moral accusations are valid, given the book’s rather sensationalist tone and despite endorsements from historians such as Ian Kershaw — but I must say that this only serves to heighten the reader’s fascination with Ohler’s argument. His consummate skill as a novelist more than makes up for the possible inaccuracies in his work, as shown by the book’s bestseller status in Germany and its choice as Radio 2’s Book Club read. Regardless, and perhaps even partly because of the controversies surrounding ‘Blitzed’, this book is a gripping and exhilarating read. Whether it be the desire to read Ohler’s argument and make your own mind up on this fascinating topic, or even just to be swept away in this rip-roaring adventure that seems to have stepped off a big screen, I would recommend ‘Blitzed’ — it makes for intoxicating reading.

OxFolk reviews: ‘Cold Old Fire’

0

There aren’t many folk groups that can claim to have originated in an ‘experimental psychedelic folk punk duo’, but then again Lynched, the self-styled ‘Dublin miscreants’, are in fact no ordinary group. Having grown from the small duo of Ian and Daragh Lynch to a wider, five-piece group, they have absorbed influences from all types musical genres from techno to American country and blues, and have played with various mediums from movie soundtracks to film documentaries. Lynched’s debut album ‘Cold Old Fire’ is a culmination of their many adventures, and has led to the band being nominated for three BBC Radio 2 Folk Awards in 2016, a fantastic achievement that makes this album, in all senses of the word, a big noise on the folk scene.

Lynched’s wonderful sound, made up of arrangements of concertina, Russian accordion, fiddle, guitar and uilleann pipes, is combined with beautiful four-part harmonies that really help to bring their music to life — with the band’s strong Irish accents giving the lyrics a bright, sharp edge for all those Oxford students listening wistfully whilst stuck in central England! Like any good folk music, each song tells a different story and itself has an expansive history, giving new layers of meaning to the lyrics. The expansive sleeve notes in ‘Cold Old Fire’ detail each track’s provenance, making the listening of this album like a journey through history — ‘Daffodil Mulligan’ comes from the variety halls of 20th century Dublin, whilst ‘The Tri-Coloured House’ was recorded from Mary, a settled Traveller from Co. Leitrim in 1973. Each track explores a different aspect of life, be that the mundane or the extraordinary, such as the nonsense lyrics of ‘Father had a Knife’ (“The longer we go on / The merrier we will be / We do belong to a boozin’ family”). The music seems almost infectious, so that by the end of each song the listener finds themselves humming or singing along.

The creativity and sheer joy with which this these tunes are expressed, and the intimacy they manage to create between the music and the listener, is summed up in the tune ‘Lullaby’, written by the group themselves. This haunting, beguiling melody is, they describe, designed to comfort us all in the “overbearing and lonely experiences” we all inevitably encounter in our lives. This track, and indeed the entire album, is an enchanting creation. It seems Lynched’s ‘Cold Old Fire’ is in fact still burning strong and bright.

Oxford University start-up fund becomes largest in the UK

0

Oxford Sciences Innovation (OSI) is now the largest private university research fund in the UK after receiving a cash injection of £230 million.

The extra capital, which came mainly from Asia’s leading technology companies and European industrialists, expanded the firm’s budget to £580 million.

Other contributors include Invesco Asset Management Limited, IP Group plc, Lansdowne Partners (UK) LLP, Oxford University Endowment Management, the Wellcome Trust and Woodford Investment Management Limited.

OSI is a firm that provides capital and scaling expertise to businesses driven by intellectual property developed at the University of Oxford. Last year it backed a variety of science and technology start-ups including Oxford Flow, Oxford Nanoimaging, and Vaccitech.

The company went back to the market to raise funds having supported 20 start-ups over the last year, double its annual target.

Peter Davies, the chairperson of Oxford Sciences Innovation, said, “Raising this capital reflects our confidence in the breadth and quality of opportunity available to investors to help the University of Oxford develop a world-class commercial ecosystem around its unmatched intellectual capital and heritage.

“We are also very excited to be working with new shareholders from across the world, notably from Asia and continental Europe, and grateful to our original supporters, the 10 largest of which have participated in this funding round.”

Professor Louise Richardson, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford, said, “We have long operated in a global marketplace, for students, academics and research funding, and know that we have to become altogether more creative in generating new sources of revenue.

“This is an extraordinary global vote of confidence in the quality and potential of the research conducted at Oxford. This initiative will bring benefits to the University, to the researchers, to the investors, and to society at large.”

“We are a cosmopolitan community of students and scholars. We welcomed our first international student in the 12th century, so it is part of our DNA. It should be no surprise, therefore, that we have attracted investment from all over the world.”

However she also described “the disappointing investment by British industry in research and development” to BBC Business.

Although the UK plays host to five of the world’s top ten medical research institutions, investment by British industry in research is below the EU Average. Philip Hammond’s recent Autumn Statement pledged an extra £2 billion a year for UK research and development by 2020.

Prepare for more political despair in 2017

0

There are a great number of people, around the world, who will breathe a sigh of relief after Big Ben strikes midnight on 31 December. They are right to be relieved that this long, long year is finally over.

The political landscape has transformed during 2016. It started with the victory of Rodrigo Duterte in early May—a man who has attacked Barack Obama in such explicit terms that it cannot be repeated in this article, and who has launched a drug war in the Philippines that has already killed more than 2500 people. Then, only a month later, came Brexit and the painful campaign and aftermath, which has almost torn the country, and perhaps the wider European political community, apart. After that, came the Tory leadership campaign and the failed Labour coup—events that showed the depths and depravity of the modern British political system. Oh, and before we forget, then came Trump. 2016 has been the year when we had to depend on a sweet-maker to remind us that those who were facing the worst conditions in order to find a better life for themselves were humans and not inanimate objects.

But, and I don’t want to be the bearer of doom here, 2017 may continue in this precedence. Liberals, the world over, may have to face the reality that political decisions will continue to go against us in the immediate, and perhaps long term, future. In 2017 we not only have the inauguration of Trump but we also have an election in France, an election in Germany, a possible election in Italy, and the proposed date for the triggering of article 50. So, in other words, Trump will be given the nuclear codes, the UK will start the process of leaving one of the greatest political projects ever imagined, and the far right will surely continue its rise in the other European nations.

Now, it is true that the French and German elections may not produce the surprise results that we have seen over the last year. It has been accepted, for a long time, that Hollande will not win a second term and he has now confirmed this, by stating that he would not even stand for another term. Similarly, it is thought that Merkel will probably hold onto power and continue her role as the politician at the centre of Europe.

We may be completely wrong about this, as we all have been throughout the past year. But, even if we are not wrong, both elections will still show the continued influence of the populist right over world politics. Marie Le Pen, from the Front National, is sure to do well in the French election and will, most likely, make it through to the final round of the count. Indeed, if this does happen, the only alternative is a conservative candidate—François Fillon—who has consistently voted against civil rights for the LGBTQIA+ community and has taken many illiberal stances on the economy and foreign policy. So, not ideal for the liberal community but better than the prospect of a Le Pen presidency. Similarly, the AfD is surely going to have an electoral improvement in the German election and—although we may end up in the safe hands of the conservative, yet favourable, Merkel—this would be a clear sign that the right is surging across Europe.

I’m sorry to further add to the misery, but we may also see new developments in Italy after the recent referendum result. The populist and Eurosceptic Five Star Movement played an integral part in the winning side of the referendum, and many see this as a move towards a possible in/out referendum on Italy’s membership of the European Union. Results in all of these elections could lead to Europe becoming even weaker in the upcoming year.

Finally, we have the triggering of Article 50, which is scheduled for March 2017. So far the signs are not looking good for liberals, if that ever was a possibility. Theresa May is continuing to make mysterious, yet meaningless, statements about the nature of Brexit. This week it was the nationalistic, or patriotic—depending upon which political tradition you come from—‘red, white and blue‘ Brexit. The wilful blindness of many prominent ‘leave’ politicians, who see only good consequences from the referendum, continues. The Labour Party’s opposition is as shambolic as ever, and there seems to be no check on Theresa May’s control of Brexit. This will be a running theme for the next year and, when it is all finally over, we will have actually left the EU so there will be little chance for celebration.

Basically, liberals all over the world should be worried. Yes, there have been some positives this year, in political terms. The victories of Sadiq Khan, Sarah Olney and the recent Austrian result have brought long overdue calm into the hearts of liberals. But, these moments of relief have been few and far between. We all need to get used to the fact that the future is not going to work for the left or for liberals. We need to get used to being excited by elections where the far right politician comes second, to even the most moderate candidate. We are going to have to get used to celebrating the small victories, here and there, because the trend will almost certainly be against the left.

2017 will continue to be a year of discord, populist conservative victories and general despair. My advice to the left is to get used to this and get ready to work out our strategy, so that 2017 can be the last year where we are constantly in mourning for lost principles of morality and democracy. Happy New Year and good luck to everyone—we may need it.

Review: Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life

0

Improbability invades the lives of the Gilmore Girls, the mother-daughter duo who captivate in the eponymous TV show. Their fairytale-like home town, Stars Hollow, is full of larger-than-life characters like Kirk, who writes short, awful horror movies involving a lot of dancing (and later owns a pet pig). In Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life, it’s no different: in one sequence Rory and her friends somehow manage to break into Stars Hollow’s Grocery Store, play golf on the roof and take over an entire hotel.

Yet improbability was always there, as some critics seem to have forgotten. Stars Hollow itself is a bubble where the outside world doesn’t seem to matter. Yet what makes me uncomfortable about Gilmore Girls: A Year in Life—especially now—is how it refuses to deal with the very real social issues that encroach upon Stars Hollow.

Whereas, in the original series, Rory and Lorelai struggled financially and were divided from the affluence of their family, in Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life, Rory is more privileged then I ever imagined she would be, and is utterly oblivious to how lucky she is. At points, her estrangement from her former world seems unrealistic. In Gilmore Girls, Rory, still at university, discussed the future of journalism as a lauded critic might do, yet in Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life, she can’t even answer the simple interview question ‘what would you like to write about?’. It’s not the über-prepared, Christiane Amanpour-wannabe sixteen year old we knew and loved.

Similarly, the way she treats those around her seems miles away from how she once acted. I was never very interested in Rory’s relationships. Instead, what compelled me was the ambitious, intelligent girl who worked hard and was grateful for the opportunities she had been given. Yet the things I didn’t like about her relationships in the original series—such as her refusal to see Logan’s faults—emerge in full force in Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life. In the original series, when Rory sleeps with her now-married ex, she regrets it hugely. However, in this series, Rory refuses to even acknowledge the existence of Logan’s fiancée. Even the relationship with her mother seems affected by this selfish streak.

Paradoxically, the key to the new episodes lies in the flaws of its heroine. In the original, Rory was too perfect. In Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life, the writers try to remedy this, aiming to show how loss can fracture even this seemingly-perfect world. This is handled well with the character of Lorelai, whose response to the death of her father is to ‘go wild’, a part of the narrative which I loved and completely believed. Yet in Rory’s case, as the real invades the unreal, we see only too clearly how Rory has changed. Rory has always had an idealistic existence and—maybe because of its time—this worked on Gilmore Girls the original. In Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life, Rory still leads a charmed life. But she doesn’t realise it—and this doesn’t work.

My theory (spoiler’s ahead)—and it’s only one of many—is that Rory, at the end of the episodes, is pregnant with Logan’s baby. Yet she has already said goodbye to Logan and to that part of her life. She will have to learn to live as a more responsible, mature adult, not the sixteen year old she seems stuck as. The Fall episode of Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life was for me so much more satisfying—and true to the original—than all the rest combined, though of course moments of nostalgic joy cropped up when seeing the indefatigable Paris Geller, Emily Gilmore and the relationship between Lorelai and Luke. My favourite scene in all the four episodes is when Rory sits down to write ‘Gilmore Girls’, a memoir about growing up with her mother, grandparents and best friend Lane in Stars Hollow. It seems as if something closer to the original is reached here, something purer, something nobler.

Live review: Frank Turner at Oxford’s New Theatre

0

Writing about music is an inherently frustrating activity—writing about live music perhaps even more so. But Frank Turner certainly makes a go of it: as well as innumerable songs about contentment with life and perseverance in the face of adversity, several songs of his take on the form of meta-commentary on the music itself. That is, something as simple as rock ‘n’ roll trying to save us all.

Despite being peppered with references to Shakespeare, T. S. Eliot, W. H. Auden and enough other literary titans to keep an Oxford audience happy, Frank’s music has an underlying simplicity. The themes are earthy and familiar: falling in love, falling out of love, living, dying and blacking in and out in a strange flat in East London.

Like much of the music I know, I was introduced to Frank Turner by my elder siblings playing his songs during car journeys. The first song of his I remember hearing is ‘Four Simple Words’. Breaking the musical fourth wall, its first lines evoke the solitary experience of listening to his music on a portable stereo at the back of a bus, and then of singing along to the very same song in a concert hall. This is one wonder that all concerts have in common: fans of a musician are, in a sense, reunited, able to voice their appreciation in unison for rock and roll saving us all. This warm, toasty feeling is what all the greatest concerts surely embody. And it undeniably was there.

The first opening act, Esme Patterson, offered an interesting excerpt from a concept album of hers responding to famous songs addressed to women, while Felix and the Family turned up the volume for their half-hour and regularly raised the spectre of Frank to keep the audience interested. Nevertheless, this is hardly a fault. All things considered, the opening acts were solid—considering opening bands are often written off as only existing to showcase the relative strength of the main act. Needless to say, when Frank Turner & the Sleeping Souls appeared, they hardly put a foot wrong in their two hours’ traffic upon the stage.

Unfortunately, great concerts can be let down by their venues—it’s difficult to rock out surrounded by seats, though we gave it our best shot. The most interesting venue-related moment came when Frank insisted that two randomly picked members of the audience charge over the chairs to the mixer, kiss the lighting technician on the cheek and return to the stage on the other side while he performed ‘If Ever I Stray’. The security guards were clearly not particularly impressed, but much fun was had (despite the wrong team winning the race).

Several songs in, Frank noted that the vibe wasn’t quite what he was after. It was, he said, more like a “sixth form disco” than a rock concert. The crowd, admittedly, wasn’t the best – nor was it the worst of any concert I’ve attended (that award goes to the audience of a concert in London four years ago who almost turned into a drunken, angry mob by the final song). By the end, the “sixth form disco” had receded from view and most of us had woken up to our surroundings, making for a far more enjoyable and lively musical experience.

Almost obligatory was a mention from Frank of what a frankly appalling year 2016 has been—for humanity, for decency, for peace and security and for hopes of a prosperous future. Frank’s answer was not necessarily one of optimism; it was essentially one of narrower horizons, of smaller desires and ambitions, of contentment with what is in the moment, of moments of hedonism and aestheticism. Or, to put it for at least one evening into four simpler words: rock, roll and happiness.