Monday 30th June 2025
Blog Page 1037

‘You’ve not read this article?’

0

You have to read The Catcher in the Rye before you turn 18. To Kill a Mockingbird is essential reading for all GCSE students. If you’re tanning by a pool in the South of France then it really has to be Fifty Shades of Grey, or, a few years ago, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. What do you mean you’ve never read Jane Eyre – do you even like books? If you’re an avid reader, it can often feel like you’re drowning under a series of literary rules, the books you absolutely have to read, no matter what.

Everyone has an opinion on the essentials and, it seems, everyone has a set of standards by which they judge others. My yardstick is The Great Gatsby. Whenever anyone asks me about books, it’s the one I instantly start talking about. Partly it’s because it’s the one I remember the most quotes from, so when I talk about it everyone thinks I know what I’m talking about, partly it’s because it really is my favourite book, and partly I just like talking about it.

The issue is that when someone tells me they’ve not read it, to my shame I recoil in hor- ror, and I don’t know why. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying people shouldn’t recommend books. The best thing about being an avid reader is the community spirit, the sense of being part of a group of people trying desperately to navigate the excessively large amount of available content by any means necessary. It’s the literary snobbery that gets me. There seems to be some idea, permeating through society, that there are certain books you have to read in order to say you enjoy reading with your head held high.

This wouldn’t be an issue if there was an actual list, a tangible body of texts that we can work through, with an end-point. Except there’s not. It’s an entirely subjective thing and although a teacher might judge you for not reading the complete works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, your friends could be equally disgusted by the fact that you’ve never picked up a John Green book. It feels to me sometimes like I should just collapse under the sheer weight of it all, give up and read only what I want to.

Surely, we should just surrender to our own subjectivity. If you can’t read it all, you may as well dig tunnels that take you to places you want to visit. If you like Romance then naturally you’re going to steer towards Austen, Gaskell and Green. If you enjoy violence and intrigue, then these would point blank be the worst authors you could possibly read! I don’t believe that one book is inherently more valuable than another, or at least I certainly don’t think we get to choose that. It’s important that we engage with books on our own terms so that we get the most enjoyment out of them.

The classics and high literature are, obviously, wonderful but they’re far from the only options. It’s not about ticking items off a list or proving yourself by reading the hefty tomes of Hugo and Tolstoy. It’s not about reading One Hundred Years of Solitude in the original Spanish because “you miss so much in the translation.” No, it’s about having fun. It’s about reading the things you enjoy, the things you can curl up at night with and have long, exciting conversations about. It’s about finding something that speaks to you. That is, unless you choose to study English Literature for a degree, in which case the very joy of reading is crushed by a titanic list of books you never wanted to read and probably never will again.

Christ Church rejects Fairtrade

0

Christ Church JCR this week discussed a motion to amend a Standing Order in an attempt to require the Food Rep to support Fair Trade. To amend a Standing Order, there must be a two-thirds majority. The motion did not pass, with 11 votes for, 16 abstaining and 9 against.

The discussion ‘Make the JCR Fairtrade compliant’ was held on Sunday at Christ Church JCR’s first general meeting of Trinity term. In order for Christ Church to retain their Fair Trade status, the college had asked the JCR committee to encourage Fairtrade in the JCR.

According to the General Meeting Agenda issued before the meeting, this would involve putting on Fairtrade events such as Welfare Teas, the putting up of Fairtrade posters as well as coming up with some new ideas. The agenda also noted, ‘Previous Food Reps personally have not supported the idea of Fairtrade, and have therefore done little to help College in this aim.’

The JCR made their stance clear in wishing to show their support for College in its aim to retain Fairtrade Status. The JCR offered to resolve the Standing Order referring to the duties of the Food Rep, proposing the modification, “Support the Steward’s position on Fairtrade and promote such a position in the JCR.”

The motion, which failed to pass, comes after Michaelmas term’s JCR acceptance of Meat-Free Mondays.

Fifth-year Engineer graduate student Diego Granziol told Cherwell, “I’d say it’s pretty typical of those in a position of privilege not to consider the human and environmental cost inherent in the supply chain.”

It is thought that the reason the motion did not pass was because the JCR was unsure of the benefit that Fairtrade actually generates. Some students felt that they would prefer to give the money they would have spent on Fairtrade to a more efficient charity. Christ Church JCR and the Food Rep were approached by Cherwell but declined to comment.

University rejects petition to revoke Rhodes scholarship

1

A petition to revoke Ntokozo Qwabe’s scholarship or to “initiate disciplinary action” has been rejected by the University after collecting over 41,000 signatures. The petition was started after a controversial Facebook post about a comment made to a waitress in a South African cafe.

The petition was less than 10,000 signatures away from its set goal of 50,000. At that number, the petition would have been presented to Oxford Vice-Chancellor Professor Louise Richardson. Nonetheless, it has continued to attract attention even after its rejection.

In a statement officially rejecting the petition, a spokesperson for the University said, “Our duty of care to all members of the University means we do not discuss individuals.

“Oxford is a place where non-violent speech, however objectionable, can be expressed and challenged. Our students may voice opinions which others believe to be misguided or which they find offensive. “

They have a right to do this, but in exercising it we expect them to respect other people and the law,” the spokesperson added. The Rhodes Trust and other concerned institutions have equally stressed the importance of student confidentiality in this case.

London-based South African Jan Hendrik Ferreira, the launcher of the petition, wrote in its online description, “Mr Ntokozo Qwabe and friend violated a person’s dignity, publicly degraded and humiliated her, and created a highly offensive situation.

“Mr Ntokozo Qwabe has since taken great pleasure in narcissistically boasting over her reaction across social media.”

The petition description continues, “Mr Ntokozo Qwabe clearly does not uphold the values expected of an institution such as Oxford University and his actions have ultimately brought your educational establishment’s image into disrepute.”

“I will continue to ask you to rally to empower you to rally to empower and recognise the black nation.”
Zibu MaSotobe

Countering this initiative, Zibu MaSotobe started a petition to stop the revocation from happening. This was based on the academic merits of Law student Qwabe, stating that his action had been a move to stand up for the black Africans who “experience the rejection felt by that young white woman” as an inherent part of their daily life.

However, this petition was closed after it had rapidly reached 1,169 signatures. Zibu MaSotobe explained,“whiteness has never been shaken by a black petition. I fell into the trap of treating whiteness as a thing that one can use reason against. “I will continue to ask you to rally behind the movement to empower and recognise the black nation.”

RMF co-founder Ntokozo Qwabe’s actions in a Cape Town cafe called Obz have sparked a series of strong reactions, both in support of the activist and of the waitress who was involved.

The words “We will give tip when you return the land” were written by Rhodes Must Fall activist Wandile Dlamini in lieu of a tip for the white waitress who had served them, and triggered the latter’s tears. In a Facebook post for which, along with earlier comments of the same nature, he allegedly received a temporary ban from the social media, Qwabe subsequently dubbed these “typical white tears”, saying that something wonderfully “black” had taken place in the cafe. “We are here, and we want the sto-
len land back,” the activist stated. “No white person will be out here living their best life while we are out here being a landless and dispossessed black mass.”

A fundraising campaign named “Tip Ashleigh Schultz” was set to compensate for what was described by its online launcher Ernst Shea-Kruger as racism towards the 24-year-old waitress, raising $6,500 in five days. Cabanac, the author of a similar campaign told Cherwell, “The market and decency ensured that bigotry of this nature does not go unpunished.” The supporters of both initiatives evoked Schultz’ mother struggling with cancer as well as the assumption that the young woman was on minimum wage to demonstrate that the two RMF activists’ note had been unfairly aggressive. Schultz has expressed her gratitude on Facebook.

The question of whether a black waitress in the same situation would have received the same support from international media was raised by multiple users.

Although members of Rhodes Must Fall are divided over the matter, controversial ‘Rhodes Must Not Fall’ founder Jacob Williams told Cherwell, “It’s time we valued individuals, not just politicised identities.”

Similarly, Roman Cabanac, the host of South African podcast “The Renegade Report”, has publicly condemned Qwabe and told Cherwell, “The fact that he publicly gloated about humiliating a woman based on her race shows a malicious and racial prejudice.”

Joining Flemming in this statement, Brian Wong, a first year PPE student at Pembroke, said “Intersectional egalitarianism is about recognising that one can be oppressed in more than one way – due to their sex, race, gender, and such.

“I do not think Qwabe’s actions were intersectional; I think he acted unacceptably. I think the media probably also overreacted.”

Ntokozo Qwabe himself refused to answer Cherwell’s request for comment, stating only, “Maybe we will engage when indigenous South Afrikans have their stolen land and wealth back from white people.”

Colin Donnelly contributed reporting

Brasenose JCR wants honorary membership for Vardy

0

Brasenose JCR will debate a motion granting Leicester City footballer Jamie Vardy honorary membership and encouraging him to run for Ball President.

The motion, to be debated at a general meeting on Sunday, states, “Jamie is the man who climbed the ladder from non-league football to the Premier League, is now currently the league’s top scorer and on current form is the most dangerous player around. His pace gives defenders nightmares and he is pulling goals and assists out of his backside.”

It further notes that “Vardy has scored more Premier League goals this season than Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi combined.”

The motion follows Leicester’s clinching of the 2015/16 Premier League title last Monday, after rivals Tottenham drew at Chelsea.

Unsurprisingly, many support the motion, with one second year classicist at Brasenose telling Cherwell, “I think that the real clincher in my decision was the fact that Jamie Vardy really does love to throw a party. He would make a great Ball President.”

OUSU teaching awards for outstanding faculty members

0

OUSU’s 2016 Teaching Awards ceremony was this week, bestowing awards on teachers, support staff, lecturers and other faculty members.

The four traditional categories, “Best Support Staff”, “Most acclaimed Lecturer”, “Outstanding Tutor“ and “Outstanding Supervisor”, remained while two new categories, “Outstanding Pastoral Support” and “Special Recognition Award”, were added.

Panels of students and OUSU Sabbatical Officers narrowed the record 658 nominations down to 94 finalists, from whom the winners were chosen.

In her opening remarks, Vice-Chancellor Professor Louise Richardson said the aim of the teaching awards was to commemorate the contributions by the “unsung heroes” of the university. “Nowadays there is much pressure on academics to publish. There is less recognition of teaching [excellence],” she said.

She then stated that teaching, while undoubtedly the fundamental cornerstone of the very nature of an educational institution, should be weighed and viewed equally with the ability of staff to care for students, “You can train people to teach, but you cannot teach people to care.”

The masters of ceremonies, both of whom were OUSU Sabbatical officers, introduced the candidates with anecdotes about their work and life in the university.

Notably, the announcement of Dr. Kevin Hilliard as Most Acclaimed Lecturer in Humanities drew a loud response, as he incorporates “hand puppets” into lectures. As one of the winners of the Outstanding Pastoral Support award, Dr. Antony Smith had a big role in the life of classicist James Sinclair, who lost his father two years ago.

“[Dr] Antony [Smith] was a constant source of support” Magdalen classicist James Sinclair said. “We spoke frequently on the phone; he made arrangements for me with the Proctors so that I could grieve with my family and attend my father’s funeral, before returning halfway through term. I’d often break down in tears at tutorials, and found it a struggle to work; Antony was hugely understanding and flexible in adjusting for this.

“We’d meet for tea and coffee, and he would listen and offer words of consolation. It’s really quite heroic, how much he did for me, especially for a tutor- I’d say he’s probably the main reason I’m still at Oxford, doing what I love.”

Special awards were presented to Anne Ford, founder of the two-decade old Peer Support Program, and also to the Pro-Vice-Chancellor Professor Sally Mapstone.

Profile: Clarence Seedorf

0

Clarence Seedorf has an exceptionally firm handshake. His handshake is commanding. It has gravitas. Seedorf doesn’t speak loudly – but his handshake does.

And so he uses it: at the drinks before his Oxford Union talk, Seedorf walked down a split aisle of invitees and shook each of our hands as he passed. Slowly, measuredly, leaving no one out.

There at the drinks, Seedorf fielded question after question about football, like what he thought of Leicester City winning the Premier League and whether he reckoned they could do well in the Champions League next season. His football experience was the audience’s interest of course – as you might expect from a group gathered to see a four-time Champions League winner who had played for Ajax, Real Madrid, Inter and Milan.

But Seedorf himself had not come to the Oxford Union to talk football, as I learnt when I met up with him after his talk to ask a few questions. Instead, as far as I could tell, his hope was to impart wisdom – to help guide the next generation of leaders in achieving their dreams and aspirations.

And as he explained, he thought there is power in the fame of the footballer. The mass recognition afforded him, in small villages and as far away as China he said, means that he has a platform – one which he intended to use.

Not that he is the type to shout from it, because Clarence Seedorf is not a man, I imagine, who likes to shout. Rather, he speaks softly, with restraint. So softly that silence descends upon a room when he talks – a silence that you feel he likes to be in control of.

Indeed, I got the impression that, insofar as he is able to, Seedorf takes pride in his ability to control his conduct, and hence the impression he gives. For instance, he is an immaculate dresser. His Union outfit was simple: a dark, well-tailored suit and green tie. But its simplicity belied its elegance; I couldn’t replicate the dimple in that tie if you gave me all day to try.

But, dear reader, enough from me – you want to read Seedorf’s thoughts, his words. So, how, you ask, does Seedorf think one can realise success in one’s life goals?

“Well,” he told me, “I think everybody has talent in general.” All it takes is that you “recognise your talent, work hard in a disciplined way, and enjoy the journey.” Disciplined hard work? I thought, Why, he almost sounds American!

“Set goals,” Seedorf added. “That’s very important.  Really set goals, goals that are reachable, but also that are ambitious.” Ah, but don’t we try. What else would you call the perennial disasters that are New Year’s Resolutions? All around the world, we set goals, making promises to ourselves to be better people and more successful ones. Then comes February (generously speaking) and trust me: if you’ve got a single resolution still intact, you’re way ahead of the great majority of us.

Finally, Seedorf says, “Trust in the right people around you.” I must say, I liked the duality of his suggestion. The trick is not to trust those in your life; it is to trust the right friends and family, which is a piece of advice I find eminently more reasonable than that platitudinous encouragement to have blind faith in others.

So, there we have it. The Clarence Seedorf Recipe for Success. But Seedorf’s views on how to succeed are just one facet of his worldview, and cannot be taken in isolation. So who’s ready for some spitfire Seedorf? I know I am.

On leadership:
“When things are rolling, things are good, it is not so important that leadership is present. But the moment there’s difficulty, you need to step up and empower. If you have the strength and the personality.”

On getting a master’s degree in business:
“I always felt I was an entrepreneur – I wanted to have more knowledge, that was my main drive. I also had huge interest in psychology, just for my personal development. I can probably teach some lessons already – I mean, I went in depth with that course, which was for a period of almost seven years. A lot of repetition.”

On Nelson Mandela:
“I mean, what to say. Nelson Mandela has had a huge impact on my life, on who I am today, on what I want to achieve. His message of peace, education and the power of forgiveness.”

On forgiveness:
“27 years of jail, then come out and forgive the person who put you in there. [If Mandela could do that], then we can forgive a lot of people, things that we live daily. But ultimately, to forgive, you do it for yourself, to have peace for yourself. It takes courage and strength, but to be capable of forgiving others and your self, that’s fantastic.”

On everything:
“Well, everything is a bit of circumstances and I think also destiny.”

And on everything else:
“The most important thing is definitely to dream, dream big, dream about anything – and believe in yourself. Show courage and get out of your comfort zone. Stay out of your comfort zone as much as possible. That way, you’ll have new adventures. New challenges, too. But there is great satisfaction, especially when you achieve your dreams. I’ve lived that.”

Seedorf and I parted with a handshake, with me off to finish up an essay and him… off to do whatever it is famous footballers do, I guess. On my walk back to Balliol from the Union, I found myself mulling over my impression of him, and his comments. Essentially, I think, Seedorf has life figured out, at least as far as he is concerned. In other words, he is the owner of a quiet confidence in both himself and his beliefs – not an entirely shocking trait when found in someone who had been at the very pinnacle of his profession.

Confidence is a personality characteristic. It is also a tool, one that is wielded subconsciously but to great effect. In Seedorf, I suspect, confidence allows him to be self-assured in his actions in a way that most of us are not. Discipline is more easily managed when one trusts oneself to be disciplined, in the same way that espousing one’s views is more quickly done by one who is certain of the rectitude thereof.

Anyway. Seedorf had one last piece of cosmic wisdom, which I suppose I would be amiss not to convey: “Speak to the universe and the universe will provide.”

Labour see gains in Oxford City Council elections

0

Exceeding most expectations, the Labour Party saw significant success in Thursday’s Oxford City Council elections.

Oxford Mail reported Friday that Labour now control 35 out of 48 seats in the city council, while the Conservative Party continues to have no council representatives. Of the 24 seats contested in Thursday’s election, Labour won 18 and the Liberal Democrats won four. The Greens also held one of their seats, as did independent candidate Mike Haines.

The results mark a gain for Labour, who picked up two seats in Holywell and Iffley Fields from the Green Party. In Holywell, Oxford student Dan Iley-Williamson received 451 votes, beating his closest competitor, Andy McKay of the Liberal Democrats, by a margin of 168.

But fellow Oxonians Alex Curtis, who ran as a Conservative, and Harry Samuels, the Liberal Democrats candidate, were not as fortunate, both losing in Carfax to Labour Party candidate Alex Hollingsworth.

Deputy Leader of the Council and of the Labour Group Ed Turner, who won reelection in Rose Hill and Iffley, said in a statement that the election results were “confirmation that we are fantastic, diverse, liberal city and people love living here and helping to make it a fairer and more equal place.”

But the Conservatives had success in other parts of Oxfordshire, winning 12 seats in West Oxfordshire to Labour’s three and the Liberal Democrats’ two. Early results from Cherwell District Council also show victories for at least three Conservative candidates.

When asked about the disappointing results in the city of Oxford itself, Curtis told Cherwell, “Labour has strengthened its stranglehold on Oxford City Council. This means the need for opposition has become greater than ever. None of the 24 Conservative candidates was elected this year across Oxford, as the Labour Party machine outplayed us on this occasion. However, we will continue our fight as a party for better government in this city moving into next year’s county council elections and the 2018 city council elections.”

The Oxford turnout rate was 38 per cent for the city council elections.

Rewind

0

The King James Version was first published this week, in 1611. It’s possibly the most famous translation of any text into any language, one of those Shakespeare-like members of the canon that have shaped so many different registers of global English so much that occasionally you won’t even notice it.

Translation is sometimes understood as being a fight between ‘literal’ meaning and ‘spirit’, and when the text in question is the central scripture of what has become the world’s biggest religion, there’s special pressure on that division. Religion is something you feel, at its heart is spiritual, religious, devotional experience. How do a bunch of letters on paper thin enough to smoke with connect you to that?

The King James Version is deeply associated with Protestantism, of course, which as a denomination – here’s another dichotomy – was once summed up in a little two part motto, ‘fi de et literis’, ‘by faith and by scripture’. You could argue that you can’t have spirit without letter or faith without scripture or vice versa in each of those. The holy book of the Sikhs, for example, is made up entirely of hymns sung in sincere, totally dedicated adoration of the divine highest ideal. Faith and language and literature and soul are totally inextricable.

Tucked away in the middle of the Old Testament is possibly the most beautiful part of the KJV, the Song of Solomon. Any distinction between divine love and human romantic, erotic love is tossed aside in this glorious, gloriously lyrical poem. But this isn’t uncommon – Dante’s Vita Nova takes his love for Beatrice and transforms it into something divine, Edward Fitzgerald’s famous translation of the Rubaiyat is either an ode to wine and love or an intensely emotional hymn to God; I’ve always felt that it is both.

Another dichotomy we adore is the one between East and West, and similar to that the one between the Abrahamic and non-Abhramic religions. But Gandhi, who was to become profoundly religious in his Hinduism, found in the Gospels a message of compassion that led him to beautiful universal understandings, of ahimsa (non-violence and loving-kindness) and of yajna (service to the world). The figure of Christ was an inspiration for his strict Vedic lifestyle.

A text like the King James Version has a network of links and contradictions like an infinite paradoxical spider’s web; even if only for that, 400 or so years since its publication it’s no less exciting at all.

 

Review: The Weir

0
There is a certain type of absolute silence that only comes with good storytelling – it is the silence of held breath, of absolute concentration, a silence so intense and focused you forget it’s even there – until the storyteller snaps his fingers, everyone finally relaxes, and you realise that the entire room had for those few minutes been brought together by one voice. This silence was achieved brilliantly by the Pilch’s new play, The Weir, on its opening night- as character after character stood to share their tales, the audience were drawn in to a storytelling session of ghosts and hauntings that stayed with me long after I’d left the theatre.
The Weir, set in a backwater Irish pub, is run in one continuous scene, with pub chat and banter unfolding in real time – meaning the audience is drawn into their jokes, their petty feuds, and their discussions. Although nothing excessively dramatic happens over the course of the play – as my neighbour grumbled, “it just doesn’t go anywhere!” – I feel this is the beauty of The Weir. It’s simply a group of old friends in a bar, reminiscing and telling ghost stories. And this makes every minute detail a focused point of drama – the rift that has developed between Finbar (Stas Butler) and the others creates a between-the-lines tension that is brilliantly brought out by the actors. The quietly stoic, reserved atmosphere of Jim (Leo Danczak) balances out the loud and boisterous nature of Brendan (Aaron Skates) and the more down-to-earth nature of the barman Jack (Christian Amos, who did a fantastic job of grounding the play. This feeling of genuine involvement put forward by the actors makes every emotion feel more intense: the ghost stories are more unnerving and spooky, the jokes and the laughs (of which there are plenty) are funnier: in short, the audience are invited to relax with the actors, to the extent that they can bring their own booze to the play, and we feel like we are sitting in the pub with them.
There are a few problems with The Weir, if I had to nit-pick and search for them – the Irish accents sometimes wavered slightly, though I don’t know if I could keep one up for that long, and the immediate dimming of the lighting precluding every story made its arrival rather obvious and overly accentuated. But this did not detract from the overall atmosphere: the director Chris Page and producer Claudia Graham have created a wonderful pub setting that at once gives a convincing rural aesthetic and draws the characters closer together. The soft Dublin accent of Valerie (played by Annie Hayter) was somewhat hard to hear on the back row, though that only made you listen all the more intently. The minor flaws do not detract from the overall success of The Weir- at once an intimate and absorbing play, it sweeps you into a rural, Irish world of folk tales, friends, feuds and family secrets. It is well worth a visit – be sure to bring some alcohol, sit back and be swept away to their stories.
The Weir is on at the Michael Pilch Studio, 4 – 7th May at 7.30pm.

A dichotomy as old as time

0

Rabindranath Tagore’s timeless novel The Home and the World is perhaps the most underrated work in Indian literature. Published in 1916 in the febrile political climate of the late Edwardian Raj, it is the tale of dichotomies – the clash between West and East, reason and idealism, violence and pacifism. It’s one of those novels publishers like to tell us are ‘timeless,’ an exploration of the masculine-materialist world and the feminine-spiritual home. Our protagonists are challenged; do they go gently into that good night or join the cause of Indian nationalism in an evil-male world?

It’s a dichotomy as old as literature itself. Book IV of the Aeneid often seems to me to be one long sob story to Aeneas’ feminisation, entrapped in Dido’s home of Carthage and unable to go out into the world. He becomes an emasculated, even effeminate figure, his wife’s plaything. His ultimate act of heroism, a spontaneous departure from Carthage in a seemingly deus ex machina sequence of events, provokes Dido’s tragic suicide, the feminised world of Carthage literally going up in smoke.

The Victorians obsessed over this distinction between ‘home and the world.’ Tom Brown’s School Days is an ode to a boy’s conquest of Rugby School, departing the squirearchy of the Vale of the White Horse to embrace the depravity of Flashman and his pals. It is a bildungsroman in the most basic sense, a picaresque tale of personal conquest and triumph, filling these gendered stereotypes of the masculine world and the effeminate home. It is a binary which bestraddles that genre of ‘boys’-own’ literature, ranging from the Just William stories to the Biggles novels. All have a marked absence of leading female characters, valorising instead male rolemodels. Even the supposedly early feminist novel Little Women by Louisa May Alcott invokes male figures of salvation when the going gets tough for the four sisters.

Of course we’d like to think we left behind that gendered version of the ‘home’ and ‘world’ dichotomy some time circa 1968, but the dichotomy itself has not gone away. It’s an idea which infuses postmodern culture, as much in the tropes of Ridley Scott as with Tracey Emin, running right through Derrida and culminating with Baddiel and Skinner.

At Oxford the dichotomy I always find most startling is the distinction we draw with ‘friends from home.’ This is a phrase I heard bandied around early in my first year and it soon quickly became part of the vernacular of our lives. “Oh, she’s got a friend from home visiting,” or “Yes I’m off to meet my friend from home,” were catchphrases we seemed to embrace unthinkingly. I was left bemused. I’d never thought before to draw a divide between home and Oxford. Obviously, geographically they are two separate places and one has separate friendship groups from each. But this casual demarcation of ‘friend from home’ seemed to speak to something deeper, an easy willingness to ‘other’ ones past friends, to distinguish on some sort of cultural level between friendships.

If the dichotomy of ‘home’ and the ‘world’ is applicable to Oxford where does that leave us? Is Oxford the world, and home a retreat – the safe option which we need to escape like Aeneas? We like to think 21st century-postmodern culture has moved on from the Victorian hyper-masculine ‘home and world’ obsession. But has it really?

Kanye West’s ‘Homecoming’ anthem apostrophises his hometown. “But if you really care for her, then you would never hit the airport, to follow your dream” he challenges himself, with the haunting refrain, “do you think about me now and then,” a cry of anguish from someone who has fled South Shore Chicago. You don’t have to live in the Chicago ghetto to understand what he means; that whoever we are and wherever we’re going, we’re engaged with a constant dialogue with our homes.

Edward Said’s famous ascription of Orientalism as a “system of ideological fictions” could easily be applied to Oxford. I think we choose to make this false distinction between ‘friends from home’ and our Oxford friendships as a way of reflecting the unique place in which we work and study. We’re surrounded by cultural symbols and icons which emphasise this dichotomy. It’s an easy ‘Us and Them’ dichotomy which sustains our ‘ideological fictions,’ an easy linguistic get-out for this bizarre and exceptional place in which we live.

20th century realist drama attacked the idea of the home as an escapist fantasy. Most of us know that to be true after spending a week there during a vac. Harold Pinter’s moving play The Homecoming picked up where Tagore left off , taking the sexual politics of the 1960s and bringing them into the home. The idealism of the home is fractured just as surely as James Bond’s house burns down at the end of Skyfall. 50 years on from Pinter, ‘home’ and the ‘world’ remains a dichotomy embedded within culture. The ‘our friends from home’ line is the Oxford leitmotif. It’s a rejoinder to Kanye’s question “Do you think about me now and then?” Not the dichotomy we want, but the dichotomy we need.