Monday 13th April 2026
Blog Page 1120

Cambridge college criticised for Japan-themed ball

0

This season’s announcements of the themes for Cambridge’s popular end of the year balls have been accompanied by protests and claims that the colleges are indulging in cultural appropriation, most recently with Trinity Hall’s ‘Tokyo to Kyoto’ May ball.

The ball is proudly advertised online as an invitation to “come aboard the Tokaido bullet train as we take you on a journey from Tokyo to Kyoto.” For the price of £90 students will be able to “experience everything from the vibrant fashions of Harajuku and the neon lights of Shibuya to the Imperial palaces and tranquil gardens of the old capital, Kyoto.”

This aim to cover all aspects of a distant and complex culture in a single night is part of what has irritated some students, and Trinity Hall is not the first to choose an exotic theme for its ball.

Oxford has recently had its share of exoticism with Pembroke’s ‘Indian Summers’ last year, and Lincoln will be holding its controversial New Orleans ‘Jazz Age’ ball in May. Just as Darwin College in Cambridge chose ‘Havana Nights’ as its theme and Clare College announced its ‘Orient Express’ ball, non-Western culture has become one of the principal sources of inspiration for these events.

Hannah-Lily Lanyon and William Andrews, both undergraduates in Oxford, told Cherwell that they see this trend for themes evoking faraway countries as being “primarily about a desire to control. What’s a better way to dominate another culture than using its outward projections (clothes, traditions etc)? This could all stem from the remains of a colonial mindset: we are still being taught by our society and our education system that white domination of non-White culture is totally ok.

“We ought to be rejecting the orientalist attitude which sees Japan as a different world in which we can play out our night-out fantasies and then finally return to western normality. This is no different to Lincoln’s ‘New Orleans’ – which sees white British students take over predominantly African-American history. Yet crucially Japan was never a colony, so colonisation doesn’t ply such a role here – rather it’s about using a different culture to make ourselves feel superior; in contrast comes New College’s ‘Bombay nights’ – which plays on a colonial heritage we should be ashamed of.”

The announcement of Magdalen’s Commemoration ball last term also triggered reactions from students, with many pointing out how the event’s idea of bringing students back to an earlier version of the college may exclude a number of groups. William Andrews notes, “As a queer man I know I don’t want to go back to the 20s: I’m planning on going with a boy as a date, an activity we’d have been arrested for; some non-White students might feel a bit out of place in 1920s outfits designed without them in mind.” The various committees organising these balls all replied positively to these claims, and Trinity Hall has called for advice on the ways of securing a sense of authenticity for its Japanese evening.

When asked whether the problem of cultural appropriation at parties is specific to Oxford and Cambridge, Lanyon and Andrews both agree.

“Using ‘oriental’ and ‘exotic’ aesthetics to promote a predominantly white party experience is a nationwide problem, stemming from the lack of diversity in universities themselves, often composed of white middle class students with little awareness about the cultures they are stealing from.”

Oxford professor wins Abel Prize for Fermat’s Last Theorem

0

Oxford Professor Andrew Wiles has been announced as the 2016 winner of the Abel prize for his proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem. Wiles is a Royal Society Research Professor  at the University of Oxford and will receive the prize from Crown Prince Haakon of Norway at a ceremony in Oslo in May.

The Abel prize is awarded annually by the Norwegian government to an outstanding mathematician. The award was established in 2001 and has been described as the mathematician’s “Nobel prize”, coming with the monetary award of six million Norwegian Kroner (£500,00).

First formulated by the French mathematician Pierre de Fermat in 1637, the theorem has been widely regarded by mathematicians as seemingly intractable. Wiles claims to have become fascinated by the theorem as a ten year old child after coming across a book in a library in Cambridge. In solving Fermat’s Last Theorem, Wiles has developed new tools which have allowed researchers to make significant developments in an effort to unify disparate branches of mathematics.

The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters, which presents the Abel Prize, said in its citation, ‘Few results have as rich a mathematical history and as dramatic a proof as Fermat’s Last Theorem.’

Learning of the award today, Andrew Wiles told Cherwell, “I am very honoured to receive the Abel prize. I have been very fortunate to spend my life working on the mathematical problems that I love, and I am doubly fortunate then to be recognized so generously for my work.”

In an email to Mathematics students across the university this morning, Martin R Bridson Head of Department wrote, “I write to share some tremendously exciting news with you: it was announced in Oslo at 11:00 GMT that Sir Andrew Wiles has been awarded the 2016 Abel Prize, the most distinguished prize in mathematics. This is a great day for Andrew and for Oxford Mathematics.”

Second year Mathematics student Monica Gupta studying at Merton College where Sir Andrew is a fellow, told Cherwell, “Andrew Wiles was a the main reason I started looking into choosing Merton to apply to when application time came around. He is the most ‘famous’ contemporary mathematician. I feel very privileged to have seen him lecture a few times at the Maths Institute. The Abel Prize is regarded as the equivalent of the Nobel Prize in the Maths world, and it is very well deserved by Wiles. Hearing him give an interview after he found out he received the accolade was humbling – he was incredibly modest and mainly focused on the Maths behind his work, rather than the Abel Prize it won him.”

In 2013 the Maths Institute opened their new £70 million Andrew Wiles Building, uniting a department that had previously been spread across three separate locations. The building was named after Andrew Wiles in tribute to his published completed proof in 1995.

Merton College has been approached by Cherwell for comment.

The end of Roppongi

0

“Thats right!!!

“Roppongi will close it’s [sic] doors for the last time on Friday 25th March!”

In a stroke of devastating news, one of Oxford’s finest club establishments, Roppongi, is hosting a “Farwell Party” from 5pm to 5am next Friday.

After almost six years in operation, the “chic, luxurious lounge and club,” as they describe themselves, will be replaced by JT’s Cocktail Bar & Club.

It is a bewildering end for a nightclub that, again as per their own description, is “a unique playground for Oxford’s elite, designed for affable debauchery and indulgent fun, without pretentiousness but exuding an abundance of class and style.”

Roppongi “is the ultimate destination for Oxford’s exclusive highly effervescent and au fait crowd,” they add.

But perhaps Roppongi is best known for its magnanimous spirit, although its largess was not always accepted. In fact, some – incomprehensibly – think Roppongi’s generosity to be a mark of poor quality.

As Balliol first year Toby Squire told Cherwell, “No, I’ve never been. Thank the lord. I hear it’s grim. I mean they offer free shots. Which no reputable establishment would need to do to drum up trade.”

But the siren’s call of free drinks did succeed in attracting Michael Withers, a second year Mertonian. Withers told Cherwell, “My friends and I were once tempted into Roppongi by the free shot offered to us as we charged down George Street on our way to Bridge.

“We ended up dancing with two middle aged women, but then I guess that was natural since they were the only other people there. If you’re concerned that you’ve missed out on this terrible excuse for a club during your time at Oxford, don’t be.”

Yet it is undeniable that the club is exclusive, with one of Cherwell’s own editors, second year lawyer Tristan Upton, being turned away only feet into the club.

“I went once and got kicked out after 8 seconds,” he said, “because I accidentally brought an empty bottle in with me. Go ahead and quote me.”

Yet one love story emerged from the depths of Cherwell’s investigation, maybe even validating all 71 months of Roppongi’s existence: the story of Wadham classicist Roseanne Finn.

“I met the love of my life in Roppongi (or at least my current long term partner)!!!” Finn told Cherwell.

He is “a hulk of five foot six, dripping with charm and wit,” she said, and “was a shock to both my senses and my intoxicated state. I am so thankful to Roppongi for letting me find love (and such an athletic physique!).”

The dangerous ignorance of Baroness Bakewell

0

‘Anorexia is narcissism, says Joan Bakewell’. On seeing this headline on the cover of this week’s The Sunday Times, I was pretty appalled, but unfortunately not surprised. After over three years of treatment for anorexia, I’ve become kind of used to hearing ignorant remarks in regard to my condition. Then I read the article itself and even I was astounded at the level of ignorance it contained.  Not only does Baroness Bakewell claim anorexia is narcissistic, the comment which appears to have caused most uproar, she bases her argument for this entirely upon a string of inaccuracies, before essentially shaming sufferers for not being able to just ‘carr[y] on’.

Bakewell’s statement that anorexia arises in young people presumably because they are pre-occupied with being healthy and beautiful particularly struck a chord with me. Now, if my illness was a mere obsession with being ‘healthy’ why did I ignore every warning I was given about the dangers of not eating? Why did I not ‘stop’ when I was told even walking to the shop was putting my body at severe risk? Why could I still not ‘stop’ when I found myself in a hospital bed? If there is one thing I know, it is that starving yourself does not equate to health, yet I, and thousands of others, still have to fight every day not to do so.

The ‘desire to be beautiful’ element of this painfully ignorant argument is equally flawed. It cannot be denied that in our society a high emphasis is put upon the way we look, something which does lower self-esteem. However, this in itself does not cause anorexia. During my admission to a specialist eating disorders unit I came across a range of people. Each of us was very different, each of us had different fears and each of us spoke of different reasons for why our eating disorder had first developed and why we now found ourselves so unable to escape. Despite having heard such a range of reasons, I can state with all honesty, not one person cited a desire to be ’beautiful’ as the cause. Sure, I heard people say they ‘were not beautiful’ just as we hear in every school dining room across the country, but hearing that this is the reason they had fallen into anorexia’s clutches? Not once.

It is not merely Bakewell’s remarks concerning ‘narcissism’ and a fixation in regard to one’s own appearance which contain blatant inaccuracies. I’d like to ask Baroness Bakewell how, if anorexia is a modern day fixation with weight as a result of the ‘over-indulgence of society’, the earliest medical descriptions of the illness appeared in the seventeenth century, with the term ‘anorexia nervosa’ being coined in 1873. True, the number of recorded cases may have been less, but that doesn’t actually mean fewer people were suffering. Yes, we may not have openly started discussing the condition in the mainstream until the eighties, with Karen Carpenter’s death bringing anorexia into the spotlight, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t there. Silence doesn’t mean no one suffering, it does, however, most likely mean that they weren’t getting better.

Bakewell’s attempts at justifying her opinion through her own life experience actually serve to do quite the opposite. In asserting that she only knew one girl in her youth who may have had an eating disorder, rather than suggesting this means self-indulgent modern day society is to blame, she instead shows us she really isn’t qualified to be making a judgement on the topic at all. If her statement that her granddaughters have ‘breezed through life’ is accurate, I’m very pleased for them, I truly am, however not all of us get that privilege. No one chooses anorexia and it doesn’t come about as a result of character weakness, as the Baroness seems to believe. Rather it is a reaction to events and pressures, which others, including her granddaughters, may not have been exposed to, or have dealt with through less obvious or destructive means.

In response to questions on twitter about her comments Bakewell has stated she was only ‘speculating loosely about what might cause it’. Now I for one would argue that as a public figure, you shouldn’t really be ‘speculating’ in such a public domain, no matter how ‘loosely’ about, well, anything, never mind an already highly misunderstood illness which causes the deaths of 20 per cent of its sufferers. But hey, what do I know? I’m merely a self-regarding narcissist after all.

My problem with Bakewell’s comments does not however simply lie in the fact they are downright inaccurate, but also with the dangerous consequences her words could have. My first reaction to reading the interview? She’s stating what the anorexic part of my mind has been trying to convince me of for years, that I’m nothing but vain and should just stop being so self-centred and get on with my life. Not only does she suggest that self-centredness is at the heart of eating disorders, but she also rolls out a whole range of statements suggesting that psychiatric treatment is in itself a form of over indulgence. Speak to almost any mental health professional, and they will tell you that early intervention is what gives people with anorexia the best chance of recovery. A problem we see today, and possibly a reason for such high numbers of inpatient admissions, is that people are too ashamed to come forward and ask for help as they fear they will be seen as vain or unworthy of treatment. Statements like this, no matter who makes them, reinforce this idea. This in turn pushes back the time it takes for someone to access treatment and thus reduces the chances of them gaining their life back completely, or severely extends the period of time their recovery takes. Believe me, I would know.

So if Baroness Bakewell’s ignorant interview has encouraged anybody to start thinking about the reasons anorexia is becoming ever more prevalent within our society, the one good thing which may come from it, I’d urge you to inform yourself via years of psychiatric research, rather than the loose speculations of a Labour peer who openly admits she has no experience of the illness. Creating a dialogue surrounding mental health is important, however, to me at least, it is obvious that this should be done on the basis of factual information. If you have no knowledge of a topic, ask questions about it, don’t try to answer them.

What next for OULC?

0

Last Monday I was elected as the Labour Club’s new BME Officer. I was told that it was the first time in years (if ever) that the position had been contested and it was by far the best attended caucus anyone could remember. One of my predecessors told me about how he’d been voted in by a caucus of only three, including himself. But since the summer the Labour Party and affiliated student clubs have seen membership rocketing, radically defying European-wide trends of declining party membership. The Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) has been no exception.

New members have breathed fresh life into OULC. Membership is more diverse than ever. A once overwhelmingly white Club, at the BME caucus there were members from Asian, Afro-Caribbean, Arab and Jewish backgrounds. Many who have joined are new to Labour politics but share Labour values and were inspired by the principles and integri­­­ty of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership campaign. Others, like myself, have long been active in our local Labour parties, campaigning in our communities but until recently alienated by student politics.

Too often politics in Oxford can feel cliquish and political clubs merely a platform for aspiring politicians looking for another item for their CV. When I arrived at Oxford I immediately headed for the Labour Club, expecting a political home, but was put off by an elitist culture that treated politics like sport. It felt like it wasn’t for me and looked nothing like my local Labour Party in multicultural, working class South London. But it’s a shame that this reputation prevails because since I’ve joined I’ve met great people, rooted in their communities, determined to work against injustice. They, like me, want to ensure that the Labour Club is the natural home of the left in Oxford.

It is vital at this critical time that OULC continues to revive its campaigning mission. The Tory ideology of today’s government is waging an unprecedented assault on all the institutions that were created to preserve our liberties and uphold human dignity. And as with every bully, those who are picked on are the most vulnerable. Whether it’s the removal of student grants, the marketization of education or authoritarian policies like Prevent, which attack the precious foundations of free speech, this government is hitting the most exposed hardest. We are citizens in a city and a county that is being attacked by government policies to such an extent that David Cameron’s own aunt has taken to the streets in protest. Faced with massive government cuts, the Tory-run County Council has planned to close all of Oxfordshire’s forty four children’s centres.

But where there are injustices, citizens and students of Oxford have always refused to remain silent and have mobilised. The Labour Club must take its place alongside and in support of other movements who share our values. If OULC is to become an authentic voice for students, and an effective tool for campaigning, we need to reach out to these movements and work with them, as we have begun to this term. I’ve been part of the OUSU Living Wage Campaign since coming here, and recently helped set up the Oxford Campaign for Unionisation which aims to support staff across colleges in joining trade unions and defending their rights at work. In my term ahead, I want to make sure OULC works with other great campaigns, such as Save Oxfordshire’s Children’s Centres and On Your Doorstep, a student campaign against homelessness, a problem set to get worse in the wake of a thirty eight per cent cut to the local council’s homelessness budget.

Rhodes Must Fall Oxford (RMFO) has provoked an overdue debate about the legacy of colonialism at the university and its impact on our environment, culture and degrees. Already workshops on diversity in the curriculum have been held by the Department of Politics and International Relations, a sign of progress being made. This term OULC voted to support RMFO and we will continue to work closely with liberation movements across the university.

Politics is not a game, and OULC is not a networking society. I joined Labour because I find it outrageous that 24 per cent of young people in my hometown grow up in poverty and I want to do something about it. We need to realise that a drinking society for students with political aspirations is no match for a group which is engaged in community change and campaigning. That’s why the new OULC committee is going to stand up for the type of politics that ordinary people like me, and so many others in Oxford, would rather be a part of.

Preview: Orphans

0

Coming to the Michael Pilch Studio in 1st week Trinity, Orphans looks to be a harrowing exploration of the division between familial and societal duty.

Helen and Danny are ordinary, functioning dutiful citizens – all until Helen’s brother, Liam, comes in bloodied and makes them change their attitudes and outlooks. What becomes clear from the outset is his inability to clarify his own story of how he comes to be bloodied – whether it is an accident or not becomes a key piece of the opening, providing the vaguely unsettling mixture of comedy and deep, macabre severity which comes to be the play’s calling card. The question of his guilt or innocence provides much of the tension of the play’s opening; yet altogether more unsettling questions come to the fore later on. 

The style of the play is as one would expect from The Experimental Theatre Club. In the original script as written by Dennis Kelly, often the lines do not end with punctuation – but instead with the interjection of another character. The resultant realism drives the conversations, which in turn drives the plot. The play also has no real exposition, relying on it being revealed in off-hand allusions in the conversations. Thus when Liam comes in bloodied, it comes as a jarring image, disturbing the apparent peace of the family dinner setting. However, the portraits of these characters get filled in as the play progresses, making us question the intrinsic moral worth of each of them; with the possibility of being pushed from middle class civility into madness and violence never that far away. 

The tension is something Kelly has spoken about explicitly in relation to this play. Ever since its debut on the Edinburgh Fringe in 2009, it has shocked and provoked audiences for it and what happens at its resolution. The questions asked of ‘Broken Britain’ by the play attack the notion of a united, integrated country that David Cameron was contemporaneously trying to build with the ‘Big Society’. Kelly says this tension is necessary for him – ‘I always want my plays to have tension; whether the audience hates it or loves it is up to them, but I never want them to be bored.’ He has achieved his aims – if you go and see it; you won’t be.

Poetry Bites: HT16 week 8

0

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%13185%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Accidental Morning

 

Late turned to early when the mail slipped under the door,

a tiny crease of lemony light covered, then revealed. 

Those pebble steps.

 

Somehow the tea cooled. You called it the colonizer’s drink,

and I put my hands over my ears, I said,

to warm them.

 

When the heat turned off, we knew it was spring again.

The marigold splashed itself into the hallway,

despite our protests.

 

I placed a petal in the oval of your chest (but your body had grown

out of my stretch). A mailman’s thumb.

Smudged return address.

 

All of it, morphing without our consent. No wonder

I fumble like any accidental supplicant, whose prayer

is for a single lull to stay and be.

 

Note:

Cathy Go is the recipient of the River of Words Grand Prize in Poetry and a Columbia University fellowship funding her first chapbook project, which aims to present both oral history and poetry in a dialogue on memory, landscape and diaspora. She has been published in Cuckoo Quarterly, Just Poetry and the Columbia Review.

 

 

The Oxford Guild responds to last week’s resignations

0
The Guild is, and always has been, a meritocracy. Those who do the most work, add the most value to the society, and best serve our members and peers, are rewarded most. We take our responsibility very seriously: it was this framework coupled with our diligence and care that resulted in the Guild becoming a hugely successful society in just four years since its re-launch in 2011 and the largest careers society in the UK. Our ambition, dedication, and subsequent results have been repeatedly acknowledged through regional and national awards, and in national and international press (over 100 countries in the past calendar year). These achievements stem from the values we instil in our committee and unique system, which provides excellent training, education, guidance and encouragement to successive generations of Guild committee members from experienced committee members from our board who wrote our constitution and which includes former Chairpeople, Presidents, founders, and senior committee members who went above and beyond in their time on committee. None of what the Guild has achieved and continues to achieve would be possible otherwise. Most importantly, year on year, people reiterate the role that the Guild played in their development – not just in terms of their careers, securing internships, jobs (not just their first graduate role but beyond as well), but the connections they developed and the important skills and lessons they learnt and as a result, volunteer large amounts of their time and energy to the Guild. In ‘giving back’ many of our alumni and former committee have helped in any way they can in a wide range of areas: providing guidance and advice, making introductions, helping to provide funding and sponsorship, or returning to campus to share their own experiences or as representatives of their firms at events (from specific talks, to the champagne social). The city is filled with Guild alumni, many of whom are influential business figures; accordingly, we received nominations for the best alumni engagement award in the national RBS ESSA awards two years ago and our strong alumni network continues to improve even further in terms of people in industry. With over 100 committee members and representatives serving across each year and countless more alumni and board members continuing to engage with current students, the Guild is not only a meritocracy that provides a vital service to our members, but it is a community that extends far beyond any small number of individuals.
 
Our over-arching goal is to help Oxford students and graduates with their careers and personal networks. Crucially, our aim does not, and has never, extended to committee politicking, popularity contest elections, or providing an opportunity for CV filling. In order to best serve our members, we interview all our recruits who have to apply with CVs and cover letters for roles. We select and reward people on merit, who have demonstrated tangible results, shown real hard work and long-term vision, rather than just a desire for CV points. Indeed, such continued dedication is appreciated by many employers looking for evidence of ability and commitment when hiring. It is a pity that some individuals looking for quick CV scoring may find our preference for proven ability and contribution through hard work amongst committee members abhorrent to their own self-interests. Many of the individuals that recently left did not fit this profile: some had only been members for a couple of weeks, some were former members that were no longer active (not attending committee meetings or events, missing enough to lead to automatic resignation), others were members that were frustrated at missing out on promotions which they sought, but which their lack of proven contribution, performance and commitment did not justify or merit. Despite their apparent claims about their hard work and contributions, it is interesting that some took the liberty to erroneously give themselves inflated and in some cases false titles and roles that do not even exist. We were baffled to hear that all the people boasting of work on sponsorship had not in fact spoken to a single sponsor let alone raise any money. Those in question include individuals who wanted Presidency and Vice-Presidency roles but were not up to the right standard for these important positions, and some whose tenures on committee were due to come to an end this term. The only thing that has been ‘counterproductive’, to quote their words, is their own agendas in dishonourably seeking to promote themselves and their own venture through unfounded and petty criticism of the Guild. The fact that this small faction of individuals involved have staged this to promote their own organisation which they wish to set up in this way and sent this to Cherwell well in advance of sending it to us but never raised any concerns whatsoever or discussed any issues internally before behaving in this manner clearly shows their malice and insincerity. Having helped many of these juniors with their CVs, cover letters and internship applications, we wish them the best with this and with their own organisation that they have sought to promote in this dishonourable manner and genuinely hope that this kind of backhanded behaviour and tactics are not values that they wish to have as foundations for their futures or organisations. 
 
The Guild goes far beyond any small number of individuals in serving as Oxford’s largest society. We have the biggest committee in Oxford and our best and most promising talent are very actively involved. Moving forward, our board continues to be key to our success whether it is to do with suggesting ideas for growth and long-term strategy, coming back to offer talks to the next generation, attending the Guild’s networking events, or providing mentoring to committee members. Just last weekend the Guild won the Innovation of the Year prize and runner up prize for Event of the Year in the Oxford University Student Union Student Awards 2016. The Guild was also recently a finalist in the national best university society awards run by RMP, runner-up in their national Society Showcase awards, and has been positively featured in the past few months in The Times, the Financial TimesThe Telegraph, the BBC, the Chinese press, Indian press and South American press amongst other news outlets from print and online to radio and TV (over 1,000 in over 100 countries in the past year). The Guild has many exciting events, initiatives, innovations and developments lined up soon and we will continue our rapid growth and nationally recognised successes. We will continue to work harder than any organisation to ensure as many people as possible can develop skills and achieve their career goals and broaden our reach and impact even further and benefit as many different people with varying interests as possible. We have received more applications in the past week and this term than in any Hilary Term ever before from people wanting to contribute to this goal. We encourage members to attend a series of special events and initiatives in the coming months to mark our five year anniversary since the relaunch and our strongest ever position, size and reach.

Review: Horseplay

0

I feel like, at this point, provisos about the hit and miss nature of student comedy are cliché enough to be taken as read. If the attendance of the opening night of this show was anything to go by, Oxford at large is far from convinced that just because a show has the Revue’s stamp on it, it will necessarily be a guaranteed night of laughs. Watching bad comedy is genuinely painful, in a way that bad acting can never quite manage to be – the public in general knows what good comedy looks and feels like, in a way that is much more difficult to discern than good vs good dramatic performances. Added in to this mix is the fact that plays are very rarely written by the people performing them, whereas in sketch comedy we are not only judging the people on stage for their performances, but we’re judging the very premises that they are presenting to us. In this way, comedians are actually considerably braver than actors – with all this in mind, let’s get down to the business at hand – the new show, ‘Horseplay’, from the handpicked new generation of the Oxford Revue.

The sketches themselves had, for me, a hit rate of roughly 60%, however the overall tone of the show was surprisingly coherent – the sketches had a unifying voice which was surprising and impressive given the relative inexperience of the cast. If I were characterise the prevailing tone of these sketches, it would be massive, constructed, dense set ups, incredibly intricate worlds created and then paid off with incredibly simple punch lines– sometimes just puns. To describe some of the set ups, the audience was treated to a (shoddily accented) Australian spelling bee, where two of the judges were feuding divorces, all for the pay off of ‘you didgeri-did my wife’. I think these ludicrous experiments in world creation, which take an enormous amount of effort and time for these laughs founded in very simple and mechanical humour owes something to the meteoric popularity of improvisation – which has gone from strength to strength in recent years. This show really relies on an audience which will say “yes, and” to increasingly convoluted and dense sketches – Dr Seuss at the Pharmacy, someone dissecting a rat in the Missing Bean, and a completely surreal office environment with some astonishing character acting from Derek Mitchell, who quite literally had me gasping for breath. 

Other standouts included Kathy Maniura’s pretentious Marina Abramovich devotee (who reminded me of several people I know) and Alistair Inglis’ Oscar nominated bishop. The problem with such vast and intricate sketch comedy is that when it falls flat, it really does fall flat – I would like to think of myself at relatively intelligent, but there were some sketches I simply didn’t ‘get’. Maybe the problem was that I did ‘get’ them, but the pay offs were so mind bogglingly simple, that I refused to belief that we’d spent quite as long as we did getting there. The one sketch that really frustrated me was set in an audition for the show, under the premise that fart jokes are unfunny, but if we present them in a knowing way, as bad comedy, then they will become funny – it’s a copout, and I am so tired of self awareness. Moreover, the changes between sketches were often choppy, and the shifts in subject matter so erratic as to make the whole thing quite disorientating at points. Overall, this was an impressive opening for this new generation of the Revue – there were plenty of faults to be ironed out, but I mostly think it’s a shame that there weren’t more people there at the opening night. 

Is Oxford still a posh boys’ club?

0

Going to Oxford University from an inner city comprehensive school is like living on another planet, one populated by strange people in bow ties with no concept of what it’s like to live in the real world. Before you arrive you hear the stories of the Bullingdon Club, lavish dinners and champagne receptions, but until you actually live here you don’t realize that all the rumours are true, and in the worst possible way.

The first thing that shocks you when arriving is how everyone seems to know each other already. We used to fight our neighboring school at the train station, but these guys have been wining and dining each other since the age of 11 (even if the wine arguably came slightly later). People seem surprised in Freshers’ week that you haven’t met their mate Tarquin from St Paul’s, or you didn’t know about Humphrey from Eton’s gap year excursions in Goa. Although it does help your rep a little that you are able to provide some context to the Chip vs Bugzy beef, due to your days in the playground sending low quality grime instrumentals via Bluetooth on your Sony Ericsson. This public school network is real, and it affects your life as a student from a state school.

Oxford’s famous drinking societies are where this network comes into its element. The most famous of is the Bullingdon, but Keble College have the ‘dissolved’ Steamers, whose misogynistic antics arguably earned the college the chant: “We are Keble, we hate women”. There’s nothing wrong with a couple of lads going out for a meal, but when these lads all went to public schools, and meet in an all-male dining club, it projects an image of exclusivity that the university is keen to distance itself from. Yet this exclusivity is real, and is perpetuated by the students themselves, dishing out invites only to those who went to the top public schools, leaving those who were not fortunate enough to attend searching for where we fit in this posh puzzle.

I have experienced first hand some of the attitudes the members of these societies hold towards people such as myself. From snide comments about dropping my T’s when asking for the ‘water’ at meals, to having my accent laughed at by a member of the Bullingdon on a football pitch, it leaves you having to adjust the way you speak to avoid confrontation. The street-onians may attempt to sound like they’re from Tottenham, but when you’re actually from there it’s suddenly not as cool, and leaves you embarrassed about where you come from. If you’re Northern it’s even worse, with constant references to ‘graaaavy’ and ‘Bistooo’ forcing them too to adjust their mode of speech. I’m personally not keen to come out of here sounding like a 1942 Pathé news reel. Accents are a reflection of where you come from, and if you didn’t come from Kensington & Chelsea it seems like you’re doing something wrong.

Oxford University has made attempts in recent years, to extend access to the university through talks in schools and visits to various colleges. There is, however, a systemic bias towards those who can’t afford to actively participate in social activities. With some black tie dinners costing around £35 a go, and the yearly ball at Keble College costing £89 for college members, and £99 for guests, the social events provided by the university are undeniably expensive and thus exclusive. Everyone around you is all too keen to remind you that this ball cannot be missed, and is cheap considering the comparative £200 price tag on other college balls. When you had to get your ticket for your birthday, but those around you are asking for your guest place so they can bring a friend from another college, it becomes clear that this is not an equal playing field. The role of money in this university is so profound that they won’t even remove the statue of the colonialist Cecil Rhodes for fear of benefactors withdrawing their financial support.

Although this is a dire portrait of the University, there are some signs of hope. The Rhodes Must Fall movement has got people talking once again about the true nature of this university, and this will hopefully lead to positive change for BME students as well as those from state schools. I also do not wish to tar all public school students with the same brush, as many are accepting of state school pupils and make huge efforts to ensure they feel welcome. What is undeniable, however, is that this university will allow you to thrive if you have come from a public school, and leaves those from the state sector often feeling ostracized because of it. I may just be one Jack, swimming against a tide of Randolph’s and Montague’s, but with more and more pressure being applied, hopefully one day this will be a university that is more reflective and accepting of the state of our country today.