Saturday 18th April 2026
Blog Page 1137

An evening of Illuminations in Iffley

0

It really was a dark and stormy night. The weather and the trek down to the church of St John the Evangelist might in fact have contributed to heightening the audience’s expectations of what was already a relatively ambitious programme. Performed by the Oxford-based string ensemble Corona, Benjamin Britten’s musical adaptation of French poet Arthur Rimbaud’s visionary collection of prose poems, Les Illuminations, effectively added to the gloomy atmosphere of the evening by its intensity and the nine contemplative texts’ underlying tensions, which it translates rather accurately into another form of art.

Conducting the formation which mixes period instruments and the more usual selection of strings, Janet Lincé equally directs soprano Erica Eloff for the central piece of the evening. Elgar’s Serenade in E minor, his Opus 47 Introduction and Allegro and John Ireland’s milder Concertino Pastorale come to complete the programme built around Britten’s work and the general theme of early 20th century “Englishness.”

One of the peculiarities of this ensemble is the wide range of sounds it covers. Larger than a chamber orchestra and far too experienced to be compared to a single instrument-category band still focusing on its coherence, Corona makes being constituted exclusively of diff erent types of strings an original advantage among Oxford’s many quality classical formations. The depth of the sound produced by two basses easily balances the absence both of wind and percussion instruments. They achieve a particularly rhythmic eff ect when playing pizzicato, almost bringing too much of the audience’s attention to their part. Although not the subtlest of associations, this combination of short, deep notes and longer strokes of the bow from the violas and violins avoids all monotony and successfully renders the mood and tempo contrasts in Britten’s intense suite of pieces.

Erica Eloff ’s strong presence and full voice resonate under the beautifully painted ceiling of St John’s with an air of dramatic authenticity well suited for the third part of the lluminations, ‘Royalty’. After the intellectual, persistent style of Britten’s composition, Ireland’s piece comes with its pleasingly lighter mood, toying with the artistic cliché of pastoral scenes full of warmth and gaiety.

Reflecting the evocative imagery of the poems which go from mentioning fantasised historical settings such as “old craters, surrounded by colossal statues and palms of copper” to the freer “streams of the barren land and the immense tracks of the ebbtide,” Corona delivers a colourful performance.

The formation demonstrates its own capacity to switch rapidly from a series of musical interjections to the longer, lighter phrases of John Ireland’s rarely played Concertino Pastorale as well as Elgar’s oscillations between mellow and troubled themes

The Coral: always getting proggier

0

Nick Power contemplates time. “We’ve gone up to four, four and a half minutes, which is like prog for us,” says The Coral’s Nick Power ahead of the release of new album Distance Inbetween, the first after a five year hiatus. Speaking to me from home in Hoylake on the Wirral Peninsula, The Coral’s keys-player muses on the idea of timing from two perspectives on the new record – for this will mark the quintet’s eighth studio album – as well as Power’s intrigue in each individual track being longer than ever before. “To do a four and a half minute song is quite unbelievable for us.”

It is this balancing act between pop and tame psychedelia that makes The Coral. Renowned early single ‘Dreaming of You’ is a mix of woozy psych groove moulded to a tight pop tune, much like 2005 hit ‘In the Morning’, which inhabits, too, a vocal familiarity ahead of disjointed guitar. Power explains this marriage of pop and psych simply: “We just try out our maddest ideas and turn them into a three minute little crafted song”. In an age where internet-friendly attention spans are short and listening options are endless, perhaps it is for the best that The Coral have more or less maintained this temporal sensitivity.

Looking back on how the industry has changed since The Coral formed in 1996, Power grows bold in his speech for the first time. He describes this shift to the age of the internet vividly. “It did completely turn on its head, this ‘industry’. It’s no exaggeration – there was two or three years, I think, when people were sort of just wandering round going ‘what the fuck do we do? How do we … What is this business anymore?’”

But this technological upheaval was liberating for a band like The Coral. Power speaks faster as he expresses the sheer excitement this freedom brought. The independent thrill of the internet meant the band could move away from a major label, where they had had to “fight to do our own videos and artwork”, and finally get the chance to be in charge of their whole artistic output. “Now we get to do more stuff that we always wanted to do. We always wanted to put records out all the time and just be the master of our own world.” The Coral haven’t quite been putting out records “all the time” – a five year hiatus followed 2010’s Butterfly House and former The Zutons’ Paul Molloy now joins them on guitar – but surely this opportunity to break and do their own thing is an even larger part of this free- dom than Power could iterate. I ask what the band was up to during this time, and what strikes me about Power’s reply is the broad, open-minded range of the members’ artistic pursuits: “Ian [Sully] has always drawn and painted comics. Paul [Duff y] did some soundtracks. I released some books. This album is a kind of weird marriage of all those things.”

Whether the casual listener hears these intelligent cross-media references in the woozy guitar of new singles ‘Miss Fortune’ and ‘Chasing the Tail of a Dream’ is another matter. Power talks too of writer Richard Yates, film maker David Lynch and photographer Gregory Crewson, embroidering the ideas of these creatives together to form his own definition of psychedelia: “It’ll be like a nondescript mundane event or relationship – a description of that. But it’ll be so heavy in the person’s mind that it’s apocalyptic. And it’s the juxtaposition of the two things. And that’s a kind of psychedelia in a way.”

If what Power says is true, fans awaiting the ten-date UK tour will not be disappointed. The desperation of such a long wait this time around gives Power a stark sincerity as he says “I don’t think we’ve played like this live for about ten years.

It’s basically the hungriest we’ve ever sounded: we want to make these shows sound loose and angry.”

The art of creating the past

0

“The fact is that every writer creates his own precursors. His work modifies our conception of the past, as it will modify the future.” – Jorge Luis Borges

Traces of Kafka, Borges writes, can be found across previous generations and cultures. He is in the works of Zeno, Han Yu, Kierkegaard and Browning. Each of those authors can be considered Kafka’s precursors. But if Kafka had never been, nor could any of his precursors contain traces of his work. They would have been no precursors at all.

In this way, the present creates the past. We interpret and our interpretation conjures up millennia of history and art and literature. From the here and now, we dream our escape to the not-here and the not-now, the elsewhere – an escape that, in being a dream, is no less and no more fiction than any other.

Borges was not supplying a thesis of historical relativism – just a statement “de una verdad literal”, of a literal truth. The past is shaped by the present, with the corollary that the present is directed by the past. His focus was primarily on the history of poetry, with the implication that he, a Latin American author, was in someway able to influence the Western literary tradition with his work.

TS Eliot writes about tradition too, saying, “The poet…must be aware that the mind of Europe – is a mind which changes and that this change is a development which abandons nothing en route”. Change happens, but change is not loss.

The Tanakh was once only the canon of the Hebrew Bible; it is now also the foundation of the Old Testament. The American Civil War was to many a battle over state rights, but the victors write the history books: now, it was fought and won over slavery. The story of artists gaining fame and recognition only years after their death is a common one. Van Gogh died penniless, having sold but one work.

The personal is itself the historical. Take the friend you once thought to be honest, but was revealed to be otherwise. Your view of her does not only change going forward. Your past impressions are reformed as well. Sometimes the past can be rewritten dramatically: We were not placed at the centre of the cosmos by a deity. We make revolutions around the sun in one infinitesimally small corner of the universe. Humans did not appear on this earth fully formed. We evolved from apes over the course of millions of years.

These changes in the narrative are not progress. They are no more than revisions. We might think they’re good ones today; it might be realised that they were rotten ones tomorrow. But for right now, in this present, we have our story – one that allows us escape to daydreams, to reveries and fantasies.

As cultures, we embrace great illusions. Elide our faults, laud our strengths. We find comfort in these lieux de mémoire, each people sharing a collective remembrance. Tragedies are transcribed so as to make them palatable; we reinforce each other in times of doubt and of fear.

And I, how many hours must I spend at my desk thinking about the past? The time slips by. In the act of reflection, of scribbling each day’s notes and memories in that small black-bound journal, I cement an account of time passed. I analyse, forgetting for a minute, for an hour, that analysis is interpretation and interpretation, revision. And as I write, I provide myself escape: one day by allowing overindulgence in misery, the next by celebrating my smallest accomplishments. I am writing a fiction, but it is my fiction – and also my reality. I find myself free in the elsewhere of the past.

Borges is famous for how he quoted previous authors. He was loose with their words, adding phrases, modifying them, transplanting sentences from one page to another. He did this in his translations too. He did not say he was making the changes, either; he merely made them.

What he recognised, I think, is that our history is not immutable, an intransigent obstacle with which we must grapple. He was free with other authors’ words because he saw that in being so, he could alter the narrative little by little so that it would read more like how he thought it should. There is honesty and deceit in this. Deceit, in the overt manipulation of someone else’s text and presenting it sans acknowledgement of having done so. But honesty in not disingenuously agreeing to tradition against his own interpretation. Borges pitted societal fable against his own; the latter won.

So let me conclude with Eliot’s words: “The appearance of a new work of art affects all those works of art that preceded it. The order is complete before the new work arrives; for order to persist after the supervention of novelty, the whole existing order must be, if ever so slightly, altered. The past is altered by the present, created again in each moment imperceptibly different but after long enough, unrecognisable.”

Rewind: Apollo 18 & 13

0

In this week, in this month, in 1972, Apollo 18 was meant to launch. It never did, due to budget cuts under Nixon’s administration, but also because Apollo 13 cast a long shadow over future space missions. As the closest shave in NASA’s history, Apollo 13 made the dangers of space exploration apparent to captivated worldwide audiences; so apparent that they could not be ignored. Better to spend the money on the Vietnam War than risk American lives in the cosmic void.

I can sympathise. I experience my own version of Apollo 13 every Fourth Week of term. As JFK famously said, we do not book Black Tie Formal because it is easy, but because it is hard.

Mission launch is 4.30pm, Thursday. (This doesn’t correspond with Apollo 13 – I can only make this comparison so believable). Weather is good. Wind is low. No sign of rain. T-minus 3, 2, 1. Initial launch is successful. Formal booking website loads successfully, and login details are correct. So far, so good.

Suddenly, an external oxygen canister explodes/login stalls under the weight of college traffic. Shit hits the fan. Houston, we have a problem. The damage is catastrophic and chances of survival are dropping by the minute. Quick, shut it down, shut it all down! Turn off your internets, your Snapchats, your Buzzfeeds. If the Russians can shut off radio frequencies to avoid interfering with Apollo’s transmissions, you can stop clogging up the internet with all of your duck face pics – I want fucking Oreo cake.

There’s only one chance of getting back/ back in alive, and it’s hella risky. It’s not as risky as building a makeshift carbon dioxide filter in space, but it’s as brave; log back out and back in. There’s only limited voltage (laptop battery is low). We have to give it a go, failure is not an option. Cut to montage of prayers being said, pained expression on family members’ faces, visible clouds of baited breath. A long, ominous radio silence. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Odyssey, this is Houston, do you read?

Hello Oliver, this is the Merton Formal Booking System, it’s good to see you again. YYYYYYEEEEESSSSS. My meal booking splashes down just like the Odyssey module did into the Pacific. It’s a perilous business, this formal booking malarkey. But God, it’s exciting.

Profile: Marina & The Diamonds

0

The moment I enter the Union I realise that Marina Lambrini Diamandis, better known as Marina & the Diamonds, is quite literally two steps ahead of me. Having exited the chamber, I hear laughter as she bounds up the stairs enthusiastically. I catch a flash of short, dark curls and sleek blue velvet before she disappears through the imposing archway of the Gladstone Room. I hurriedly follow her in and Marina’s eyes settle on me in delight: “You must be the student press!” The notion, clearly, is an exciting one. And with such a unique reaction to my arrival, it takes no less than an instant to warm to this energetic and engaging woman who, it becomes quickly apparent, is fully deserving of the international recognition she has received.

It is easy to assume that Marina, so animated and well-styled as an indie pop-star, has always lived a life similar to the fast-paced environment that she finds herself in now. But Marina’s international fame and widespread musical influence did not come to her instantly or without a lot of hard work and effort. “It’s funny when you’re going through it, it doesn’t feel like there are any sacrifices, or that it is all particularly hard.” Marina settles into her chair and her expression grows grave. “But looking back at it, I definitely knew that there were some terrible periods. It wasn’t quite that I was depressed because I always knew I was going to make it. But life in general was, well, hard.” She shakes her head as she recollects her post-school years. “Coming to a new city and not knowing a single person there is actually pretty tough. I was on my own in London to start with.” She gestures to her surroundings. “Being a part of a university is so important to make those kinds of connections. Without being connected to a university, I didn’t have that social environment.”

I find it hard to imagine that this openly friendly woman was on her own for too long, however. Her carefree demeanour is highly charismatic and there is a noticeable awareness of her presence from all the members in the room. “Honestly, it took me so long to find people who I really liked”, she tells me. “It can take a while to find people who are like-minded individuals. I actually really felt that the creation of Marina & the Diamonds was a way that attracted certain individuals into my life and that is how I saw music. It was very much a way of uniting people and doing the whole likes-attract.”

Success, when it did inevitably happen to Marina, didn’t come as much of a surprise. “When I got signed I simply wasn’t that jubilant. It solved my financial problems pretty much instantly.” She smiles at me coyly. “But I didn’t celebrate or anything. It was more of a case of, well now that that’s done, I’m able to do this and that. And of course, I’m able to create an album. So there was never much pause for thought. It’s actually only really been in the last years, especially with Froot, that I’ve been able to enjoy everything. I can see what I have been able to do and I know that that’s not ‘the norm’. Whereas at the time it felt like I was just really blinkered.” She laughs at her own words and the gaiety of her expression returns.

We fall onto the topic of her highly original 2012 album Electra Heart, famously known for its conceptual caricatures of American archetypes. Despite its purpose to imitate, I ask her whether she feels that she can personally identify with any of the themes that her album approaches. She throws her head back and laughs aloud – “Absolutely!” she cries, “Absolutely! The aesthetic side of it was driven by the fact that the sound that I had acquired for that album wasn’t really true to me, but it was a result of working with a lot of ‘big-name’ producers. I was being encouraged to take that pop route and to come out as a pop star. Yet I didn’t feel that was really ‘me’ so adopting a different guise was my way of dealing with it. Lyrically, it was different. That was totally authentic; songs like ‘Primadonna’ and ‘Heartbreaker’ are really just me mirroring what I saw in terms of female archetypes in our society. It’s like the Kim Kardashian, Paris Hilton effect. That’s what pop is for; it’s a mirror. It’s telling you about a certain moment that you’re living in, be that bad or good. But then there were songs like ‘Teen Idle’ and ‘Starring Role’ that were more simple and not at all multi-layered.” ‘Starring Role’ is one of a string of songs that lament love and reflect on emotionally damaging relationships, adding to the complexity of the album’s fictional alter-ego duality. “There has been a lot of heartache” Marina adds, “But it’s not necessarily because of boys or love. I think one of the main themes throughout all three albums is to do with identity. In my first album, The Family Jewels, it was me figuring out my identity. Electra Heart was questioning it, and then Froot confirming it. Identity is definitely one of the central themes. Questioning who you are and why you are that way, I suppose.” She pauses. “Everyone will have events in their life that will influence the things that they do. For me – well, I can’t think of anything precisely. There was a lot of stuff from my upbringing, it was happy but also it wasn’t. I guess like everybody, there are things that will mark you for the rest of your life, and definitely form your story. Everybody has their story in life, don’t they? I don’t know what mine is. I guess you probably know better than I do.”

We laugh as I point out that the more I listen to her music, the less I understand her. The lyrics from her songs sometimes cover intertwined topics and as a result present conflicting stories. It is perhaps this complex layering of personalities and experiences that make Marina’s music so elusive and unique to the music industry. Marina’s music is encouraging in its self-acceptance as her confidence in herself also embraces a range of themes that are not classifiably black and white.

She tells me how now she feels that she can explore other things, specifically particular social concerns of hers, her song ‘Savages’ being demonstrative of this. “A lot of it is actually just me being curious, asking why human beings are the way that they are. We are so complex, and I don’t like approaching something from a role of condemning it, it’s not me having to reinforce that war and rape are bad because they obviously are, it’s more of a question of ‘why?’. You know; why is that ingrained in us? And acknowledging the fact that we have an animalistic side and that yet we still think that we are civilised human beings.”

Leaving these dark topics behind, the conversation turns to synaesthesia. I ask Marina if and how her personal experience of synaesthesia ever manifests itself, be it lyrically or visually within her work. “I’ve heard a lot of varying accounts from other people who have synaesthesia,” she tells me, “Accounts where people smell colour, or they actually see it, but for me it’s not that at all. It sounds weird to everyone else, but I associate colours with days of the week, and numbers and musical notes. It’s not something I actually see, it’s more of a colour sensitivity. And that definitely affects the way that I have worked visually. Each album creates a world in which fans can immerse themselves. It’s not just an MP3. I have a huge role in the direction of the music videos.”

As the interview draws to a close, Marina leans in towards me. “It’s such a pleasure to be asked real questions by you.” Her eyes shine playfully. “Really, I’ve been so impressed by everyone in Oxford. There was even a little nine-year-old girl in the chamber who asked me about how I could help her to be a heart breaker and why I wrote the song.” She does an imitation of the girl’s voice and chuckles in amusement to herself. But doesn’t she live by that? “Not any more, but at the time I ferociously did!” Poor men in London! She grins, “But it didn’t last long though.” Oh we know, Marina, we know.

Spiking their way to success

0

It has been an exciting and demanding season for the Oxford University Volleyball Team this winter. Both the men’s and the women’s teams compete in the BUCS in addition to the Varsity Match, with both teams also fielding an NVL team and a second squad each, making it one of the most popular sports in Oxford by team. Although there is considerable overlap between the Blues and the NVL squads, the NVL’s rules allow for the addition of post-doctorate students and alumni, making volleyball also one of the most age-diverse sports at the University.

When considering what fosters popularity, success is usually one of the most prominent reasons, and this certainly holds true for the Volleyball Blues. The men’s 1st team have had a fantastic season, climbing to the top of the BUCS rankings with an undefeated season. Their most recent victories, a decisive 3-0 shutout over Warwick and a 3-1 victory over third place Loughborough show the dominant offense that the team has been able to build. When asked what led to such an advantage over other divisional competitors, captain Stefan Nekovar observed that having such a large team-17 members-from which to field an on court offense gave Oxford great depth and a variety of strengths. The payoff has obviously been tremendous.

The women’s team has also had a solid season, currently ranking third in the BUCS. Although the season started disappointingly, the Blues bounced back strong with back to back victories, including a 3-0 victory over King’s College London. Although the record shows them at .500, such a strong defensive showing promises more fantastic matches in the near future.

Rivals Cambridge compete with both Blues teams in the annual Varsity Match, held this year on February 20th. Prior to the 2014-2015 season, the Oxford men’s team had gone four years without a win; however, last year the curse was finally broken and the trophy has returned to its rightful home. Even better, the team are heavy favorites to win again this season, given their outstanding record. The Oxford women’s Blues are also defending champions, and are looking to increase their victory streak over last place Cambridge, who just recently concluded their sixth straight loss. Given such matchups, Oxford are a clear bet for this season’s game.

The NVL teams have also had great success this year, with the women’s team standing undefeated in Division 1 more than halfway through the season. With the exception of one particularly tense match between Oxford and Herts VC, the women’s NVL have secured shutout victories in every game they’ve played. The men’s NVL, who compete in Division 3, started the season with an unfortunate but close loss versus New Forest but quickly bounced back to claim victories over Cardiff and Bristol.

Aside from its inclusivity and popularity-new and inexperienced students are encouraged to try out for NVL teams with a free first training session-the volleyball team captains also attribute the team’s recent successes to the dedication and training that their athletes demonstrate every week. Training sessions run two hours on weekdays and three hours on weekends, interspersed with long weekend tournaments. Volleyball is one of the most match-intensive sports, with triangulars or games taking place almost every weekend and sometimes on back to back days. This kind of schedule can be exhausting, but several team members cited the competition-heavy schedule as one of their favourite things about the sport, pointing out that the best practice comes not just from drills and conditioning, but also gameday situations. One women’s NVL member said that there is very little that matches the excitement that comes from playing in real time, and that the best way to prepare is just to play as much as possible.

The teams are certainly set up for a challenging and competitive end to the season. The championships don’t end with Varsity; the teams will also be competing in the BUCS trophy tournament. Weekly knockout rounds begin on the seventeenth, the same week as the Varsity Match, and continue into the first weekend in March for what promises to be an intense few weeks for the volleyball squads. Given such excellent showings across the board, the players and their fans are excited about their continuing to dominate on the court.

An open letter to OULC

0

Dear Sirs,

On Monday 15th February, the members of Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) voted to endorse Oxford’s so-called “Israeli Apartheid Week”. As former and current Chairs and Executive members of OULC, Jewish student leaders and other members and friends of Oxford University, we condemn and oppose this poorly considered course of action. We also congratulate the bold decision of one of the current Co-Chairs, Alex Chalmers, to resign in response. “Israeli Apartheid Week” purports to be a conference promoting intellectual discussion. In reality it is little more than a gathering of activists promoting a one-sided narrative, seeking to dismantle the only majority-Jewish member-state of the United Nations.

It principally serves as a vehicle for promoting the academic, cultural and economic isolation of the Jewish state. In doing so, it strengthens the hand of those who oppose the two-state solution and emboldens extremists who seek to “resolve” the conflict by extinguishing one of the parties to it.

It is wrong to contend that Israel – a multiracial democracy – even remotely resembles the horrors of South Africa’s racist dictatorship. Israel is a nation largely composed of refugees and their descendants – from both Europe and the Arab world, living in a land to which they have deep historical and religious ties. It is not a settler-colonial state. It belongs to the Middle East’s rich tapestry of religious and ethnic diversity. Today, more than ever, minorities in the Middle East need their own states. Worse still, the appropriation of the term “apartheid” is an affront to black South Africans. The supporters of “Israeli Apartheid Week” would do well to remember the words of Nelson Mandela: “As a movement we recognise the legitimacy of Palestinian nationalism just as we recognise the legitimacy of Zionism as a Jewish nationalism. We insist on the right of the state of Israel to exist within secure borders, but with equal vigour support the Palestinian right to national self-determination.” We share this vision and believe it is in the best traditions of OULC – and more importantly, the ethos and values of Oxford University.

We don’t pretend for a second that there are no problems in Israel-Palestine. We don’t ignore the imperfections of Israeli society. We don’t overlook the tragedy of conflict. But we are troubled by OULC’s decision and feel compelled to speak out. In a climate of rising anti-Semitism, we have a duty to oppose initiatives that foster an intolerant political culture which intimidates Jewish students.

Lastly – but most distressingly – we observe with horror what Mr Chalmers describes in his note of resignation: “members of the Executive throwing around the term ‘Zio’ (a term for Jews usually confined to websites run by the Ku Klux Klan)”; senior members expressing “solidarity” with Hamas; claims that “most accusations of anti-Semitism are just the Zionists crying wolf” and the fact that “a large proportion of both OULC and the student left in Oxford more generally have some kind of problem with Jews”.

We note that OULC and the Labour Party have a long and distinguished history of fighting racism and injustice – and we therefore urge current members to remember that tradition and to reconsider their distressing decision.

Yours sincerely,

Baroness Ruth Deech, QC (Hon) DBE, Former Principal (St Anne’s College)

Lord Carlile of Berriew CBE QC

Lord Pannick QC

John Mann MP

John Bowers QC

Professor Richard Susskind OBE

 

Oxford University Labour Club

Ella Taylor (Executive Committee)

Louis McEvoy (Executive Committee)

David Klemperer (Co-Chair MT 2015)

David Cesar-Heymann (Co-Chair HT 2015)

Helena Dollimore (Co-Chair MT 2013)

Aled Jones (Co-Chair MT 2013)

Jonathan Metzer (Co-Chair TT 2013)

Tom Adams (Co-Chair MT 2012)

Anthony Breach (Co-Chair TT 2012)

Kevin Feeney (Co-Chair TT 2012)

Claire Smith, Co-Chair 2012

Lincoln Hill (Co-Chair TT 2011)

Colin Jackson (Co-Chair 2011)

Kathleen Shields (Co-Chair HT 2011)

Sapandeep Singh Maini-Thompson (Executive Committee TT 2014)

Jack Evans (Co-Chair HT 2011)

Tom Rutland (ex OUSU President 2013-14, OULC Executive Committee 2011)

Hannah Cusworth (Co-Chair HT 2010)

Alistair Strathern (Co-Chair TT 2010)

Kieran Cunningham (Co-Chair MT 2010)

Jacob Turner (Co-Chair TT 2009)

Ben Lyons (Co-Chair 2009)

Ayo Ajanaku (Co-Chair 2009)

Emily Benn (Executive TT 2009)

Jamie Susskind (Co-Chair TT 2009)

Martha MacKenzie (Executive Committee 2009)

David Green (Co-Chair TT 2008)

Sarah Hutchinson (Co-Chair TT 2008)

Alice Taylor (Co-Chair 2008)

Mark Baker (Co-Chair TT 2007)

Harriet Myles (Co-Chair 2007)

Phillip Patterson (Co-Chair TT 2006)

Martin McCluskey (Co-Chair MT 2005)

Stephen Longden (Co-Chair HT 2005)

Alex Brodkin (Co-Chair 2005)

Jack Graves (Co-Chair 2005)

 

Oxford University Jewish Society

Yoni Stone (Current JSoc President)

Aaron Simons (Former JSoc President)

Jake Berger (Former JSoc Vice-President)

Matt Rose (Former JSoc President)

Paul Erdunast (Former JSoc president)

Rachel Grabiner (Former JSoc Vice-President)

David Miron (Former JSoc Vice-President)

Rebecca Freedman (Former JSoc Vice-President)

Vladimir Bermant (Former JSoc President)
 
Andrew Freedman (Former JSoc President, barrister)

 

Oxford University Chabad Society

Jonathan Hunter (Former Oxford Chabad President, Former Vice-President of JSoc)

Sam Bodansky (Current Oxford Chabad President)

Fien Barnett-Neefs (Current Oxford Chabad Vice-President)

 

Oxford University Liberal Democrats

Jack Ford (Co-Chair)

Matt Sumption (Former Co-Chair)

Anne Cremin (Secretary)

 

Oxford University Conservative Association

Thomas Jackson (President)

Shane Finn (Treasurer)

William Robert Rees-Mogg (Committee Member)

Richard Black (Ex-Publications Editor, Former JSoc Publicity Officer)

Dan Freeman (Ex-Political Officer)

Jack Matthews (Ex-President)

Jan Nedvidek (Ex-President)

Benjamin Woolf (Ex-Returning Officer)

 

 

 

 

 

100th birthday for lacrosse varsity

0

As its Oxford-Cambridge Varsity match enter its 100th year, Lacrosse continues to be one of the fastest growing sports in the UK. To mark the momentous, historically significant occasion, University Parks is set to be transformed into a hub of on and off-field entertainment this February 27th. Following the controversial government decision to retract visas from a number of American coaches, who were in the UK to develop the sport, Lacrosse needs this high-profile day of matches at now more than ever. 

To reflect this, and the general magnitude of the occasion, this year’s event is bigger than ever. The smorgasbord of sport will begin early, as both men’s and women’s alumni teams take on Cambridge opposition. In total, seven matches will be played across the day, and ex-Chair of the England Lacrosse Association David Shuttleworth will be presenting the trophies. Oxford rarely allow a moment of historical significance to pass quietly, so an alum from the 50th Varsity match will join Shuttleworth at the day’s presentations. The fact that this is the first year both men’s and women’s second teams’ will have their own trophy is a mark of just how far the sport has come.

Katharine Bailey, the women’s Blues captain, sees this year’s encounter as a perfect opportunity to celebrate the ‘amazing team sport’ and the ‘friendly and vibrant university clubs’ that have been fostered in both Blue camps. Given the sport itself is technical, physical and incredibly athletic, a full programme of matches from Blues to alumni looks set to be one of the sporting highlights of Hilary term. 

Of course when it comes to Varsity, putting ceremony aside, only one thing matters: the result. Whilst Bailey is under no illusions as to challenge her Blues side face – they have lost 12-11 and 8-4 to their undefeated light Blue counterparts this year – she is confident Oxford can reverse these narrow defeats to put the recently crowned South Premier champions ‘in their place’. For the women’s seconds, which Bailey describes as ‘one of the strongest’ squads that she can remember, a 12-6 victory over Cambridge in Michaelmas provides cause for buoyant optimism as their Varsity match approaches. Obviously, as with all great one-off sporting encounters, the form book rarely counts for anything. The fact both women’s squads have been approaching training with an exceptional ‘enthusiasm and intensity’, therefore, has left Bailey confident, if not expectant. 

On the men’s side of the encounter, both the Blues and the seconds will be looking to build on a hugely successful 2014-2015 season, which culminated in an outstanding set of Varsity performances on Cambridge soil. Whilst the second team drew 12-12 against a Cambridge side with far greater depth, the Blues secured an impressive win. In fact, last year’s 13-10 triumph sealed the men’s Blues fourth consecutive victory, so success in this 100th anniversary year will come with a special significance. 

As a university sport, Lacrosse is growing in support and the quality of on-field performances is, as a result, rapidly improving. This trend is being reflected across the country. However, as the movement of foreign coaches into the country to promote and develop the sport is restricted, Lacrosse still has a long way to go. The 100th Oxbridge Varsity encounter will undoubtedly help to protect and progress the profile of this burgeoning sport.

Is it the end of the road for TMO?

0

With modern technology offering ever-increasing ways of utilizing video reviews and additional support for match officials, should sports reject the advances or are they simply stalling the inevitable?

Let us return to the events of the summer, during the Rugby World Cup quarter final, when official Craig Joubert awarded Australia a last minute penalty without consulting the Technical Match Official (TMO,) commonly known as a video referee. The resulting three-point kick sent Australia to the semis and Scotland crashing out. It was one of the most controversial moments of what was otherwise a fantastic summer of sport.

There are concerns in rugby that we are moving towards a situation where the real referee is the man in the car park in an office next to the television scanner rather than the highly-trained official in the centre of the pitch. Previously, and at levels of the game without TMO, the whole nature of being a rugby referee is that your word is final and everyone respects that decision. The level of respect is far superior to that in football and many other sports.

However, TMO has made referees doubt themselves. The referee should be the sole arbiter and have complete liberty over making his decisions. When you have a TMO in the background, the referees end up getting more things wrong because they are not as decisive. It breeds doubt which by its nature is not a trait anyone wants a referee to have, especially in a sport as fast-paced and free-flowing as rugby.

So then what are the arguments for video view and additional support for match referees in any sport? Accuracy seems to be the main argument, namely that the right decisions will be made and everyone will go home happy. Controversy will be removed from a situation. However, to believe that a few slow-motion shots from a variety of angles will remove all doubt from a complex sporting situation is ludicrous. In rugby, tackles always look ten times more serious in slow motion, leading to an increasing number of sin bin offences that should never have been given.

If it doesn’t remove the controversy from all situations, then is there a place for it in the game? Despite all the criticisms above, I would say yes, but only in limited circumstances. At the discretion of the man in the centre of the pitch, technology can be used to ascertain in cases of disputes where there is a clear binary whether a try should be awarded, or a ball crossed the goal line. Even so, it should be used sparingly so as not to disrupt the flow of the game, the speed of the action and the sense of spontaneity and jubilance when a try or goal has been awarded.

Technology should be embraced in the name of accuracy and fairness, but not at the expense of the spirit of the game. It should always be remembered that rugby, football, all sports in fact are games of humans and we should love them for their imperfections. Sport belongs to men and women, not robots, and it should stay that way.

Cross-party coalition slams OULC in open letter

0

A cross-party coalition of student politicians, academics and public figures has signed an open letter for publication in Cherwell condemning and opposing Oxford University Labour Club’s (OULC) vote to endorse Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW), an annual series of lectures that opposes Israeli occupation of Palestine and supports Boycott, Divest and Sanction movements.

The letter’s 65 signatories include more than 30 former OULC Co-Chairs, as well as a number of Oxford University Jewish Society and Chabad Society current and ex-leaders, and significant figures from both Oxford University Liberal Democrats and Oxford University Conservative Association, including presidents of both. Six public figures have also signed the letter, such as Baroness Ruth Deech, Former Principal of St Anne’s College, and legal expert Lord Carlile of Berriew QC.

The signatories express “horror” at the anti-Semitism within the club alleged by Alex Chalmers in his resignation as OULC Co-Chair on February 15th.

They continue by criticising OULC’s “poorly-considered choice of action” to endorse IAW, which they describe as “little more than a gathering of activists promoting a one-sided narrative, seeking to dismantle the only majority-Jewish member-state of the United Nations.”

IAW is especially controversial this year given that the theme of “solidarity with Palestinian popular resistance” coincides with a resurgence of attacks on Jewish civilians since October.

The signatories add that “it is wrong to contend that Israel – a multiracial democracy – even remotely resembles the horrors of South Africa’s racist dictatorship.”

“Today, more than ever,” they write, “minorities in the Middle East need their own state.” The letter also challenges the use of the term ‘apartheid’ to refer to Israeli policy, saying, “The appropriation of the term ‘apartheid’ is an affront to black South Africans.”

While acknowledging the “imperfections of Israeli society,” the signatories state that “in a climate of rising anti-Semitism, we have a duty to oppose initiatives that foster an intolerant political culture which intimidates Jewish students.”

The letter highlights as “most” distressing Chalmers’ examples of anti-Semitism, like “members of the [OULC] Executive throwing around the term ‘Zio’ (a term for Jews usually confined to websites run by the Ku Klux Klan.)”

The signatories end their letter by calling for members of OULC to return to the organisation’s “distinguished history” of combating prejudice.

Chalmers’ resignation is a move that has earned attention outside of Oxford as well, provoking significant national and Israeli coverage as well as stirring up broader debate about anti-Semitism within the left.

The Oxford University Jewish Society (JSoc) responded swiftly to Chalmers’ statement, writing that it was in full support of his decision but “unsurprised” by the anti-Semitic reports.

In a statement released on its Facebook page, the society claimed, “It is not the first time that Oxford JSoc has had to deal with anti-Semitic incidents within the student left and it will not be the last.

“It is a significant and worrying issue and one that on many occasions, Jewish students have felt that they are fighting alone.”

The statement added that Jewish students who attempt to point out anti-Semitism often have their concerns dismissed by liberal students, or outright mocked. But the accusations of anti-Semitism have provoked contrition among Labour leadership, with few choosing to defend the club.

Although both Michael Muir, former Social Secretary, and Noni Csogor, Chalmer’s Co-Chair, said that the vote to support IAW at Oxford was not itself indicative of anti-Semitism, the OULC official statement on Wednesday made no mention of the club’s vote, and only vowed to begin the process of investigating anti-Semitism among its membership.

Writing that it “whole-heartedly” condemned anti-Semitism “in all its forms,” OULC promised to co-operate fully with an investigation launched by the national group Labour Students into anti-Semitism and intimidation of Jewish students by OULC members.

Labour Students has already begun to make steps in their probe. A letter on behalf of Labour Students’ National Chair Michael Rubin was posted in JSoc’s Facebook group on Thursday afternoon and sent out by email a few hours later, with Rubin writing that he was “keen to meet with any member who has experienced or witnessed anti-Semitism” or could otherwise aid in Labour Students’ investigation. Evidence is to be submitted by Monday 22nd February and Rubin said Labour Students aims to publish its findings the day after.

On Wednesday, both the Israeli embassy in London and British Labour leadership issued statements condemning the alleged anti-Semitism within OULC.

Ed Miliband also cancelled plans to address OULC at its John Smith Memorial Dinner on March 4th after hearing the news.

A spokesperson for the former Labour leader told the New Statesman that Mili-band was “deeply disturbed to hear of reports of anti-Semitism in the Oxford Labour Club and would not appear until the investigation was resolved.

Later the same day, universities minister Jo Johnson urged Oxford University’s leadership to consider disciplinary sanctions, stating that “strong disciplinary action” should be “taken where necessary.”

A University spokesperson said in a statement that “Oxford University does not tolerate any form of harassment or victimisation,” but added that it “cannot comment on individual cases or complaints for reasons of confidentiality.”

Some students have extended the debate to the broader politics of the left-wing of the to the broader politics of the left-wing of the Labour party.

One Jewish student wrote in The Guardian that “the student left conceives of Jews as white.” He argued that Jews of Arabic or African descent are “ignored” and that framing Jews as white allows the left to attack the Jewish community as beneficiaries of privilege.

Similarly, a former OULC Co-Chair, David Cesar-Heymann, who also signed on to the open letter, posted on Facebook that “there has been a concerted effort from the Oxford hard left to take over the club.”

He alleged that activists linked with the Labour leader’s Momentum group are partly responsible for anti-Semitism within OULC.