Saturday 5th July 2025
Blog Page 1326

Review: Beryl

0

If Yorkshire had been counted as a separate country at the 2012 Olympics, it would have finished twelfth in the medals table; what Beryl shows us, in dealing with the life and career of cycling legend and Yorkshire lass, Beryl Burton, is that sporting excellence in the Dales is far from a recent phenomenon. Maxine Peake’s play, directed by Rebecca Gatward and performed at the West Yorkshire Playhouse, is a timely venture, as this year’s Tour de France sets off from Leeds and remains up north for the first two stages. The timing could not be more perfect, but the play rises far above being a mere footnote to the excitement of the Grand Départ.

Beryl Burton is a remarkable figure, made even more remarkable by her obscurity. “I hadn’t heard of her until I got this job,” one of the play’s cast of four announces, metatheatrically. “I hadn’t heard of her until I looked her up on Wikipedia, before I went to the audition,” another replies. This exchange positions Beryl as an underdog not only in the traditional sporting sense of having begun her career a rank outsider, but also in being relatively unknown, and un-talked of, to this day.

The play does an excellent job of making the case for Burton’s greatness, telling her story with wit and tenderness. It’s a classic sports movie trope to position the protagonists in a struggle against seemingly overwhelming odds, but, as it turns out, Beryl Burton was exceptional not only in the sheer quantity of her awards and world records, but also in the number of obstacles she faced on the way to achieving them.

Balancing the necessary – and long overdue – recognition of Beryl Burton’s achievements with a play that works in dramatic terms is a difficult trick. It is one managed excellently for the most part, but for some of the play’s second half, it loses something of its dramatic power in dwelling perhaps too long on a period of consistent success. The piece finds its way by the end, but perhaps would have benefitted overall from having some material from the second half cut, and from running without an interval.

Ultimately, this is a story that is worth telling, and that is told well; the play has warmth, humour, and an evident and contagious admiration and enthusiasm for its characters. There’s an appropriate and unique ‘Yorkshire’ feel to the piece – maybe it’s the dry wit and no-nonsense story-telling, or maybe it’s the morally obligatory swipe at Tory regional arts cuts – but there’s also something in the story of Beryl Burton which goes beyond the obvious local interest. Like all good underdog stories, it speaks to the desire in all of us to believe that ordinary people, people like ourselves, can perform superhuman feats – be they emotional or physical – of strength and of endurance.

The app which ‘democratises’ the party playlist

0

Nick and his co-founders Josh and Otto see their new app as solving an age-old student problem, namely that “anyone who has been to or hosted a house party knows that the music there is usually comprised of a nightmarish mix of drunk kids plugging in and out their phones, beer spilt on laptops, and long silences as people wait for their YouTube videos to load.”

DJs or playlists are not the solution, because they still fall prey to endless complaining about what is actually being played. “Every music service out there is designed to cater to your personal preferences, but most of the time when people listen to music, they are with other people. We wanted to build a music service that was designed to be used by multiple people at the same time, whether they’re hanging out with friends, at a party, or at a bar.”

The founders of Jam set out to democratise the choice of music, starting out with house parties as a “first use case”.

With Jam, “people can request any song they can think of, and up-vote others’ requests in the queue, so the most popular songs get played the soonest.” Eventually, Josh, Otto, and Nick hope that Jam will be able to automatically select the music played at an event based on the common tastes of those attending. They also hope to overcome the Spotify requirement, so that eventually anyone will be able to use the service from the music they already have on their phone.

The trio are all 22-year-old seniors in the University of Michigan’s College of Engineering. The project was conceived out of a senior design class, in a course deliberately designed “to give students an opportunity to pursue projects they might not otherwise have time for”. According to Nick, such creative courses are increasingly common in engineering schools, which now directly compete with tech start-ups for young talent.

Jam seems to form part of a common trend among tech start-ups, namely that it was begun as a group of friends aiming to create something useful for themselves, but soon transformed into an increasingly successful business model:

“We were all very passionate about Jam from the outset, so it was an easy decision to continue development when the class ended in December. From January to March we poured thousands of hours into the project, and finally released our first version in April.”

Jam has been hard work, but Nick says it has been “extremely gratifying” to watch its popularity grow. “Jam is really a passion project for the three of us, so even though it has been exhausting, it has also been a ton of fun. We have gotten a pretty amazing response from users; without doing any marketing or promotion, we have built up a base of several thousand users in 41 countries.”

Despite this success, the trio are still awaiting investment before committing to pursuing Jam fulltime. We get the sense, however, that they are reluctant to let go: as Nick says, “Anyone who has ever worked on a creative project knows how easy it is to lose objectivity; when you’re that close to something, when you’ve worked and worked and fretted about it for months, it is very difficult to put yourself in an outsider’s shoes, and you can never really know how people will react. I get a huge rush every time we get an email from someone telling us they love Jam, or receive another good review on the App Store, or watch as ten more people in another country download the app.”

Wadham cancels plan for vegan-only meals

0

Wadham College’s Student Union (SU) has announced that it will not continue with a motion passed in June, which had mandated the Hall to serve only vegan food for five nights a week.

The College made the announcement on its website on behalf of Lucy Halton, SU President, and Diana Greenwald, MCR President. The Warden of Wadham, Ken Macdonald QC, confirmed this announcement and stated, “While every effort is made to accommodate specific dietary needs, the College has no plans to serve exclusively vegan food.”

The original motion was justified on the grounds of environmentalism. It noted that “immediate and drastic action is needed to battle climate change…serving vegetarian food for five days of the week gives a strong message on where the college stands on climate change and reducing the college’s own carbon emissions.”

The Vegan Society had praised Wadham for the decision to stop serving meat. Amanda Baker, senior advocacy officer, commented that “good vegan-friendly food is great for everyone, especially in higher education. This is because imaginative plant-centred dishes ‘tick’ so many boxes: delicious, varied, inclusive, environmentally sustainable and cost-effective for university and other caterers.”

The motion however had also received some significant criticism since its inception. Ben Szreter, who inserted the amendment to introduce vegan nights for five days a week instead of the initially proposed idea of having vegetarian food only on four, openly stated at the time that he did not actually support the motion. The motion was also criticized for potentially deterring future applicants.

Alexander Walker, leader of the ‘No To Meat-Free Mondays’ campaign, told Cherwell, “The vegan motion was considered a joke motion at the time and it would not have passed if that had not been the case. We did not realise how bad the motion would be for the reputation of the college and there lies a lesson for how to consider these sorts of motions in the future.”

Both the SU President and MCR President remain committed to Wadham’s ‘Meat-Free Mondays’ policy, which sees no meat served at dinner on Mondays. They were also keen to stress that vegan food will still be available to all students who opt for it.

Oxford academic criticizes badger cull

0

Professor David Macdonald has criticized the government’s badger culls for failing to achieve targets.

Professor Macdonald is the founder and current Director of the University’s Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, as well as chairman of the government’s Natural England scientific advisory board.

The culls began last year when trials were authorized for Somerset and West Gloucestershire, killing an estimated 65 per cent and 39 per cent of local badgers respectively. The aim of the culls is to eventually eradicate Tuberculosis in cattle.

According to Professor Macdonald these trials were not sufficiently successful as the target was a 70% reduction. He commented that “following this epic failure it is hard to see how continuing this approach could be justified”.

A second Oxford academic, Professor Tim Coulson, has also criticized government ministers. When speaking to the BBC, Professor Coulson stated, “If culling worked I’d be fully supportive of them [Defra, the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs] rolling it out, but all the evidence is that it does not.” Professor Coulson is a member of the Independent Expert Panel, which was tasked by the government to advise it on the pilot culls.

The Farming Minister has recently proposed badger vaccination programs, suggesting that the current policy of culling badgers may eventually be reversed. Other alternative policies such as culling cattle have also been proposed by a research-paper published in the science journal, Nature.

However the government still plans to continue the ongoing pilot culls. A Natural England spokesperson has told Cherwell, “Natural England’s position [remains] to support the Government’s bTB [bovine Tuberculosis] eradication policy through the issuing and administering of badger control licences.”

I, too?

0

By most standards, 2014 has been a big year for issues concerning race at Oxford. March saw ‘I, too, am Oxford’ go viral as non-white students took to Tumblr, wielding placards inscribed with incensed one-liners. Within weeks, a university-wide Race Equality Summit had been set up with Oxford’s own powers-that-be joining the conversation.

You have probably also heard that just before the end of term, the same people behind the ‘I, too’ campaign launched a zine off the back of their earlier success. Entitled Skin Deep, it essentially spells out the core philosophy powering the placards in its call for “a post race writing… which claims that race is a fiction, which is only ever given substance via the illusion of performance, action, and utterance”.

For some, this “race as fiction” approach goes a long way in explaining their experience of Otherness. Unsurprisingly, it has proven particularly relevant to those who have an Occidental suffix like ‘-British’ appended to their identities; after all, if you have been bred in the same socio-political petri dish as most white Oxonians, it is perfectly conceivable that, for you, the particularities conveyed by an ‘ethnic’ background really do start and stop at the skin.

No surprises, then, that a significant portion of the ‘I, too’ and Skin Deep campaigners are long-term citizens of the West, who resent being told what great English they speak when they have spent their entire lives based in New York or London. Other campaigners, whilst not British, are nevertheless the sort of global elite who have embraced the West conclusively enough to protest, against all appearances, that yes English is their first language.

In cases like these, race may genuinely be a form of unhelpful fiction that deserves to be overlooked. But personally, as an international student, I cannot help but feel a little alienated by the assimilative racial programmes du jour which argue that people ought to be treated like they’re all ‘the same’ inside, regardless of ethnic particularities.

Like other non-Brits I’ve spoken to, I get nervous about what the word ‘same’ is meant to imply in this context: that there exists some ideal version of ‘Oxford’ that I’m supposed to have the capacity to ‘be(come)’, in spite of my tinted skin and completely un-English background. Far too often, I have seen the phrase ‘the same’ elaborated into an irrational expectation that under the skin, all Oxonians ultimately are — or even worse, ought to conform to — some combination of British, white, and middle-class.

It has been precisely this expectation of underlying, unrelenting sameness that has produced some of my most unsettling experiences here at Oxford. Truth be told, I can live with being asked regularly if English is my first language; I have an accent that is clearly not local, a fact which makes this assumption somewhat more understandable.

But I cannot, as I have discovered, live with friends and tutors who insist on belittling non-European forms of belief or social organisation to my face, on the blanket assumption that the whole world buys into — or worse still, should want to buy into — their own society’s myths (If you’re a working adult who still lives with your parents, then you must be a sponge; if you take the occasional dose of Traditional Chinese Medicine then you must be superstitious, or living in the dark ages).

Similarly, I felt wronged when a university supervisor informed me point blank, one day, that I was on the “wrong side of History” for erring on the side of so-called Asian-style democracy, rather than agreeing with his fancifully liberal and privileged British abstractions about what a Southeast Asian utopia should look like (Whose history was I on the wrong side of? His?).

On a less subtle note, I also remember feeling mildly disturbed when a British friend once proclaimed, half tongue-in-cheek, that he could form a real friendship with me only because I was Singaporean, and therefore “just an English person with yellow skin on” (“Actually,” I told him, “I’m very yellow on the inside too.”).

As I see it, then, the logic of ‘race as fiction’ applies to some of us here at Oxford more than it does, or should do, to others. On the one hand, there is admittedly no doubt that it works well if you do count yourself as British at heart, like many of this year’s most vocal campaigners. There’s also a certain amount of truth in its foundational premise that race does not make a person — I am well aware that my ethnicity is not the sum of my personality, and I feel a little slighted whenever people assume straight off the bat that I read physics or do kung fu.

But on the other hand, it is perhaps worth asking ourselves just how far this attitude can be applied to the entirety of the international student community since, in many cases, race does signify a whole plethora of genuine cultural differences for them.

How far can you treat everyone like they are the same, before coming across as disrespectful in your refusal to acknowledge genuine points of uniqueness rooted in ethnicity, and the expression of this through performative social beliefs? What is this ‘same’ that we’re all meant secretly to be, anyway; is it shorthand for ‘culturally British’?

And what if, horror of horrors, the very skin colour you want to brush aside turns out to be the best route to approaching someone who does not identify with your culture, and wants people to take a more active interest in his own?

In Oxford, of all places, the legitimisation of ethnocultural differences ought to be the basis from which genuine cross-cultural understanding can develop. I, for one, feel that if my skin makes me seem culturally distinct from the average British person, then it is only doing a good job of telling the truth.

I am different on the inside, and would much rather have this fact cast out into the open and be treated positively as the Other that I am, rather than as the standardised, generically British person whom people would prefer me to be. 

Interview: Laura Watson

0

On February 26th this year, the European Parliament voted in favour of legalizing selling sex but criminalizing its purchase. This is indicative of a growing international movement towards criminalizing the client, or ‘shifting the burden’; first adopted by Sweden in 1999, this has become known as ‘the Nordic model’. Supporters say it will decrease demand for prostitution while protecting the rights of individual women.

However, The English Collective of Prostitutes, a network of activists who advocate for the rights of sex workers, are strongly opposed to this increasing support for the Nordic model. For Laura Watson, a spokeswoman for the organization, the only way the safety of sex workers can be guaranteed is complete decriminalization. Their manifesto powerfully asserts the way that both current UK laws and the Nordic model ‘criminalize sex workers, divide us from our families and friends, make us vulnerable to violence, and set us apart from the rest of the community — separate is never equal.’

In the UK, it is currently legal to exchange sex for money, but Laura tells me that laws which criminalize certain activities in the sex industry inevitably endanger the sex worker. “Everything you can do to keep yourself safe is illegal. So, for example, working together in a house, if there are two or more people inside, that’s illegal. The laws are very draconian.” Women are forced out of the relative safety of brothels onto the street, or away from their colleagues and security networks: it is very difficult to protect sex workers when part-criminalization preserves stigma and prevents equal treatment in our legal system.

In light of the EU vote, the UK is being urged by many to adopt the Nordic model. However, its central premise is not entirely new. “Kerb crawling is currently illegal, and so we already know the effects of criminalizing clients… basically, police crackdowns disperse women into dangerous and isolated areas”. Police crackdowns are perhaps the most harmful consequence of the part-criminalization of the sex industry. Often, crimes such as ‘controlling prostitution for gain’ conceal an agenda which works to eradicate sex work from our communities at any cost. “The Ipswich murders, in which five women were killed, happened in the wake of a police crackdown.”

This is the central criticism of systems which criminalize clients: their attempt to decrease demand drive the sex industry ever further underground, so that services are used by clients who are more determined, unconcerned about breaking the law,  and more likely to be disrespectful, derogatory or violent. Aggressively targeting clients also results in a culture of non-collaboration with the police among sex workers, for fear of losing business. It is therefore clear that if we cannot prove that criminalizing clients has led to an increase in violence, these laws have certainly not increased protection or relations with the authorities, as is often claimed.

Advocates for Nordic-style legislation often claim that it reduces demand for sexual services. Some official reports have indicated that Sweden’s laws have cut prostitution in half. However, this is an assertion which has been disputed; others contend that sex work in Sweden is simply less visible, and that a reduction in sex work is merely a reduction in street work, so that the majority of prostitution is now conducted online or in private apartments. One report by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare asks “Has the extent of prostitution  increased or decreased? We cannot give any unambiguous answer to that question… it is difficult to discern any clear trend”

Its supporters claim that if prostitution was decriminalized entirely, exit services which allow women to leave prostitution would be compromised, because the industry would be considered a more legitimate choice. However, Laura is quick to dispel this myth: “In fact, criminalization means that you can’t leave prostitution, because if you have a criminal record it’s incredibly difficult to get another job. We are also campaigning for services which allow women to leave prostitution if they wish.”

One of the most important issues to consider in legislating prostitution is human trafficking, which is often used by anti-prostitution campaigners as evidence of the intrinsic problems with the sex industry. However, the extent of trafficking in the UK is uncertain, due to inadequate research, and multiple cases of repeatedly inflated statistics, as comprehensively detailed here. While no one is disputing that trafficking is a problem which must be confronted in the sex industry, the ECP and other campaigners see trafficking as another excuse for social cleansing. In Laura’s experience, “victims of trafficking are not getting help and are instead targeted for arrest and deportation, which is despicable. Anti-trafficking efforts are used to raid brothels and target immigrant women.” She gives an example of anti-trafficking raids in Soho, in which “No victims of trafficking were found. But two hundred police officers, with dogs and riot gear, raided the flats…dragging women out in their underwear, smashing the place up. The idea that this is how we should treat victims of trafficking is a complete sham, and a cover for their real agenda.”

The English Collective of Prostitutes campaign for adoption of total decriminalization, a model which has been tested in New Zealand since 2003. My conversation with Laura so far has indicated that the biggest impediment to sex workers’ safety is social stigma attached to their profession. We discuss a successful case of sexual harassment brought by a sex worker in New Zealand, in which a tribunal ruled that ‘Sex workers are as much entitled to protection from sexual harassment as those working in other occupations’: I ask her if she thinks such a ruling would be possible in the UK. “I think that it would be very unlikely to happen here. It’s a largely criminalized industry currently and is very stigmatized as a result. The fact that such a conviction could happen demonstrates that in New Zealand, things are definitely moving forward.”

Attempts to eradicate the sex industry entirely, consciously or unconsciously, whether under an anti-trafficking or womens’ rights agenda, have often had disastrous consequences for the safety of sex workers. The UK’s 80,000 sex workers are among the most vulnerable women in our society: around 70% of women in prostitution are single mothers who do not receive social benefits. My conversation with Laura has convinced me of the need to forget abstract morality and listen to sex workers themselves, to scrutinize laws which, in her words, “currently do everything they can to sabotage whatever you’re doing to keep yourself safe.”

Glastonbury 2014: The People and the Place

0

As a Glastonbury first-timer, I had pieced my expectations of the festival together from friends’ reports, TV footage of previous years, and a secret feeling that it would all just be a bigger, wilder version of Green Man. I went for the music, sure, but I also went to see what on earth all the fuss is about. It couldn’t be much more than just another festival, surely? I was very wrong.

What struck me more than anything was that the whole thing is more like a surreal, outdoor city than a music festival. Picture London – its many districts and boroughs, each with its own separate, ever-changing personality. Think of the way it is populated: a vast, diverse mix of people, each one with their own agendas and haunts.

Imagine rush-hour traffic – but on foot, through mud that goes over your wellies. Then imagine all of this crammed into an area roughly the size of Oxford, covered in glitter and rain and set to a soundtrack of hundreds of bands playing at any given time. And then remind yourself that the whole thing has been carefully orchestrated by a vast creative and logistic team.

Wonderful, prophetic poetess/rapper Kate Tempest (with whom I’ve come away from the festival more than a little bit in love) stood on the Left Field stage and reminded us that “all of this effort, it’s all so that you guys have the fucking best weekend of your lives”.

Like any new city, getting your bearings takes a while – especially if, like me, you haven’t done your research and have zero navigational skill. Thursday daytime consists mostly of my standing underneath things, ringing someone and asking exasperatedly: “can you see a giant stripy tent?” not realising that the person I’m on the phone to is three miles away and that the festival has about 30 giant stripy tents.

What is great, however, is the fact that the camping areas are integrated into the festival, meaning that you’re free to trek (and it is literally a trek) around the vast site with a crate of cider under your arm and a whole temporary life strapped to your back, at any hour of the day or night. There is no separate ‘arena’; your tent becomes a part of the Glasto scenery, creating an atmosphere of complete immersion. 

This is a festival with villages; my favourite daytime one was the Park. The stage is situated mid-way down the hill where you find the famous Glastonbury sign, making the viewing experience a bit like watching bands from a grassy amphitheatre.

I was also a big fan of The Green Fields, probably best described as “where all the hippy stuff is”. People making things out of bits of metal, hula hooping, having massages, sitting around naked – and kids: tiny babies being carted around in trolleys and carried on backs; toddlers wearing ear muffs and looking a bit like how I felt – in awe of everything and not really sure where they’re going.  

As night hits and the headliners end (Regine Chassagne dancing around with ribbons!) everyone who hasn’t passed out in the mud from exhaustion wanders down to the train line-cum-footpath which runs down the middle of the festival.

This is where things get dark – literally and metaphorically. On either side are pockets of the most conceptual nightlife I’ve ever experienced: Arcadia, Block 9, the Common, the Unfairground (which we avoided on the grounds that it “sounded sad”), Glasto Latino, and finally Shangri-la.

Shangri-la is the festival’s very own Promised Land. Situated at the very furthest end of the South-East Corner, it is the heart of Glastonbury nightlife, falling somewhere between an experimentation in immersive theatre, a modern art installation, and the best outdoor clubbing experience of your life.

It’s heaven-and-hell themed, and the whole thing really does feel a bit like blasphemy – this year’s hell was the modern commercialist world, complete with iBabies and organs growing in jars.

And yet it is pure hedonistic fun.There were spontaneous rave parties in what look like offices, with actors on typewriters frantically handing meaningless bits of paper to the dancers; a man sitting on top of the red walls of hell with a £20 note dangling from a fishing rod, just out of reach; posters saying things like ‘Savour the Whales’, ‘Save Your Selfie’ and ‘Numb the Pain’.  I sent a text saying: “I’m in hell, it’s so great.” 

With more than 100,000 people on-site it could all so easily go wrong. And yet people seem to get that they’re onto a good thing. When my phone runs out of battery I start asking strangers for the time about ten times a day, and not one of them is anything but lovely. People stop to give water to people puking on the side of the track.

It’s called the Glastonbury spirit; Dolly talked about it up on the Pyramid stage and articulated it in her southern drawl better than I could ever do in writing. Go watch her on iPlayer if you haven’t already (I have, twice) and imagine being stood right at the edge of the crowd, listening to ‘Coat of Many Colors’ and simultaneously welling up and grinning like a muddy, tired out fool.

It’s clichéd and many have said it before me, but there’s something very special going on here. Go register yourself for next year and you might just get to see for yourself.

Yo ho ho and a battle against harsh copyright laws

0

The recent arrest of Peter Sunde, a co-founder of the popular file-sharing site The Pirate Bay, has brought back to light the issues surrounding copyright piracy on the Internet. Sunde had been on the run for more than two years, while another founder, Fredrik Nejj, is still a fugitive. The three co-founders and their sponsor were sentenced back in 2009 on charges of copyright infringement, but there is still debate on whether or not their actions should actually be illegal.

The site was originally founded by members of the Swedish think tank Piratbyrån, or The Pirate Bureau, an organization devoted to the promotion of copyright freedom within the Swedish government, and a counterpoint to powerful lobbyists such as the Swedish Anti-Piracy Bureau. In Sweden, their movement is highly respected, and has even spawned a political party, The Pirate Party, which has since been mirrored in a number of countries around the world, including the UK.

Since the foundation of The Pirate Bay, there has been a ruthless campaign to shut it down, a campaign which has not always stayed within the bounds of the law. In 2007, an anonymous hacker leaked emails from anti-piracy company MediaDefender discussing the hiring of hackers to attack users of The Pirate Bay. In response, the site filed charges against clients of MediaDefender including the Swedish branches of Twentieth Century Fox, EMI, Universal Music Group, Universal Pictures, Paramount, Atari, Activision, Ubisoft and Sony. Whilst these charges were not pursued, this case highlights the strength of opposition to the anti-copyright movement.

Accusations of corruption, bribery and bias have dogged the footsteps of The Pirate Bay’s enemies. For example, police investigator Jim Keyzer, accused by Sunde of a conflict of interest when he declined to investigate MediaDefender, later accepted a job at Warner Brothers, a client of MediaDefender.

In 2009, a guilty verdict was returned against The Pirate Bay’s founders, and the legal battle against the site was stepped up a level. Numerous countries, including Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, have blocked access to the website, while some ISPs such as Virgin Media have taken matters into their own hands and even blocked numerous proxy websites, used by file-sharers to circumvent the original blocks.

The high profile of The Pirate Bay’s enemies has had a large impact on the response of governments to it. The power of Hollywood around the world and the political impact of big business has meant that the anti-copyright debate has been suppressed at every level, with even Piratbyrån, the seemingly harmless, award-winning think tank, being subject to a police raid in 2006.

Greedy corporations, such as those which hire the likes of MediaDefender or the even more sinister-sounding Rights Alliance to defend their copyright issues, should not be allowed so much power.

Interestingly, the debate has been changed recently through an unlikely source: Game of Thrones. Due to the fact that it’s actually pretty difficult to watch the show legally unless you live in America and have access to HBO, the show has been setting record after record for illegal downloads. The finale of season 4 was downloaded 1.5 million times in the first 12 hours, with 250,000 users sharing the same file.

However, it seems HBO doesn’t care.

Despite Time Warner’s involvement in putting legal pressure on The Pirate Bay, CEO Jeff Bewkes told Forbes magazine that they had been dealing with piracy in the form of people connecting wires in apartment buildings and stealing cable for years, and they had found it led to greater publicity and therefore more paying subscribers.

It also seems clear that the war on piracy cannot be won. Despite numerous attempts to block The Pirate Bay, it still enjoys widespread usage all over the world, thanks to proxy sites and other mechanisms used to bypass government blocks. This shows that there is a strong desire by many people for less stringent copyright laws, and a consideration of the legitimacy of file-sharing.

However, as recently as January 2014, the UK Prime Minister’s IP advisor, Mike Weatherly MP, told the House that there needs to be “some sort of custodial sentence for persistent offenders”. He even advocated the imprisonment of people who only use file-sharing for their own entertainment.

The relentless attempts by big business to stifle free speech and freedom of expression on the Internet show a wilful disrespect for basic rights and an overwhelming desire to make money above all else. While a complete dismantling of the concept of copyright seems overly extreme, there must be some middle ground whereby men like Peter Sunde aren’t locked up for founding websites which don’t even host any content.

The creative industries need to recognize that it is their responsibility to change their businesses to adapt to the new technological landscape, and not to use their political influence to prevent development and criminalize pioneers.

Exploring the unexplored in Oxford drama

0

No question about it, the Oxford drama scene is a fertile and vibrant one. The academic year from Michaelmas 2013 to Trinity 2014 has seen a wide variety of innovative and exciting productions, from Buskins’s beautiful outdoor As You Like It, to the hilarious and moving performance of The History Boys at the Oxford Playhouse and a dark and thought-provoking Judgment at Nuremburg at the Keble O’Reilly.

However, one form of drama remains as yet underexplored: immersive theatre. Immersive theatre is perhaps the last stage in breaking the fourth wall: the audience is given almost total freedom about what to do and where to go within the performance space, and often finds itself becoming part of the action.

Perhaps the biggest pioneers of immersive theatre are Punchdrunk, a British theatre company formed in 2000.  Their recent show The Drowned Man: A Hollywood Fable transformed four floors of a building near Paddington station into the home of the fictional ‘Temple Studios,’ around which the audience could roam freely, choosing which characters or storylines to follow. However, elements of this dramatic form have been incorporated into shows in less extreme ways. National Theatre Wales were responsible for 2011’s The Passion, a translation of the story of the Passion to a variety of locations all around present day Port Talbot. Whilst this might not be considered as pure a form of immersion as Punchdrunk’s oeuvre (audiences being given the times and locations of key scenes in their programmes) it nonetheless constitutes a challenge to normative modes of theatrical expression, as the audience were of unquestionable and unusual importance to the events as they unfolded in real time.

It’s possible that the lack of similar ventures in Oxford student productions may stem in part from an anxiety concerning the way such productions are shaped – immersive theatre often involves some degree of devising on the part of the actors. However, as Rough-Hewn’s witty and on point adaptation of Frankenstein has recently shown, Oxford’s dramatic types are more than capable of rising to the challenge.

As well as allowing Oxford’s talented actors and directors to remain at the cutting edge of theatrical practice, experiments in immersive theatre would allow our thespian population to use the stunning locations around the city to their fullest advantage, and allow audiences a new way of appreciating familiar architecture and scenery. Use of immersive theatre could provide all involved, from actors to set designers to audience members, with an exciting and unique theatrical opportunity.

Cynicism and idealism in cinema

0

It’s impossible not to be aware of the so-called “-isms” that have come to define different schools of philosophical and cultural thought over the last century. From feudalism to functionalism, structuralism to sensationalism, anything anyone has ever said, done, made or thought can be put into a labelled box. Humans have always been fond of categorising things; never more so than now. This begs the question, though – is there a way of defining, in a phrase, how we think at this moment in time?

In recent years the term “metamodern” has been bandied around on the Internet as a possible description for the mindset of contemporary artists, musicians, writers, directors and critics in the West. It is a word which smacks of pseudo-intellectualism and pretension, but the idea behind it is an interesting one. In essence, the most popular creative auteurs – particularly in cinema – supposedly display all the naïveté, hopefulness, and humanitas of early 20th-century modernism along with the detached, ironic cynicism of the post-modern, and have reconciled the two.

It sounds far-fetched, but it isn’t. Whatever one wants to call it – and the word “metamodern” really doesn’t do it any favours re: being taken seriously – the concept seems to hold sway in a huge number of the most successful, thought-provoking films of the last 15 years or so. A metamodern movie is likely to ask you, the viewer, to laugh and cry at the same moment. Behind a veneer of wit, cool and quirk, there’s a genuine message or emotional plea. What’s more, it’s twice as hard for a self-conscious, smart movie like, say, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind to manage cynicism yet still have a genuine impact than a weepy epic like Titanic or The Notebook, and this is why these films are so lauded at film festivals, by critics and by moviegoers.

Eternal Sunshine is a great example of a metamodern film. Representing more than just proof that Jim Carrey can act with words as well as facial expressions and silly noises, it was in fact a touching film with a very postmodern premise. The film could have ended with Carrey’s character Joel and his ex-girlfriend Clementine (played by Kate Winslet) having their memories of each other erased, going their separate ways and never meeting again, but instead the characters (and by extension, the viewer) are given a final chance to make their relationship work. For an otherwise pretty bleak film, a small chance of redemption is offered in the final scenes.

It’s not a stretch to find others like it. Little Miss Sunshine, Lars and the Real Girl, Submarine, Napoleon Dynamite, Donnie Darko, Marie Antoinette. Being John Malkovich. Juno. Anything directed by Miranda July or Wes Anderson. All are surreal, odd, and in some cases self-aware, but they all invite sympathy for their characters and the situations they find themselves in. There’s a postmodern absurdity to the way Juno MacGuff talks (no real person can think of so many witty lines in so short a space of time) but behind her razor-sharp exterior she’s just sixteen, and pregnant – as viewers we feel for her whilst still laughing at her.

It would be impossible to write about taste in modern cinema, of course, without mentioning Anderson, everyone’s favourite “quirky” director. Nearly all his films, for example The Royal Tenenbaums and The Darjeeling Limited, have both elements of stylised pastiche and naïveté underlying every scene. Though irony-laden, these films still inspire a real consideration of their characters’ emotional states. Recently, The Grand Budapest Hotel was a disappointment because it lost the earlier films’ deeper genuine meaning and sentiment. It was all chocolate-box aesthetic, with no real emotional moments comparable to Richie Tenenbaum slitting his wrists in the sink or Patricia Whitman running away to India to block from her mind the death of her husband.

Obviously, metamodernism isn’t restricted to cinema. In literature, Haruki Murakami is an author whose work fits the bill, and in TV, nothing compares to Community when it comes to self-parody and knowing postmodern humour. There are a number of similarities with Arrested Development, the other great cult comedy of the 00s: both are/were continually under threat of cancellation because they were too clever; not enough viewers “got” the humour for them to pull large audiences. However, Community has a certain idealism of spirit where Arrested Development remains largely cynical. Parks & Recreation, The Office (U.S., not British) and even the likes of Scrubs all follow the same blueprint.

Ultimately, it’s a matter of opinion whether this mindset really is dominant in the arts in 2014, and even more so as to what insight it provides, if any. To me, it’s a symptom of idealism coming to terms with the modern world. The age of the Internet, mass media and homogenous global culture is both terrifying and full of promise, and this manifests itself in cinema. Western values tell people to be individual and expressive, but the world is changing around us at a dizzying pace and identity is a fluid concept. The response of previous generations was to celebrate this fact, and then to ridicule it; ours, it seems, is a shaky mix of the two.