Sunday 8th June 2025
Blog Page 1476

Facebook sets the terms

Patrick Beardmore
-
0
Facebook sets the terms

I forgot to set the alarm this morning, but I needn’t have worried. Facebook woke me with an email instead, and said they wanted my face. If you have an account, then they’ll want pictures of your face too.

What’s changed, you might say; didn’t they always reserve the right to use my image as and when they saw fit?

Not comprehensively enough as it turns out. Facebook settled a lawsuit in the US last week with users who appeared unwittingly in adverts for products they hadn’t agreed to endorse. They’ll receive $15 each in compensation.

However, under new terms and conditions being consulted on from yesterday, Facebook are reserving the right to begin this for all users, without an opt-out being available.

The scenario runs something like this: on Monday you buy some trainers on a website; on Tuesday your best friend sees your name and face next to them in an ad; and on Wednesday it’s accompanied by a picture of you wearing them nearby. Facebook will have drawn all the information together automatically.

They also want to perform facial recognition on their entire collection of profile pictures. It will allow them to create the closest we have to a comprehensive catalogue of the world’s population.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG%%8025%%[/mm-hide-text]
An extract from the amended Data Use Policy.
The advertising section has been completely rewritten.

Facebook’s struggle for profitability (unusual for a firm that holds a near monopoly in its field) is the core reason for the expansion into data vacuuming. Interestingly, even Facebook are struggling to come up with enough ways to use the unprecedented variety of information they now hold.

In my case, they know where I go (on my phone), what I’m browsing (every “Like” button reports back, even when you don’t click*), and now through facial recognition the things I do and with whom.

It’s difficult to see how these by-products of using their excellent social networking service will ultimately benefit us. We are being asked to take it on faith.

Using Facebook is all but compulsory; we know it, and they know that we know it. If you bother to read the amended terms today, be sure to look at the 13,000 almost exclusively negative comments beneath. Just don’t be under any illusions that you or I can refuse.

The proposed changes are detailed here.

* We have a “Like” button too (see below), so you are being tracked right now.

Review: 1913 – The Year Before the Storm

Enyuan Khong
-
0
Review: 1913 – The Year Before the Storm

The cover of the German edition of Florian Illies’ 1913 depicts an idyllic scene.  It is a Heinrich Kühn photograph of two girls dressed entirely in white ‘darting across the crest of a hill, the heavy August clouds pressing down from above’, as Illies later describes. The juxtaposition between this utopia of pure colours and perfect balance and the undefined threat of the clouds perfectly encapsulates the mood conjured by the novel. The various historic and cultural figures that make up its fabric are completely unaware of the events that are about to unfold, and go about their lives with a false sense of stability.  Yet a vague neurasthenia dominates, and a feeling of unrest and fermentation seems to seep throughout the artistic world. 

As Illies’ audience, we are entirely immersed in this world.  The broad scope of his account of the year is created through the compilation of numerous microcosmic viewpoints, shifting contemporary perspective to that of individuals of the era.  This is narrative history at its most evocative, a personal journal of the year told through the lens of day-to-day lives.    

The book is divided up like a calendar with each month introduced by a picture or photograph and followed by a verbal snapshot of events, with Illies leaping into the lives of artists, musicians, writers, psychologists.  The rapid changes of viewpoint give the book a filmic quality, so that as we flit between characters we not only see the links that form artistic movements and ideas, but feel as though we are at the heart of the creative process and turmoil of the time.  We are provided with a network-like picture of the world, though the connections here are not external political events but the private crises, interaction and disputes between the era’s major cultural figures.

Illies’ book is very much an artistically focused account of the year, with Vienna as its hub and Berlin just beginning to become a centre for new movements and ideas.  We are caught up in the excitement of major cultural events; the premiere of Stravinsky’s ‘Rite of Spring’, the collaborations and disputes of the painters in ‘Die Brücke’, the fraught relationship between Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung.  Politics, while never disappearing, recedes into the background, and figures who later change the course of history are shown within radically different contexts – Adolf Hitler, for example, takes the unassuming role of a failed art student.  The vivid descriptive style in which the year is recounted allows Illies to speculate over the encounters and interaction of his characters.  This is not a historic account for those wishing to closely investigate the concrete facts of this period, but rather an almost pictorial interpretation of events, allowing historic figures to appear before us as fallible individuals.  

 Even while we read Illies’ account from a contemporary perspective, it is almost possible to lose one’s sense of hindsight in the present tense of his prose.  We alternate between the vivid sensation that the events of the year are taking place right before us, and the subtle signs of unrest or irony that foreshadow what is about to happen.  The book acts as a snapshot of a generation dominated by an undefined desire for change, yet also unaware of the massive change about to be wrought to it. 

1913 is published Profile Books and is available in English here. 

"Boys better at exams" claims Oxford Admissions boss

Joe Iles
-
0
"Boys better at exams" claims Oxford Admissions boss

Mike Nicholson, the head of Oxford admissions, has sparked controversy this week by claiming that boys are more successful in exams than girls.

He holds that the key reason for this is that boys are more prone to taking risks, commenting, “We have generally seen male students tend to be much more prepared to take risks, which is why they do well in exams.”

According to Nicholson, this is a particular issue when time is of the essence. He noted that “generally, female students are risk-averse, and will tend to take longer to think about an answer. If it’s a multiple-choice question, male students will generally go with their gut feeling. Girls will try and reason it out. Obviously, if you are using timed multiple-choice assessments, that has a bearing on the likelihood of the female students even finishing the section, when the boys have whizzed through it.”

This is particularly relevant to a number of Oxford admissions tests, such as the TSA, which use multiple choice questions to select applicants.

Sarah Pine, OUSU Vice President for Women, felt that these comments were unjustified and was disappointed that Nicholson was using “gender stereotypes rather than a more mature approach in understanding results in admissions tests”. She told Cherwell that “The comments by Mr Nicholson rely on unfair generalisations, which, once a student gets to Oxford, are disproved. The work that OUSU has done with the university’s Education Committee has completely disproved ‘risk-aversion’ as an explanation of discrepancies in exam attainment at finals, so there needs to be much more evidence before it is invoked at the level of admissions.”

She continued: “What is particularly sad is that this thinking doesn’t actually tackle socially enforced gender inequality, because differences are presented as innate. This means that boys’ overachievement in admissions tests like the TSA isn’t questioned. It is instead accepted as a problem with women rather than a problem with the test.” 

In his interview with the Telegraph, Nicholson also attacked the government’s recent education policy, in particular the Education Secretary Michael Gove’s plans to scrap As-Levels. He commented that “it is really helpful for many students to have a checkpoint part way through their studies to get a handle on how well they are doing” and that scrapping As-Levels might lead to “a tendency to take their foot off the gas”.

He also highlighted the work done by Oxford admissions in advance of A-Levels, ensuring that Oxford candidates’ results day is, in most cases, a more stress free occasion. He commented “We put so much of our effort into selecting students when they first apply, we don’t need to do an awful lot at this end of the process.”He also made it clear that Oxford’s stance towards adjustment was unbending, commenting ““Our main aim at this point is to stop people getting in touch with us if they want to come here through adjustment. We don’t have any vacancies.”

Nicholson was keen to stress, however, that the sole aim of Oxford admissions was to ensure that the brightest students, regardless of gender, class or any other factors, were awarded places at Oxford. He commented “We are looking for the best students we can find. It is not in our interests to take students on the basis of anything other than their potential to do incredibly well at Oxford.

That is not restricted to a particular school type, or social class or ethnicity or background or whether they are from the North or the South. Our entire reputation as a world class university depends on getting the best and the brightest we can.”

Eric Pickles’ American Adventure

Joe Iles
-
0
Eric Pickles’ American Adventure

Eric Pickles has been spotted in a variety of locations across the US, courtesy of an Oxford student and a friend attempting to spice up their road trip.

From the sunny beaches in Crowfordville, Florida, to the Olustee Battlefield, nestled in among the civil war artillery, Pickles has had a considerable presence in the States recently, albeit in cardboard cut-out form.

Oxford’s James Johnson and his friend from Nottingham, Daniel Flavey, took it upon themselves to spread Pickles’ image, if not his message, out of admiration for the Secretary of State for Local Communities and Government by carting his image along with them as they made their way across the country. Johnson told the Independent “He has a lot of gravitas, and he’s a funny man. What better way to spice up our American road trip than bringing along the man himself?”

On their blog, they write that, “We are two British undergraduates, currently both at university in the UK. This summer, we are taking a coast-to-coast road trip across the American South and felt that there was no one better to accompany us than the Secretary of State for Local Communities and Government, the Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP.

As Conservatives and huge fans of Mr. Pickles, his outlook and his work to modernise and maximise value in our public services, we hope this blog goes some way to document the great man’s adventures across the land of our great Atlantic neighbour.”

Johnson admitted that the campaign had been met with a certain level of bemusement across the pond, but insisted that the response had been positive, commenting, “All the Americans ask who it is, and, when they find out, some are a bit baffled and others find it hilarious. It’s a great way to bond with people. People want photos with it and want to know more. It’s a great way of getting us interacting with the locals. It’s a talking point.”

Although carrying Pickles around a country the size of the United States is an arduous task by any definition, the duo are adamant that they will pursue their mission to the very end, saying “We’re one week into five weeks, and he’s coming all the way. He’s coming to Vegas, which is our last stop.”

Their blog, documenting the politican’s movements, can be seen here. http://picklesroadtrip.com/

Syria – What should happen next?

Marc Pacitti
-
0
Syria – What should happen next?

Even though the House of Commons seems to have halted the UK’s movement towards intervention in Syria, we cannot yet be sure that other Western countries will not choose differently. Even if the UN will not support it, and even seeing as the UK government is hamstrung by a rebellious Parliament, it looks as if the US is gearing up for some sort of substantial effort. However, quite what sort of form this action would take or what it would aim to achieve is still up for debate.

[I admit that I’m not sure that there will be an intervention. It seems that way to me, but I’m quite prepared to be proved wrong by the events of the next few days.]

It is clear that the main justification for an intervention would be humanitarian. Before Parliament voted to block the principle of intervention, the UK Government outlined its legal position – “the legal basis for military action would be humanitarian intervention; the aim is to relieve humanitarian suffering by deterring or disrupting the further use of chemical weapons.” This is a view presumably shared by the US and its potential allies. However, it does not present a clear scope for intervention. Quite what is needed to deter or disrupt the use of chemical weapons is left up to the imagination of the foreign policy official.

It seems unlikely that such action will be minimal. If the US decides that it must remove the Syrian government’s capability to use such weapons, it will have to engage in serious bombing of strategic targets. It is however, the deterrence issue that is most likely to commit the US to a serious intervention. It is unlikely that the US will do anything less than fully throw their weight behind opposition forces on this front, or else they risk looking like they’ve done nothing to stop the slaughter of civilians by their government. The only deterrent factor that would really stop that would be serious US military backing for the rebel forces.

There should also be another objective. The Weapons of Mass Destruction that Assad possesses (the very certainty that the regime at least possesses these puts the lie to those drawing parallels with the Iraq War) must be seized or destroyed. This is not just in order to protect Syrian citizens – it involves a level of enlightened self-interest. Syria is by far the most unstable state out of the family that constituted the “Arab Spring”. We cannot be sure which faction will come to rule the country, or, indeed if the country will be governable at all, come the end of the current battle of attrition. In this context, it is deeply troubling that there should be chemical weapons facilities within the country, as we cannot be sure that these will not fall into the hands of militants who may use them against whatever target takes their fancy, whether it be the new regime in Cairo, the West’s most prominent ally, Israel, or perhaps even mainland Europe. It is a matter of pure pragmatism to prevent these weapons from belonging to a failed state, and one that should not be overlooked in the rush to prevent human suffering.

It is, however, far too easy to get involved in the world of the hypothetical and neglect the facts on the ground. Whilst the majority of the debate in the press has been well-argued, (bar a couple of lefty-types muttering about imperialism and some right-wingers moaning about it not being our problem), politicians have reverted to a simple narrative whereby there are two teams, one of which is the Bad Guys, headed by Assad (who is presumed guilty of a chemical weapons attack on his own people) and the other of which is the Rebels, who are presented as a homogenous group. This narrative leads to many assumptions, some of which are plainly false.

The most important of these is that there is one group that can be called “the rebels” in some meaningful sense. Whilst there is still an amount of support for the sort of liberal secularists who allegedly characterised the beginning of the Arab Spring, the majority of the rebels now belong to a patchwork quilt of Islamic fundamentalist militias, bankrolled by questionable states in the Middle East and including notable Al-Qa’ida franchises Jabhat al-Nusra and ISIS. These forces are fighting a Sunni sectarian war against Shi’ites and Alawites, rather than a war of emancipation from tyranny. Their actions during the last two years of fighting have included suicide bombings, the imposition of violent misogynist laws on conquered territory and the mass shootings of secular protestors. To lump these militants in with the secularist rebels is madness, yet politicians continue to pledge unconditional support for “the rebels”.

There are no quick and easy answers here, and no good guys either. To support either side against the other is to get into bed with some really disgusting partners. If America really wants the rebels (the democratic, secularist subset thereof) to win the war, they will need to do some really tough work – a no-fly zone will not stop the country falling to Al-Qa’ida in the event of a rebel victory, and other, more limited forms of intervention may not even result in victory at all.  The problem that the US faces now is that there is very little appetite for the full-scale, boots on the ground, nation-building exercise that would be necessary. However, anything less seems to leave Syria to choose between the devil and the deep blue sea, which may be equally unpalatable to the American public in a few years’ time.

(It is perhaps just as well that the House of Commons voted to block the government’s proposed principle of “limited intervention” – it is likely that that is not what they would have ended up with.)

Every dalliance that Western powers have had in the Arab world has been marked by a total lack of curiosity, nuance, or sophistication. We can only hope that leaders take these few days to reflect on a strategy that recognises the tensions and problems on the ground and throughout the region, rather than blundering into another unfamiliar country. It should be clear by now that this doesn’t preclude intervention, although it serves to complicate it. However, if a potential intervention is to serve the needs of the Syrian people, it must be effective, as well as well-meaning. It is important that US leaders are clear about what it is to which they are committing their country should there be an intervention. 

Review: Reading Festival 2013

Luke Barratt
-
0
Review: Reading Festival 2013

Reading Festival is Glastonbury’s kid brother in more ways than one. The Glastonbury Festival of Performing Arts is arguably the only UK festival bigger than Richfield Avenue’s offering; what’s more, the average crowd age of each reveals something more. Reading is the 16-year-old’s festival, and this year I was more aware of that fact than ever. As a faithful Reading Festival-goer of many years, I had no excuse for being annoyed at these young pretenders, as I had once been them myself. But I managed it anyway. Reading is my home festival, but it seems I have outgrown it.

But let’s focus on the music for a bit.

This year’s lineup certainly left much to be desired; Festival Republic must be seriously mistaken if they think they can follow 2012’s Friday and Sunday headliners, The Cure and Foo Fighters, with Green Day and Biffy Clyro. The former is a band so far from relevant it makes Rocky Balboa look 21st century, while the latter is a good band with some solid songs, but has a long way to go before it reaches the pedigree necessary to close Reading Festival. My hat is off, however, to the organizers for the inspired move that was bringing Eminem back to Richfield. The man is a true superstar with fans all across the UK, and a range of excellent material that was certain to set the Main Stage alight.

What’s more, the NME Stage really seemed to be set to excel itself this year. When the music began on Friday with a late-announced set by Dry The River, one could tell that Reading’s second stage was going to be the place to be. Even though Deap Vally were a little disappointingly bland, an excellent showing by FIDLAR a short while later showed that their brand of youthful insincerity was exactly what the GCSE/A-Level crowd at Reading needed. Peace were on next, and showed a new maturity alongside their usual joyful exuberance, producing a highly stylized performance on a plain white stage which included a stellar cover of Disclosure’s ‘White Noise’ with a verse from ‘Another Brick In The Wall’ thrown in for good measure.

But it was Bastille who stole the day, with a stunning performance during which Dan Smith’s voice was almost (but not quite!) drowned out by the roar of a crowd who knew every single word to every single track, whether from the album or an earlier mixtape. Sadly, all these bands suffered from a disastrously poor microphone which meant anything they said between tracks was completely unintelligible. Fortunately someone did something about it just before Major Lazer took to the stage, at which point some classic festival misfortune conspired to force me to miss both them and A$AP Rocky, two of the acts I’d been looking forward to the most. From what I can tell watching coverage afterwards, the phone I dropped somewhere in the NME tent had little chance of survival.

But the rest of the day was far from a complete loss. I headed to the Festival Republic Stage, where an enchanting set from CHVRCHES was followed by an exhibition of pure, unbridled and confusing fun when Crystal Fighters took to the stage. Sebastian Pringle, dressed like a disco ball, careered around the stage like a demented satellite on acid as the English/Spanish folktronica band finished the day in style. Billy Joe who?

Saturday produced less excitement in quantity, but made up for it in quality. Early on the Festival Republic Stage, new boys Drenge were magnificent, running through the highlights of their excellent debut album and infecting the whole tent with their barely-contained adolescent rage. Swim Deep were, against all expectations, disappointingly lacklustre; after a second-class debut they really needed to make their hits count, but even ‘King City’ failed to inspire the usual euphoria (though to be fair, the indie kids jumped around anyway).

Soon afterwards, Foals did exactly what everyone has said about them all summer, and stepped up to the plate on the Main Stage. They’ve come a long way since ‘Cassius’ (which they didn’t even play) and Yannis Philippakis  looks like he’s finally where he’s always belonged: at the top.

After that it was back to the NME Stage, where Tame Impala were, predictably, their brilliant selves. Using the TV screens for their own psychedelic light show, they produced an atmosphere of hazy, trippy wonder. Finally, it was the moment I’d been waiting for for months. The moment I was missing Eminem for. The band behind my album of 2012: Alt-J.

They were everything I could have hoped for and more, dispelling all rumours of disappointing live shows almost as soon as the opening chord of ‘Intro’ had rung out through the tent. The crowd was spellbound by every song from hit single ‘Breezeblocks’ to ‘Interlude 1’, including an exquisite acapella cover of College and Electric Youth’s ‘A Real Hero’. Keyboardist Gus Unger-Hamilton was the only member to break the spell, with carefully timed exhortations to the crowd, but lead singer Joe Newman didn’t say a word throughout, preserving the mystery and aloofness of his genius. Instead, his only communication with the crowd came as he was unable to hold back his emotions at the sound of thousands of people singing his songs back at him. The set ended with the show-stopping ‘Taro’, as fake snow was launched into the crowd and Newman hid his face as the crowd roared the chorus for him.

Somewhere in between all of this, Jake Bugg was awful.

Sunday was always going to be an anticlimax after two such amazing days of music, but Alunageorge did their best to buck the trend with a set of true quality on the NME Stage in the early afternoon, including a brilliant cover of Montell Jordan’s ‘This Is How We Do It’. Tribes were surprisingly empty, considering their usual love for festivals, but things perked up later on the Festival Republic Stage, where Spector headlined to an archetypically chaotic crowd with real aplomb. After this, defeated by the weekend’s exertions, I sat down to watch Biffy Clyro from the back. Against my expectations, nostalgia took over, and I even felt a rush of emotion as fireworks launched into the air during ‘Mountains’. If that was the last song I’ll ever hear at Reading Festival, it was a pretty good one. ‘Mon the Biff.

Eating My Way Across America

Sybil Devlin
-
0
Eating My Way Across America

As my mum picks me up from Heathrow at 23:00 after a hellish 24 hour stint in San Francisco Airport, my stomach churns for some food – Marks & Spencer is closed; W H Smith’s selection of confectionary is tempting but then, the unavoidable hits me: the Drive-Thru McDonald’s on the way home. A pastime, nay a tradition, of stocking up here after a journey has developed in my family and so within what seemed like seconds I was clutching a quarter-pounder like there was no tomorrow. Something was wrong – was it too greasy? Not greasy enough? Had we forgotten French Fries? And then it hit me – I had been indoctrinated into the American Fast Food culture – chips were now French Fries and the idea that a burger a day wasn’t normal was a concept only worthy of my contempt. Every Subway, Burger King or KFC I passed in the next few weeks pushed me further towards desperation; seeing the fast food weight that I’d put on in America (approximately 10 lbs) slowly drop off me left me feeling wrong, even cheated. Why couldn’t I clutch my love handles with ease? Where was the love?

It was and is abandoned in the USA but it seems a shame not to describe the beauty and intricacy of the American Fast Food institution. 

We should start with the Mothership, the oh-so-beautiful-burger topped with cheese and perched coyly next to a slice of gherkin. “I’m bloody delicious”, it screams. American burgers are wonderfully to the point; there’s none of this “I’ll have a blue cheese and avocado burger with no bun”, just pure, simple hamburgers or cheeseburgers. However, there is often the choice of a double burger – these come in varying degrees of lush, either there is the double patty or the third bun and double patty combo… needless to say I wasn’t keeping tabs on calories. I was, however, ever conscious of my budget – a £10 GBK burger wasn’t really in my financial grasp – this turned out to be OK really with my favourite double cheeseburger from Five Guys dubbed “the best $5 burger a man can buy” by GQ Magazine. The burger market seemed to be a sort of classist system – there was a slight difference in prices but the level of service and quality was miles better in say In’n’Out burger than in McDonalds or Burger King. The East Coast/West Coast divide between Five Guys and In’N’Out was a hard one to judge so I settled on the conclusion they are equally beautiful culinary institutions. The famous Hooter’s was a great experience (I even bought a classic Hooters vest to my companions’ despair) and it was the only place that I couldn’t finish a burger (what a feat). It turns out that the ever so slightly misogynistic food parlor has a male counterpart, Dick’s. This was truly a disaster: we walked in and the waiter started explaining to us how Dick’s was all about “sarcasm” whilst he threw our menus on the tables. I wasn’t really sure which definition of sarcasm he was getting at but decided to embrace the restaurant’s “kooky” approach… what a mistake – the food was fine but the poor waiter’s annoying jibe of “come get your soda yourself” fell on deaf ears. I did feel quite bad as he looked as dejected by the whole experience as we were – I guess we just didn’t get his wit.

Each different city had a form of “Fast Food” that drew me, only momentarily, away from my burger fetish. I won’t go into the $1 slices of Pizza and footlong hotdogs from New York because I’m still mourning their absence in my life. However, there were many other cities that had worthy fast food – the first being Virginia Beach with its deep fried crab sandwich. When you think of a crab you think of snapping the pincers and scooping out the delicious white meat; this crab meal was quite a different affair. They had deep-fried the crab till the point of no return; its shell had disintegrated into the batter and even the pincers were edible. Although I would recommend trying this at least once, I wasn’t a huge fan and was left feeling a little bereft of a crab’s usual freshness and taste. Nashville’s BBQ pulled pork sandwiches, on the other hand, were quite a different story – one sandwich was enough to fill two hungry travellers but we were tempted to order another just for the taste. If you ever find yourself in Music City and want to try one of these head down to Union 417 and share it! We found that the portions in America were monstrous and could be split between two, especially at ‘Mother’s’ of New Orleans where they sold their famous “Ferdi Special” – this has to be the pinnacle of my non-burger foods… a “Po’Boy” sandwich filled with baked ham, roast beef, gravy and debris, which is the roast beef that falls into the gravy whilst it is baking in the oven – it sounds grim but it makes the meal. The sandwich was hard to fit into your mouth and when the waiter first slammed the plate on the table I thought that he’d given us double but no, it truly was a monster. Despite being horribly full I still managed to fit in one of Mother’s beautiful Pecan Pies – if you can stomach it, definitely try both.

The phenomenon that is the constant filling up of your “soda” was one of the best culinary revolutions to have hit the Western world – but why, oh why, has it not affected the UK. Apart from this the drink situation was fairly average, they have the same “soda” with some extras (Mountain Dew isn’t really something to shout about however) and wine can only be bought in Liquor stores so I ended up drinking a lot of Coors Light, which was described by many fellow Englishmen as piss-water (I secretly really liked it). Their milkshakes were far superior however  – but there was only one that brought boys to the yard and Kelis, it wasn’t yours – it was Jonny Rocket’s 780-calorie banana milkshake. Yellow in colour and so thick you can feel your arteries giving way with a scream of happiness. For over $6 it was a bit extravagant, especially as at that point I was living on a tenner a day but either way nothing could have been more worth it. 

If you want to enjoy some amazing American Fast Food in the comfort of your home nation, go to Covent Garden to the new Flagship “Five Guys” restaurant – you will not regret it. 

Cherworld – Intern of our discontent

Anthony Collins
-
0
Cherworld – Intern of our discontent

  

A Concrete Jungle: The US Open 2013

Emma Alexander
-
0
A Concrete Jungle: The US Open 2013

Friday night in New York City; on the eve of the final Grand Slam of the year, the former ATP #1s gathered for a night of celebration, remembrance and reverence. Amongst endless tedious soundbites and much champagne-bottle-popping, you could however detect an air of anticipation for the upcoming tournament, centred around three particular gentlemen – Nadal, Djokovic, and Federer.

Prominent among attendees was the much missed and recently retired Andy Roddick. The US Open, back in 2003, was the site of his only major triumph. With three consecutive aces, the enormously popular American clinched his place in tennis immortality. That’s what winning the US Open, in front of the lights and an adoring public, does – he was hailed as ‘the great new hope for tennis’. Unfortunately a certain Swiss turned up around the same time. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are back again in Flushing Meadows, having engineered an unsurpassed stranglehold on the sport since 2008. Yet, with Federer’s recent struggles – could we be speaking of the Big Four as one for the last time?

So, once more unto the breach – we can examine their draws. Djokovic has been drawn in Murray’s half, and David Ferrer with countryman Nadal. Federer has meandered down the rankings to #7, and lurks in wait for Nadal in the quarters. Djokovic is ruling the roost at the top of the draw, having occupied the #1 ranking for the past 44 weeks. Yet, the time has come to ask – how long will it last? He plays the tricky talent Berankis in the first round, and faces potential meetings with Dimitrov, Del Potro and Murray before he can hope to play the final.

Murray, too, has a rocky road. To face the serve and volleying Michael Llodra in the first round will be no walk in the park, and he will likely face the talented but tempestuous players Stanislas Wawrinka or Tomas Berdych in the quarters. Ferrer’s draw is difficult by default, bless him, because his 4-34 record against Federer and Nadal means he will not be reaching the final. As for Nadal, the only person who could trouble him before he would meet Federer would be the big serving American, John Isner; and then, when he gets to the quarters, will Federer even pose a real threat? Federer’s recent form, and experimentation with a new racket in the last few months, have made him seem lost, and even desperate. Were to beat Nadal, it would possibly be the greatest victory of his career, given that so few would have expected it.

Ideally, an unheralded player ought to break through and make their mark in the next two weeks. Unfortunately, the current generation of young talents is so woefully behind their predecessors at the same age that it is beginning to look increasingly unlikely that any of them will achieve anything of equal note at all. If anyone is to do it, look to the fourteenth-ranked Janowicz, who made Murray fans bite their nails at Wimbledon after he took the first set in their semi-final. The Other Swiss, Stanislas Wawrinka, is also interestingly poised to make a move in Berdych’s quarter – a player against whom he has a favourable record.

So, which of these will ultimately clutch the trophy in two weeks’ time? Del Potro suffered a gut-wrenchingly epic loss to Djokovic at Wimbledon. Yet, at the US Open four years ago, he beat Federer and Nadal back to back to claim the trophy. In Arthur Ashe Stadium, he may well regain his old fervour, make amends for Wimbledon and take out Djokovic in five heartpounding sets to reach the semi-finals. Murray will then gripe and grouch his way through a few difficult matches to reach the semis, and then the final.

Nadal will breeze into the quarters, whilst Federer will labour there, but that match should happen. Expect Federer to win the first set gallantly, be poised to win the second – then wilt, to be denounced as done, one more time. He won’t be – but that’s for another tournament. Nadal will meet Janowicz, who will have conquered the floundering Ferrer to reach the second Slam semi-final of his career. The Spaniard will win. Nadal and Murray have not played for two years – but I predict they will do so again to end this tournament, and Murray will not be defending his title.

The US Open has often felt particularly distant to all residents of the UK. The glorious night sessions usually take place at approximately 3am our time, and watching these matches sprawled sideways on the sofa, with occasional breaks for drooling and snoring, nullifies some of the thrill. However, that should not stop us. In the city where dreams are made, one more will come true in two weeks. 

Top Lunch Spots in Oxford

Alexandra Bleasdale
-
0
Top Lunch Spots in Oxford

Freshers: in the first few weeks you’ll be tasting the delights of your college’s hall menu. Soon you’ll find yourself lusting after an artisan sandwich or just somewhere to get you away from your essay for an hour or so. Follow our sandwich-centric advice and you can’t go far wrong.

Covered Market:

The perfect central location to stop at on the way to or from lectures. Packed with shops and stalls that’ll happily lighten your wallet, it’s a challenge to separate the good from the bad.

Alpha Bar – choose between meat and veggie hot main courses, or a large selection of Make Your Own salads. Two salads, a spread and a ‘main’ (goats cheese, halloumi, chicken etc) will set you back between 3 and 4 pounds. It is definitely worth getting a loyalty card; if you think ten visits is unlikely (you’d be wrong there) you can always share it with a friend.

Fasta Pasta – mix and match sauces and toppings cooked to order that have a loose Italian theme. Fresh food served quickly, with a good selection of cured meats, cheeses and pestos.

Sit Down:

The Vaults – canteen service means you won’t have to waste time waiting when you’ve taken a break from the Rad. Cam. You can even sit outside on the patio and guiltily watch the library during Trinity!

Café Loco – always busy, close to the Aldates’ colleges and those studying music, and on the way to the river, it’s a good place to curl up for an hour or so.

Queen’s Lane Coffee House – perfect if you have a break between lectures at Exam Schools. The Café has a tempting brunch menu and also doubles up as a deli; the Turkish owner always has a selection of fresh backlava on offer.

The Nosebag – tucked away above a Thai restaurant on St Michael’s Street (opposite the Union), the Nosebag is homely, rustic and looks a bit like a ski chalet. Apart from a killer cream tea, you can also indulge in huge plates of salad and big bowls of soup for lunch.

Sandwiches to go:

Olives – There’s no seating area, the queue’s usually out the door and the ‘Baguette of the Day’ will put you back at least four pounds. But with some of the most exciting sandwich combinations and arguably the best antipasti selection in the city centre, sometimes you just can’t help yourself.

Taylor’s – With delis around Oxford (and two on the High Street) you’re never far away from a Taylor’s baguette. They’ll ply you with the best breakfast baps and their white chocolate cookies are to die for.

Mortons- with four shops in the city centre you’re also never far away from a Mortons’ baguette! They have a pretty good meal deal offer and cute seating areas upstairs in the Broad Street and New Inn Hall Street shops; frequent visits will leave you wondering why the Soup of the Day always seems to be mushroom.*

Heroes – there is a seating area but it’s only big enough for about four people. It’s also more expensive to eat in so it’s best to get your food to takeaway. They do a 10% discount for students and also have nice homemade cakes and biscuits.*

Alternative Tuck Shop – don’t be put off by the long queue at lunch time, with ‘alternative’ in the name it’s perhaps no surprise that lots of students flock there. Build your own sandwich right down to choosing from three different types of freshly baked ciabatta (try the sundried tomato).

*The Turl and Broad Street colleges usually have a fierce alliegance to one of these two shops. Where you go for lunch is as important as your choice of kebab van.

1...1,4751,4761,477...2,507Page 1,476 of 2,507

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by James Ashley