Monday, May 5, 2025
Blog Page 1572

Interview: Alan Davey

0

“What do you do,” an Avenue Q song so nearly began, “with an MPhil in Old Icelandic?” Become CEO of Arts Council UK, if Alan Davey’s record is anything to go by. Davey studied at Merton College before embarking upon a career in the Civil Service that has taken him to the top of the UK’s department for the allocation of arts funding.

After a spell in the Department of Health, Davey took up a position in the newly created Department of National Heritage in 1992 (the word ‘culture’ was considered too left-wing for the then Conservative government). “It was set up as a really small department, and had some of the cleverest people from the Treasury there. There were lots of brainy people around trying to think of new ways to run a department, and it was really exciting at the time. Now the culture department is just like any other government department, which is a bit of a shame because it could have been different.”

The Arts Council has a great deal of responsibility in allocating the resources for the production of art as well as directing its practitioners in how best to serve the public. There’s a danger of creating a tension between these two strands: the current ten year plan is titled ‘Achieving Great Art For Everyone’. I question how the Arts Council ensured that accessibility was not confused with popularisation – how to go about preserving the quality of art whilst at the same time widening participation. “There’s always been that tension in the arts council; are we going to go for access or are we going to go for excellence, and at times in its history it has been polarised. I’ve always been against that,” says Davey.

“It’s setting in train the conditions by which great art can happen. Someone working in the community with young people can produce great art and I’ve seen wonderful stuff. Someone working in an opera house can also produce great art. They’re different, but the authenticity of ambition makes it genuine. What we’ve found is that it can be quite simple; if you’ve never been to the theatre before, for instance, it becomes quite a frightening mystery. And how can we make people able to discover it more easily? Always without dumbing it down. It’s about saying to people, ‘Well, try it, and we’ll help you understand it’.”

Earlier last year playwrights David Hare and Mark Ravenhill attacked post-recession theatre programming, worrying that producers were playing it too safe when it came to choosing plays. “It’s something that I’m worried about,” says Davey. “We saw it happen in the eighties, and people started to do productions that they thought were safe, surefire box-office hits, or very cheap productions. Like Educating Rita, a two person play, I mean, it’s a good play, but it was everywhere! Theatres got into a spiral of decline, because audiences were finding it less interesting, so the box-office fell and the entire economic model began to collapse. What we’re observing this year if you look at the programmes of all the theatres, is a certain safeness creeping in, and I do think we have to address that now.

“What we can never do in the next few years is replace the government cuts, because we simply can’t afford to. We can help theatres look at their business models more closely, but always keep the art interesting because that keeps audiences interested.”

The cabinet minister with responsibility for culture, Maria Miller, quickly came into the media crossfire after her appointment. And it isn’t hard to see why: Miller is Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and is also Minister for Women and Equalities. In addition to the furore over arts cuts she’s been responsible for overseeing post-Leveson legislation and is also at the heart of the gay-marriage debate, not to mention fighting a burgeoning expenses scandal concerning her second home.

I ask Davey if he thinks this is simply too many plates for one minister to spin. “I think it’s doable if you’ve got the department ordered in the right way. All of her responsibilities are capable of creating a huge interest all at once. You ignore them at your peril. She’s still new in the job, and she’s got to find a way of attending to all of them with the right amount of attention. She shouldn’t be afraid of the culture sector, because it really wants to help. We’re good at culture in this country. We need to work with her to give her the means to do her job better.”

Cherwell Sport – Rugby – New College v Worcester 12/01/2013

0

Commentary: Sam Barker
Filming and Editing: Rolf Merchant

A zombie generation

0

I’m not old. I’m only 21. But that is, by a whisker, just old enough to have missed out on one of the grandest qualitative changes that ever happened to childhood. There isn’t a scent of regret in ‘missed out’ – I think we c.21 year olds nailed it.

We did our first growing up in a very different world from the one in which we will work and die. In my formative years, enormous, boxy computers had arrived in our classrooms but not quite everywhere else. Only drug dealers and businessmen had mobile telephones. The internet still had a Pacman vibe but, since it wasn’t installed in homes yet, that didn’t scare us. Electronic goods were, fundamentally, far too expensive for children to be left to play with, and, ultimately, far too Office ’97 for children even to have wanted to.

At school I listlessly practised making Power Points (unwatchably animated), or natty spreadsheets (unreadably useless). However, for genuine, after hours, infantile diversion my brothers and I didn’t turn to a composite electronic nanny made up of Gameboys, iPads, internet telephones etc. Instead, I think we played a lot with leaves and ants. They played War Games from which I was excluded because my tank noises were too generic. As a sop, they let me have a go with the Frisbee instead.

In other words, we grew up in the unhoovered gap between two very different sorts of childhood – the computer-free and the computer-sodden. We were the last generation to be raised without the parental crutch of pervasive digital entertainment, but, equally, the very first to acquire computer literacy with effortless, child-like fluency.

What I want us to acknowledge is that we are not, really, part of the Information Generation (I’m sure somebody is calling it that). We are instead the feral precursors, a rare breed, a dodo-like subset. We may share the mad web skillz of today’s 15 year olds (and even if I don’t, you might) but, crucially, their young brains didn’t develop like ours.

The difference is that their brains have developed, I propose, with weaker ingenuity. It is now very easy to be entertained as a child. That is a new thing. My childhood was an ingenious, inspired campaign fought against boredom with exceptionally limited resources. It was mental guerilla warfare, and it wasn’t easy. Frisbees, leaves and ants are not riveting per se: if these ingredients are to rivet, they must be deployed with ingenuity.

The problem is that electronic devices (as my siblings and I found, goggle-eyed, on our first, rationed computer) are extremely riveting, with no ingenuity required. But they rout boredom too easily. They offer more entertainment – but less exercise.

Science backs me up here. Watching television produces no more brain activity than looking at a blank wall – and sometimes less. You might counter that that example is passive – our web-surfing on various devices is rather more active in character. However, this mental exercise does not nourish all mental muscles equally. The ability to look up information whenever we like actually weakens our ability to retain information in our memories. Furthermore, the ease of flicking between screens, articles and devices results in far shallower stints of concentration than sustained absorption by a single thing.

In short, we should be worried about the children who, throughout their formative years in a way my generation could not, immerse themselves in a surfeit of devices. The mental muscles developed by the Frisbee kids in their boredom-war must, logically, be punier specimens in the computer kids. And although I must surrender my polarisation and admit that a balance is maintained by many parents, I think we should go further. Even the acceptable face of childhood computing, improving and educational software, is too entertaining in my book. We need to reintroduce boredom – mental austerity.

And what, you may snort, if we don’t? Then I think the struggling rich world, the world that can afford to silence its mewling brats with educational vids and the soothing blips of the GameBoy, will find it even harder to make its way in the future global economy. The children in India and Africa who are at this moment riveting themselves with leaves and ants are the ones who will turn out, on average, to be more ingenious and resourceful. It stands to reason, therefore, that their economies will enjoy more entrepreneurs and more imaginative businessmen because of it. Which is why me and my peers, feral precursors to the ‘Zombie Generation’, had better pull our weight.

The Joys of Teaching: A Year Abroad Perspective

0

With Christmas 2012 and the end-of-the-world doom-mongering which preceded it now but a memory, the students of Oxford have once again descended upon the city of dreaming spires, ready for another eight gruelling weeks of hard work, shameless hacking and general drunken debauchery. There is, however, one type of student who will not benefit from the various delights Oxford has to offer this term. For this student, there will be no coveted place on the guest list for President’s Drinks at the Union; no spare seat to listen in on the fascinating rowing debates which captivate entire dinner halls at college; and no Toby ‘Beerz’ Baker to tempt them with his alluring charisma to sample the glitz and glamour of Park End on a Wednesday night.

I am one such student, missing out on the perks of being at Oxford this term. This is because I am a third-year Modern Languages student, and as such I am currently living in France as part of my complusory year abroad. So while many of you will be frantically trying to get that essay or problem sheet done which is due in tomorrow but which you only thought about starting the night before, I will be busy chomping on onions and going “hoh-hee-hoh-hee-hoh”, as Alan Partridge once accurately put it.

But don’t be fooled into thinking that it’s all plain sailing for us linguists this year. We are expected to put in a shift in one form or another, and upon arriving at the conclusion that spending a year at a French university would almost certainly lead to playing hours upon hours of Mario Kart with like-minded lazy students, and would therefore not exactly be conducive to improving my grasp of the French language, I decided to take a step into the unknown and have a go at teaching English at a French primary school instead.

Having never previously given a thought to pursuing teaching as a career path, I had no idea of what to expect as I took my first tentative steps into the school building. Indeed, my nerves weren’t exactly settled as one-by-one I was introduced to the classes I would be overseeing for the next few months, and after each introduction came the same trembling look of astonishment and awe from the wide-eyed, puff-cheeked faces of the schoolchildren. For the Star Wars aficionados among you, picture the reception C-3PO got from the Ewoks on the forest moon of Endor. For those of you who loathe/choose to ignore/aren’t well acquainted with George Lucas’ fantasy universe, imagine Ryan Gosling descending the love lift on a Saturday night edition of Take Me Out to a dumbstruck audience (disclaimer: in no way am I comparing myself to Ryan Gosling). And for those of you who have better things to do than spend a night in the company of Paddy McGuinness or Jar-Jar Binks (I can only begin to wonder why…), or who just want me to shut up and get on with it – well, I think you get the idea.

Yet as the teaching began and the days passed, and the children began to realise that behind this veneer of otherworldliness was just another boring, authoritative grown-up, I began to appreciate just how demanding, yet ultimately rewarding the job can be. There are, of course, the handful of unruly children who take obvious pleasure from the chaos which they cause and even more so from the desperate struggles of the teacher to maintain order. This is especially true when faced with a language barrier – I have now learnt that it takes more than just yelling “Arrête!” or “Tais-toi!” to silence the sniggering scallywags sitting at the back of the class. But this is just part and parcel of life as a schoolchild, that streak of mishief that each child possesses at a time when everything still seems so exciting – I defy anyone who, as a school pupil, did not at least occasionally find the funny side of the teacher’s travails.

And for every moment that descends the whole class into anarchy comes a moment which makes you forget all about the little blighter who has been driving you up the wall for the past 45 minutes. The last week before the Christmas holidays gave me the opportunity to go over some English vocabulary for our festive traditions with the French schoolchildren. I had prepared a set of flashcards for one of the classes, and as I went over the words in English with the schoolchildren I arrived at the last flashcard, which was a snowman. With the French for snowman being ‘un bonhomme de neige’, a more-or-less exact translation, I tried helping the children by explaining that the English for neige was snow, and that un bonhomme de neige followed the same formula as the names of the superheroes which they all knew and loved; Batman, Superman, Spiderman.

Asking them to remember this, I then posed the question:

“Un bonhomme de neige, c’est quoi en anglais?”

One of the girls in the front row was the first to raise her hand, and after a few seconds of taking in my ‘expert’ advice she came up with a response:

“Ummm…Spider Christmas?”

It was a response that both brutally exposed my shortcomings as a teacher and which typifies the joys of teaching, a job where no two days are the same and where one can never fully predict the wonderful, inadvertently amusing thought processes of the children, whose tireless enthusiasm and desire to learn makes it all worthwhile.

Crowdfunding – what is it and how do you do it?

0

Searching for that initial capital investment for your start-up or funds for virtually any kind of creative venture has just got that much easier with the extraordinary rise of “crowdfunding”.

The concept is simple. Why rely on a few big investors with big demands, when you could aggregate online the smaller contributions of many? Individuals pitch projects, and in return for their money sponsors receive something in the way of a small reward; perhaps a mention in a film’s credits, or, as one Oxford-based project advertised, “a scrumptious three-course formal dinner in the stunning Brasenose College dining hall.” Rewards increase with the level of sponsorship, and the model has been extremely successful, with millions of pounds pouring in through donations often as small as £5.

The rules are that the projects must be clearly defined, with a specific time limit and minimum sum being asked for. Investors do not have to part with their money unless this amount has been fully pledged, and only then will the crowdfunding site take a cut.

Ayan Mitra, CEO and founder of crowdfunding platform CrowdBnk, believes that the potential for crowdfunding in the UK is huge. He calculates that there are around 25,000 viable small businesses every year that fail to find growth funding, not to mention something in the region of 100,000 start-ups which need to get off of the ground in the first place. The Breedon report, which looked at access to finance for businesses, estimates that this funding gap could be up to £191 billion in the next five years. Mitra says, “Not all of this can be fulfilled with crowdfunding of course, as not all funding requirements fit the crowdfunding model. But if crowdfunding could service even one per cent of this gap, that will bring an additional capital pool of one to two billion GBP over the next five years.”

The crowdfunding model has been primarily used for creative work rather than for business ideas, with crowdfunding sites acting as matchmakers between supporters and projects ranging from theatre productions, short films, dance and art shows. Yet this doesn’t mean it can’t work for entrepreneurs. CrowdBnk is one of several new crowdfunding platforms to have been given authorisation by the FSA last year. Mitra argues that having the capability of handling regulatory and governmental requirements means that he can offer entrepreneurs the opportunity to pitch to investors without needing regulatory change. The FSA warns though that most sites are not authorised, and there is a significant risk of losing money with no protection should the business or project fail.

But for the users at least, the experience is easy. Gina Robinson, ex-President of the Oxford Belles, used the crowdfunding platform Sponsorcraft, which specialises in student and society crowdfunding, to finance a CD for the Belles and to help cover the costs of performing at the Edinburgh Fringe. She picked crowdfunding because she wanted people to get something back, offering free CDs and free performances as rewards: “After all, we’re not a charity case! Also as there are a lot of other a cappella groups in Oxford, people may think it unfair to donate to one group and not the others – this is why we didn’t apply to our colleges for bursaries for the trip, as we assumed they’d feel the same way.”

Another student, third year engineer Ollie Bent, raised £1620 through Sponsorcraft towards a project with Engineering World Health in Tanzania. He too praised the crowdfunding experience for providing “an immediately accessible way of making my fundraising efforts public.” He felt however that the amount of general public support he received was little, with most funds gathered from personal contacts. Robinson also admitted that very little money was from the general public. Some was from people who had seen the Belles perform, but mostly it was from family, friends, and old members, to whom the Belles advertised through social media.

Still, for sponsors and project owners alike, crowdfunding has been an effective means of fundraising in a manner more like a business relationship than a plea for donations. As Mitra says, “Everyone deserves to play the game. It’s no longer the realm of the gatekeepers. For investors it’s about engagement and being part of a story. For entrepreneurs crowdfunding represents an opportunity to validate your ideas, respond to feedback, find your potential customers, all in addition to getting funding.” By embracing big ideas, and giving everyone a chance, crowdfunding certainly looks set to continue its growth trend in the UK.

Look, but don’t touch

0

Wandering down Ship Street, next to the far more conventional Heroes’ café, it is Unicorn’s window, brimming with a sea of dust-coasted books, garments and accessories that first catches your eye. From what I recall, the display hasn’t changed in two years and its disorganization means that everyone but the most tenacious of shoppers and the most perseverant of vintage obsessees is immediately deterred.

If the shop is open, which is by no means a certainty, you will find yourself occupying an uncomfortably large capacity of the three-foot floor space, with Iva, Unicorn’s founder and sole worker for thirty years. It is Iva that lends Unicorn its multiple idiosyncrasies.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6609%%[/mm-hide-text]

Having crossed the threshold, it is hard to know where to begin. The shop is always in a state of transition and frequently resembles some sort of modern art installation, but it has, in recent times, improved. Last year the clothes were half on the floor and half on the rails in a disorganized jumble. This year, however, rails have been ordered by garment type, but are so overloaded that it renders browsing impossible and I have twice been in the shop when a rail has collapsed under the weight.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6610%%[/mm-hide-text]

To her credit, Iva really does know her stock and will quickly dive into a pile of trench coats and mismatched handbags to dig out the bowling hat that you’ve requested, but the problem with her sales technique lies in the fact that she never really seems keen on selling anything.

Indeed, as I ask for the hat’s price she tells me that it doesn’t suit me and that it is designed for a man’s head. My companion is told that the dress she has yet to try on (there is no fitting room) won’t suit her body shape. You can’t help but feel you have gone shopping with your mother. Whilst Iva’s approach is a breath of fresh air against a backdrop of overly sycophantic and false flatteries from the mouths of other shops’ assistants, honesty is not always the best policy, especially given the slim pickings of Oxford’s vintage scene.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6611%%[/mm-hide-text]

Whilst I’m sure there is some gold to be discovered amongst Unicorn’s produce, the overwhelming feeling that you are invading Iva’s walk-in wardrobe does little to facilitate hours of browsing. The on-the-spot, extortionate pricing, characteristic of so much vintage merchandise nowadays is also enough to discourage you from making a purchase. You will not regret a trip to Unicorn, but go with the desire to buy only secondary to that of acquiring hilarious anecdotes from the shop’s unpredictable owner.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6612%%[/mm-hide-text]

Preview: Angels in America

0

 Cherwell’s Verdict
“Angelic performances break up some heavy material”

Set in New York in the 80s, Angels in America sees a community of young homosexual men being torn apart by the AIDS crisis. The art, however, of this script is that in every scene when you might want to cry, you’ll want to laugh too. Humour pervades the play, which – cunningly – only serves to make the terror of the situation all the more horrific. Playhouse student shows often play it safe. Recently we’ve had Arthur Miller’s A View from the Bridge – not his greatest play, but one that features on GCSE syllabuses. There’s been Sondheim, Pinter, Chekhov – all of them household names. But now Oxford will see something genuinely unusual: Angels in America, a three hour play that verges on opera, by Tony Kushner.

The cast bring the comic quality of the script across excellently. Nor do they ham it up and descend into pantomimic camp to portray homosexuality, even though every male character is homosexual and every actor heterosexual. The relationship between Prior Walter (played by Ed Barr-Sim) and Louis Ironson (Arty Froushan) was believable; it was tender, too.

The script’s exploration of the politics surrounding the AIDS crisis manages to be both delicate and bludgeoning. During the main plot issues are alluded to, implied and suggested, but the sub-plot – that of Roy Cohn, a vicious McCarthyist lawyer (played by Barney White), as his diagnosis is revealed to him – treats the politics of the situation like an essay topic to be explicated and laid bare. This sub-plot is at least saved – as much as it can be – by White’s compelling performance and the historical interest (Cohn was a real person).

Angels in America had just over a week to go till opening night when I saw it, and it was shaping up impressively. All the actors – not just those already mentioned – were performing at a very high standard; all that seemed left to do was to polish the scenes so that they would shine, rather than just glow. The technical side of things sounds promising – not only do we get flying flats, we’ll have a flying actress too. The music, which, opera-like, will be played throughout the play, is entirely original and is currently being recorded. Nor will their director, Jack Sain, pare down the energy any time soon; “it is good to be obsessive,” to use his own words. 

Preview: The Handmaid’s Tale

0

Cherwell’s Verdict
“Not Maid for the faint-hearted” 

If The Handmaid’s Tale is set in a world of suppression and autonomy, then the cast of this operatic version of Atwood’s novel is a far cry from the society they reproduce. With roles passed merrily around the group over the course of different scenes, musicians becoming actors and singers becoming dancers, the overall effect adds to the abstract atmosphere of the story whilst also rallying a tightly-knit and highly cooperative cast.

A group of enthused undergrads and postgrads have got together to write, perform and stage the production, which, whilst closely based on the book, exploits the full potential of the Jacqueline du Prés music room as a space for sound, dance, and visual effects. I am told that one moment of the opera will consist of all the pianos in the building being played simultaneously with the internal doors open to create a homogenous mass of noise, the floor of the acting space is to be a scrabble-board, and projections on the balcony will create various effects and backdrops.

The use of space is certainly highly original. I watched the on-going rehearsal from the stage looking down into the area usually used by the audience but wrongly assumed this was a temporary arrangement. The audience for this particular production will be treated to a place on the floor literally at the feet of the actors; later they will be moved up onto the raised stage where I sat and view the production at the eye-level of an actor, a surprisingly more engaging experience which cuts out the all too familiar situation of leaning backwards in the seat, squinting with an aching neck at the actors above. Yet the balcony of the concert hall is also put to use, and actors emerge singing and spitting from underneath the stage itself. ‘Spitting’ is no exaggeration unfortunately; within innovative and haunting melodies from all members of the cast (a duet between Ellen Timothy and Anna Appleby re-enacting the perverse ‘ceremony’ of reproduction in Atwood’s dystopia was particularly striking), is a slightly heavy-handed tendency for experimental musicianship.

Repeated words, stuttering consonants, wordless a capella and ad lib singing combine to make much of the music indistinguishable from the rest – you certainly won’t leave this opera singing your favourite tunes Gilbert-and-Sullivan style – yet this is hardly the point. Their aim is to shock, to experiment and to challenge, and in this they will almost undoubtedly succeed.

Union drops Nick Griffin invitation

0

A letter from the Oxford Union inviting MEP and leader of the British National Party Nick Griffin to speak in Thursday’s debate on same-sex marriage was published on an anti-fascist blog yesterday afternoon, prompting a hasty retraction.

The leader of the far-right party was asked to speak on the motion ‘This house would be glad to have gay parents’. In a statement released shortly afterwards, the Union “rescinded the invitation in no uncertain terms”, describing it as an “error.”

Griffin has reacted angrily to the Union’s statement on his Twitter account, railing against what he called “disgraceful cowardice”.

The letter, published at the Hope Not Hate blog, which monitors far-right activity in the UK, appeared to be written in the name of, and undersigned by, the Union president.

It promised Griffin that the Union would “guarantee [him] a great welcome in Oxford” and he could expect a keen audience, “many of whom are European”.

However, the Union claimed that a new Secretary’s Committee member, who had “arbitrarily sent out a batch of invitations to several people”, was responsible. It maintained that the letters had not been cleared by senior members, and said, “We stress that the invitation, though it may have looked official, was not signed off by the President, and was not made on behalf of the Oxford Union.”

As well as failing to rescind the request, the same committee member also sent out unapproved invitations to Mitt Romney and Lady Gaga. The Union resolved to take “disciplinary action” against the individual in question.

It is not clear how the letter was obtained. Hope Not Hate told Cherwell, “We’re making absolutely no comment as to where we receive any of our information on the far-right. However, we are glad that the Oxford Union has seen sense and rescinded the invite to Nick Griffin.”

The letter made reference to Griffin’s 2007 Union visit, describing it as “thought provoking and stimulating”. Griffin’s appearance alongside Holocaust-denying historian David Irving drew in hundreds of protestors, and a sit-down protest in the debate chamber resulted in clashes with security guards. Griffin compared the protestors to Nazis, and described them as a “mob which would kill”.

The Union stated that it “commends the work” of Hope Not Hate, which has since published clarification. In relation to the BNP, it said, “The Oxford Union does not wish to be associated with the BNP in any way whatsoever. We strongly disagree with their views. It is unfortunate and deeply regrettable that this miscommunication has occurred.”

Responding on Twitter, Griffin wrote, “Oxford Union debating society having surrendered to leftist threats & rescinded my debate invitation, now ‘commends the work’ of left thugs.”

He has threatened to turn up nonetheless, tweeting, “If I get back from parliament I’ll go anyway. As a life member of the Cambridge Union I have reciprocal membership.”

The Oxford Union confirmed this arrangement, stating, “As long as they are neither creating a disturbance nor posing a threat to others, no paying members of the Oxford Union, nor members of the Cambridge Union, who hold reciprocal membership, will be denied access to the Union and its facilities within opening hours.”

The news comes in the wake of arguments over another of the Union’s invitees this term, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

LGBTQ Society President Simone Webb commented, “[Griffin] isn’t the person to present the most well-thought-out arguments against same gender parents.”

“He was probably invited due to his controversial image. However, I think this is different in nature to Assange’s invite, as Griffin was being invited to a debate where his views would be explicitly challenged.”

Regarding Griffin’s vow, Webb suggested, “If anyone turns up to the Union who is not a member, guest or invited speaker I see no reason why they should be allowed in. But were he to be admitted, I am confident his views would meet with vigorous challenge.”

The debate, on the motion ‘This house would be glad to have gay parents’, will take place at the Oxford Union on Thursday at 8.30pm. 

 

Golden Globes: Round-Up

0

The Golden Globes are Hollywood’s hybrid event; a bit like the Oscars but also a bit like the BAFTAS, judged by the comparatively tiny Hollywood Press Association. However, they always make for an interesting night, slightly less grandiose than their weepier counterparts and with a history of entertaining hosts.

This year’s shenanigans were led by America’s comedy darlings, SNL team Tina Fey and Amy Poehler. Following the much talked about show hosted by David Brent, sorry, Ricky Gervais, they were a guaranteed success, prodding fun at the eternally mockable Hollywood acting circle whilst remaining light hearted and engaging.

Though the Golden Globes looks like a pretty good night out, it is more often considered to be the indicator of who is going to be giving an overlong speech come the Oscars. Apart from the TV nominees, of course. They probably won’t be invited. However, this year saw the field blown wide open as Ben Affleck won Best Director and his film Argo pipped the tipped Lincoln for Best Film Drama Award. (It’s ok, Stephen Spielberg. You’ll live.) Jessica Chastain deservedly took the Best Actress in Drama Award for controversial Zero Dark Thirty, whilst Christopher Waltz proved his ever growing popularity with a win for Django Unchained.

Nevertheless, some things seem set in gold, with Daniel Day Lewis scooping a Best Actor in Drama award for Lincoln (he’s probably still in period dress) and Les Misérables taking Best Picture – Musical or Comedy.

Awards aside, the most dramatic event of the night was not a fictional one, but a real and heartfelt speech from Jodie Foster, upon the reception of her Cecile B DeMille ‘Outsanding Contribution to Entertainment’ Award. This prestigious nod has previously been awarded to Alfred Hitchcock, Martin Scorsese and Walt Disney, with Foster becoming the second youngest woman to receive it. Having been in the public eye for 47 of her 50 years, Foster has dealt with her fair share of media invasion. From a stalker who attempted to assassinate President Reagan on her behalf, to continued debate about her sexuality, she dealt with these situations with dignity and elegance, the two key elements to her speech. The speech marks the first time she has publicly acknowledged her sexuality, and her dedication to both feminism and film makes her a wholly deserving recepient of the award.

Alongside Fey and Poehler, wins for Homeland, Adele, and TV series Girls, the Golden Globes went a long way to highlighting the female success stories in Hollywood. Here’s to the girls. 

 

Golden Globe Awards 2013

Picture, Drama: “Argo.”

Picture, Musical or Comedy: “Les Miserables.”

Actor, Drama: Daniel Day-Lewis, “Lincoln.”

Actress, Drama: Jessica Chastain, “Zero Dark Thirty.”

Director: Ben Affleck, “Argo.”

Actor, Musical or Comedy: Hugh Jackman, “Les Miserables.”

Actress, Musical or Comedy: Jennifer Lawrence, “Silver Linings Playbook.”

Supporting Actor: Christoph Waltz, “Django Unchained.”

Supporting Actress: Anne Hathaway, “Les Miserables.”

Foreign Language: “Amour.”

Animated Film: “Brave.”

Screenplay: Quentin Tarantino, “Django Unchained.”

Original Score: Mychael Danna, “Life of Pi.”

Original Song: “Skyfall” (music and lyrics by Adele and Paul Epworth), “Skyfall.”

 

TELEVISION:

Series, Drama: “Homeland.”

Series, Musical or Comedy: “Girls.”

Actress, Drama: Claire Danes, “Homeland.”

Actor, Drama: Damian Lewis, “Homeland.”

Actress, Musical or Comedy: Lena Dunham, “Girls.”

Actor, Musical or Comedy: Don Cheadle, “House of Lies.”

Miniseries or Movie: “Game Change.”

Actress, Miniseries or Movie: Julianne Moore, “Game Change.”

Actor, Miniseries or Movie: Kevin Costner, “Hatfields & McCoys.”

Supporting Actress, Series, Miniseries or Movie: Maggie Smith, “Downton Abbey.”

Supporting Actor, Series, Miniseries or Movie: Ed Harris, “Game Change.”

Cecil B. DeMille Lifetime Achievement Award: Jodie Foster.