Monday 4th May 2026
Blog Page 1610

A Touch of Frost and a little Nixon

0

Nixon returns to the Oxford Union for the third time with Peter Morgan’s
Frost/Nixon, staged in 4th week in the debate chamber – the venue that hosted the former President’s two visits to the place in 1958 and 1978. You would be forgiven for thinking the two previous visits were made by different men. In 1958, Nixon was Vice-President in an administration that oversaw the birth of NASA and a mutual agreement between Russia, the UK and the USA to stop developing armaments for three years.


Come 1978, it was an entirely different story. Nixon had resigned over the Watergate scandal, in which it had emerged that his cronies wiretapped his opponents to gain an electoral advantage. More than that – Nixon himself had been involved in covering up the crime. His resignation had simply been a way of avoiding shameful impeachment. That year, the whole debacle had just reached catharsis. It had also been a year since an infamous set of interviews conducted by David Frost. The sensational no-holds-barred conversations pulled in audiences of over 45 million viewers in America alone. It remains the largest ever television audience for a political interview. Nixon admitted that he had disgraced the presidential office. But he also dropped the bombshell: “I believe it’s not illegal if the president does it”.


As a result the televised interviews – conceived as an attempt to raise his profile – tanked, while the interviews sent Frost’s career into the stratosphere. A poll showed 75% of viewers thought Nixon had no more role to play in public life.


The play is infused with a real sense of competitiveness between the two sides; the Frost and Nixon camps rehearsing separately. The directors see the chamber as a boxing ring, and projections of people filming the show live will give the audience the sense of a TV show. Nixon was not a man who gave up easily. His 1978 trip to Europe was a bid to re-establish himself as a speaker with an agenda to make a difference in the world, and to promote his recently published memoirs. Among his stops were the Sorbonne, Berlin and Oxford. The Union, then a conservative-leaning organization, had invited him to speak in great secret. For security reasons, he was not even on the termcard for the Michaelmas when he visited. Even while the event was going on, the level of security was very high: Nixon’s men from the Security Service scoured the building for potential threats, and a whole wing of the Radcliffe Infirmary was reserved in case anything happened. There was so much public interest that the event was restricted to life members. Needless to say, the number of life memberships rapidly jumped following the disclosure of the visit.


Much like the visit of Julian Assange earlier this year, Nixon’s appearance attracted a great deal of controversy. Although Union memberships were snapped up on news of the visit, not everyone wanted to hear what Nixon had to say. A protest was organized by American graduate student Andy Paalborg, who studied at Pembroke at the time. Paalborg was intent on stopping Nixon benefitting from the prestige of Oxford and on hampering Nixon’s plans of only speaking at conservative societies to ensure a good reception. He managed to attract the attention of the international media to his protest by publicising that a large protest was planned – and the news reached papers all over the world. When Nixon arrived on the night in a black limousine, he was pelted with eggs. Paalborg told Cherwell, “There were 12 arrests that day. The protesters surged toward his car and rocked it back and forth.” The protesters allegedly numbered in the hundreds and carried anti-Nixon banners. They crowded around the Union as Nixon delivered his speech, tuning into the BBC to listen in to the address and shouting “Bullshit!” among other cries of disagreement during the Question Time-style session.


Although those who attended the event testify that the protests were not too disruptive, the demonstration was covered across the Atlantic. Paalborg and his protest was splashed across the British and American news channels whilst Time magazine published photos of the protesters. Some opine that the protests were the result of Oxford’s left at the time revolting against conservatism: Anti-Nixon sentiment merely provided a convenient excuse for action. The Union then was less open to all ends of the political spectrum as it is today. The term card cnsisted mostly, if not to say exclusively, of rightwing speakers.


There was at the same time a strong communist, even neo-Trotskyite, anti-American contingent that was trying to raise the profile of OUSU which was then a newly-born and penniless association. But what did Nixon actually speak about? Not that much to do with the burning topic of Watergate, apparently, although of course it was the thing that everyone wanted to hear about following the Frost interviews. Instead, he focused on looking forward: he spoke about the threat posed to the world by the Soviet Union, and how the West (which he defined as Japan, the US, the UK, Canada and Europe) can compete with the Communist states.


His only comments about the big scandal that brought him down were reluctantly made during question time, when he admitted “I screwed it up” and “I made a mistake”.

Creaming Spires: the start of term

0

The Student Beans University sex league 2012 ranked Oxford 51st, behind Loughborough (ex­pected), LSE (bitter) and Brookes (success story of “Fuzzy Ducks” and “Fishy Fingers”). With an average of just 3.44 sexual partners over the course of a three or four-year degree, to an outsider it seems like us Oxfordians just aren’t getting enough. Perhaps this is simply a reflec­tion of the tendency for Oxford students to set­tle down into long-term relationships, hence skewing our ranking. Maybe we should pity those Exeter sloanes or ghastly tabs who – ac­cording to the survey – have more sexual part­ners than us; surely we’d all rather get laid on a daily basis with a boyfriend/girlfriend than only manage to land four one-night stands in three years? Either way, our position in the league table it is doing nothing for our cred­ibility as sexperts. So what are we sex-starved matriculated martyrs going to do to boost this year’s score? 

As we welcome in the new term there is some serious spring cleaning to be done; out with the period pants, cave-girl legs and vagi­nal cobwebs and in with the summer-long-shagathon.

Over the course of the term, I’ll be deliver­ing Cherwell readers with erotic titbits guar­anteed to make even your gynecologist blush. With the aid of the Ann Summers ‘book of sex’, a Cosmopolitan subscription, and my array of newly downloaded sex apps, I shall be trying the latest sex accessories, and testing ambi­tious sex positions your hamstrings never per­mitted; all in attempt to loosen the Cherwell chastity belt.

Fear not, there shall be no jumping in at the deep end here; I shall lower you in at the shal­low end and gently introduce you to sexual ex­periences that would previously have had your knickers in a twist.

Roll on a term of sexting, sexing and out­right debauchery. And hopefully by the end of Trinity term I’ll be your Anastasia Steel as she was at the end of the trilogy: sexed up and well versed in the art of fuckery.

Review: The Ice Cream Girls

0

The Ice Cream Girls is ITV’s latest thriller, based on the novel of the same name by Dorothy Koomson. I happen to have read (and rather enjoyed) the book, so was looking forward to the adaptation. The plot follows two women, Poppy and Serena, who were both involved with the same creepy older man seventeen years ago. As the story flits between their teenage and grown-up selves, we learn that Serena is now happily married with a family, whereas Poppy has just been released from prison. Cue dramatic reveals all over the place. 

Firstly, let me start by saying that I really wanted to shoot the screenwriter (Kate Brook). The book was actually quite well written, so oh-my-lord why didn’t she just lift the dialogue? Instead we get some of the most awful, clunky rubbish I’ve ever had the misfortune of sitting through, including gems like “We’re a family. We stick together” and “Just think about Mum. She needs us. You can do it.” I wish I was making this up, but I’m not. What’s more, she did that terrible thing of adding an obligatory character with cancer to create more emotion. Seriously, this has to be one of my least favourite tropes ever (note: using the same techniques as Nicholas Sparks is never a good idea). It’s like people who win an argument by referencing Nazis (the technical term is ‘to Godwin’. Yes I did just look that up. Moving on.) My other problem is that I know that there’s plenty of genuine drama to be had in The Ice Cream Girls, and yet the first eight minutes were so completely bland that I mistook the opening for a car commercial. Not a good sign. 

I wasn’t really convinced by Lorraine Burrows’s Serena, who just seemed awkward the whole time, however Johdi May was excellent as Poppy. Her introduction was probably my favourite shot of the entire forty five minutes; involving a bridge, lots of cars and some angsty screaming. Good cinematography there. Their teenage equivalents, played by Georgina Campbell and Holli Dempsey, both nailed it: giving impressively nuanced performances in fairly limited screen time. Martin Compston was also excellent as their sort-of-boyfriend, who arguably has the hardest job of the lot since he had to make both us and the girls love and hate him simultaneously. He was restrained and not quite disturbing enough for my money, but was definitely getting there towards the end.

Overall, this first episode was a slow-burner, lacking the tension that I felt the story deserved. It was essentially just a lot of scene-setting for the impending drama which was ominously hinted at throughout. However, a host of strong performances bodes well for future episodes and I just might tune in again next week to see how they do. 

Three stars

His Majesty King Letsie III of Lesotho to visit Oxford

0

The current King of the kingdom of Lesotho, His Majesty King Letsie III, is to visit Oxford to speak at the Union on Saturday 4th May. The event is part of the Oxford University Pan-African Conference, the flagship event of the Oxford University African Society. The Conference, which is now three years old, is said by the organisers to be one of the largest gatherings of African students that take place in the UK.

His Majesty King Letsie, who studied Developmental Studies at Cambridge, is to give a talk on the theme: Towards a 21st Century African Renaissance: Sowing the Seeds of Success“. Other high profile speakers include Euvin Naidoo, the Chair of the South African Chamber of Commerce in America, who Forbes ranked in 2011 as one of the “Top 10 most powerful and influential men under 40 in Africa” and BankyW, a renowned Nigerian musician.

Martin Kayondo, organiser of the conference, spoke of its aims. He said, “The objective of the 2013 OUPAC is to bring together dynamic scholars, entrepreneurs and leaders from around the world, who will discuss issues of African leadership, governance, technological advancement, sustainable development and healthcare innovation. It aims to showcase Africa’s ongoing development and investment potential, to change people’s perceptions and in so doing recognise Africa’s emerging role as an economic powerhouse and a vital player on the global political stage. We, as participants, seek to engage with this transformational change and influence its direction as we sow the seeds of success for future generations.”

Chloe Kane, a second year PPE student at Wadham, commented, “I am very excited about this conference and that so many prestigious and important speakers are coming to speak at Oxford right at the Union.”

Lessons from Anna Wintour, Pope of the Fashion World

0

Anyone who has seen The Devil Wears Prada will inevitably draw parallels between the ruthless fictional fashion editor Miranda Priestly and real-life queen of fashion Anna Wintour, editor-in-chief of American Vogue since 1988 and newly-crowned artistic director of Condé Nast. It is difficult to fully grasp the extent of Wintour’s enormous influence. She can make or break careers; designers rethink their collections if she doesn’t like them; she famously once got Milan fashion week moved to fit her schedule. Dubbed “Nuclear Wintour” for her reportedly aloof and demanding personality, the most famous woman in fashion has hit back at critics, exclaiming, “I have so many people here […] that have worked with me for 15, 20 years, and, you know, if I’m such a bitch, they must really be a glutton for punishment because they’re still here […] If one comes across sometimes as being cold or brusque, it’s simply because I’m striving for the best”. At the end of the day, she’s only human – and the reality doesn’t exactly match up to the rumours. (If you really want an idea of what it’s like to work at Vogue, watch 2009 documentary The September Issue.)

Wintour is instantly recognisable by her trademark pageboy bob and ubiquitous sunglasses, which are said to be corrective lenses for her deteriorating vision and act as “armor” (in her own words), allowing her to keep her reactions to a show private. Her dress sense has remained fairly consistent throughout her extensive career: printed frocks, three-pieces and tweeds are often paired with simple nude sandals and a chunky necklace. Over three decades she’s managed to dodge the worst trends (think crop tops, acid wash jeans and leg warmers), and in recent years she has embraced a more conservative style, sticking to classic silhouettes with nipped-in waists and below-the-knee hems. Her looks are simple, effortless and attainable, which is fitting for a woman who has defended the democratisation of exclusive luxury brands: “It means more people are going to get better fashion […] And the more people who can have fashion, the better.”

But Wintour hasn’t shied away from more adventurous looks: a notable fan of fur, she has been photographed in garments ranging from a full-length leopard-print coat to a dress embroidered with a sequinned lobster. She sends out the message that it’s okay to like what you like. Be bold and don’t be afraid to re-wear your favourite pieces. In her own words, “Create your own style […] let it be unique for yourself and yet identifiable for others.” Amen, Anna! (She isn’t called the Pope of the fashion world for nothing.)

 

IN PICTURES: A Celebration of Anna Wintour’s Style

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%7252%%[/mm-hide-text] 

At the Met Gala 2011

 

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%7253%%[/mm-hide-text] 

At the WSJ Magazine 2012 Innovator of the Year Awards

 

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%7254%%[/mm-hide-text] 

At the “From Queen to Empress: Victorian Dress 1837-1888” Costume Exhibit in New York City in 1988

 

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%7255%%[/mm-hide-text] 

At the Louis Verdad Fall 2005 presentation

 

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%7258%%[/mm-hide-text] 

At the Museum of Modern Art in New York in 2011

 

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%7256%%[/mm-hide-text] 

At the opening of the Galleries Lafayette store in 1991 in New York City

 

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%7257%%[/mm-hide-text] 

At The Burden Center’s 12th Annual Dinner Dance in 1991

Review: Scott and Bailey

0

ITV’s crime-fighting double act is back for a third series with a fresh set of murders and plenty of surprises along the way. The crime drama follows the lives of D.C. Rachel Bailey and D.C. Jill Scott at work in the Manchester Metropolitan Police Major Incident Team, as well as at home, where things are far from simple. Unlike most detective series, the writers of Scott and Bailey focus on the characters and developing their stories, avoiding the predictableness of a ‘whodunnit?’ in favour of convincing real life drama with clout. 

In series one we witnessed the ups and downs of Bailey’s relationship with nasty Nick Savage, played by Rupert Graves (V for Vendetta, Garrow’s Law). By series three, with the barrister out of the picture, Rachel appears to be struggling to adapt to her new life with Sean: a happy-go-lucky traffic cop who might just be the man to curb her self-destructive tendencies. That’s not Bailey’s only problem – when she’s not questioning her marriage, she’s trying to keep her mother under control. Series three promises a further peek into her back story, with the arrival of Sharon Bailey played by Tracie Bennett. Whilst this pub-crawling embarrassment of a mother adds humour to proceedings, her presence also allows us to see a new side to Rachel, who thus far seems to have adopted DC Scott as a mother figure and forgotten all trace of her younger self. 

Meanwhile, Janet Scott is still dealing with the fallout after her divorce from teacher Ade whilst taking care of her daughters and pursuing her work in the police. However, she’s far from perfect. As her series two affair with fellow MIT member Andy suggests, there’s more to her than meets the eye. Amongst all this murder and life drama, there’s comic relief from Amelia Bullmore, who co-wrote with Sally Wainwright two of this series’s eight episodes. The straight-talking detective chief inspector played by Bullmore completes the trio of women who bring a fresh, modern angle to the programme as working women trying to juggle various aspects of their lives. The feisty Mancunians’ hold on the major incident team is due to be loosened, however, with the arrival of ex-Emmerdale star Danny Miller as DS Rob Waddington. An exciting addition following his turn in ITV drama Lightfields, Miller is sure to stir things up. 

There is always a concern with a third series that the drama will have run its course or that it will fail to meet expectations. For Scott and Bailey the writers needn’t worry. With a good mix of humour and drama as well as complex characters like these, the work of MIT’s finest has only just begun. 

Four stars

Scott and Bailey is on Wednesdays ITV 1 at 9pm

Hacked Off?

0

Sitting on the edge of our Freshers’ Fair desk, tired and fairly sleep-deprived after three days and over a thousand confused first years, I think we had all acutely realized that immersive cinema was a pretty alien art form to most. We used to dream of people who had heard of Secret Cinema. It’s amazing then that six months and three immersive events later – the third of which, Black Swan, opens on April 25th – we still haven’t really come up with a succinct explanation of immersive cinema to copy and paste into situations like this. But here goes another attempt.

Immersive cinema is the collaboration of a number of different art forms into a single night of unique, unexpected fun. It aims to recreate the world of a particular film before, during and after the audience have taken their seats. The means of doing this is different from project to project: the unpredictability is part of the experience. However, usually this involves the recreation of set pieces from the film in which the audience can play an active or passive role. For example, our last immersive project, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, saw confetti cannons and balloons being released from the balcony during the famous ‘Twist and Shout’ carnival scene, among other surprises.

Black Swan, in association with Keble Arts Festival, seeks to capitalise on surprise even further. Dark and moody, the film is an marked change from many of those we’ve adapted before. But this has been a challenge we have really relished. Audience members can expect to be charmed, confused and hopefully even scared by an evening of immersive psycho-sexual horror.

Cherwell investigates: homelessness in Oxford

0

Figures from Oxford City Council’s latest Homelessness Strategy show that the rate of homelessness in the city is improving.

The statistics show that the number of households living in temporary accommodation has decreased by 74% in the past five years and that, due to a council and Broadway initiative called ‘No Second Night Out’, the number of rough sleepers has decreased from 27 in June 2012 to 12 in January of this year. National figures have increased by 29% in the last two years, according to the homelessness charity Crisis UK.

Labour Councillor Scott Seamons told Cherwell, “A common cause of homelessness is parental exclusion and we have done family mediation work in the past and are looking to extend this.

“Another large cause is breach or termination of tenancies and we have a private sector team that supports tenants and landlords when there is a risk of homelessness to prevent this. This team also works to find properties in the private rented sector to place households threatened with homelessness – the homechoice scheme.”

The homelessness issue is aggravated by a lack of affordable housing: Oxford has the highest house prices outside London.

The latest City Council strategy report also cites “poor discharge planning for ex-offenders” and mental health needs as being major factors preventing vulnerable people from finding a settled home, along with “addiction, negative behaviour, poor parenting and life skills”.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG%%7246%%[/mm-hide-text]

National homelessness charities have warned that the series of government welfare reforms will worsen an already fragile situation.

Leslie Morphy, Chief Executive of Crisis said, “Our poorest households face a bleak April as they struggle to budget for all these cuts coming at once”.

The cuts are likely to hit the poorest hardest. The ‘Bedroom Tax’ will mean that rent payers on housing benefits face a 14% decrease in the benefits they receive if they have a spare bedroom, and 25% if they have two or more.

Paul Roberts, Business Development Manager at Aspire Oxford, a charity which works to put vulnerably housed people back in employment, said of the tax. “There is a real housing shortage in Oxford and if people can’t find smaller houses to move into, what do they do?”

Crisis predicts households will sustain average losses of £14 a week from the Bedroom Tax, and £93 per week from the overall benefit cap.

According to Councillor for Housing, Scott Seamons, the government will also cut the Oxford Council’s £1 million Preventing Homelessness Grant.

Seamons maintained “We have made the political decision to continue to protect the poorest in our community and those in most need. For instance with the 10% cut in the council tax benefit we receive, we have chosen to swallow this cut and not pass it on to the recipients of council tax benefit.”

A spokesperson for O’Hanlon House, a housing shelter on Luther Street in Oxford, commented, “Welfare cuts will have a massive effect. There will be more visible homelessness on the streets in years to come.”

Roberts explained that Aspire have responded to the economic pressures by becoming more businesslike: “Traditional sources of funding are less available. We have to transform the way we present ourselves.”

He continued, “You have to be optimistic, there is no alternative.”

HFL building becomes ‘cyber centre’

0

William Hague has announced that the old History Faculty Library will host the govern-ment’s Ê»Global Centre for Cyber Security Capacity.

The “cyber centre” will receive a £1 million grant from the Government. The announcement comes after the 2011 National Security Strategy rated cyber-attacks as a threat as serious as international terrorism.

Hague, the UK’s Foreign Secretary, stated that the centre “will coordinate global work on cyber threats and cyber policies which will help protect the UK’s security” and “be a beacon of expertise and put the UK at the forefront of cyber policy development.”

The “cyber-centre” will be based in the building of the Indian Institute on Broad Street, which to housed the History Faculty Library until it was moved to the Radcliffe Camera in September 2012. The move was controversial
for the lack of consultation with students.

Hague was a student at Magdalen in the 1980s, President of the Oxford Union in Michelmas 1981, and President of the Oxford University Conservative Association (OUCA) in Hilary of the same year.

The centre will be part of the Martin School, which works to “address the most pressing global challenges and opportunities of the 21st century.” It was founded in 2005 with a $100 million donation from philanthropist James 
Martin.

According to Sadie Creese, Head of the new cyber centre, the research they will conduct will define global priorities for cyber security. The research conducted will be shared with governments, communities, and organisations,, to inform their own cybersecurity strategies.

Yet a third-year Keble historian commented, “This all sounds like a bit of a gimmick by the government, especially as the G8 conference is being hosted in London right now. Hague didn’t even come to Oxford to open the centre.”

Nicholas Crossland, a first-year Philosophy and Theology student, commented, “It is looking increasingly as though tomorrow’s warfare will be predominantly fought on computer screens…it makes perfect sense to make
investments in technology, brains and innovation in this field a priority.”

Walid Haddad, a third year history and politics student at St. Hugh’s, stated that “The move of the HFL to the Radcliffe Camera hasn’t been as apocalyptic as was originally predicted.”

Haddad went on to remark that, “If the University has a few square feet of extra space on Broad Street left over from the move, why shouldnÊ»t they seek to fill the vacancy with money from Whitehall?”

University pays living wage

0

The University of Oxford this week agreed to pay all direct employees a living wage with immediate effect. This move means an increase in the salaries of all the Universities’ lowest paid direct employees, both casual and full-time, to £7.45 an hour.

This decision represents a substantial victory for the Living Wage Campaign which has been in operation since 2006. The campaign has gained support from University staff and students as well as other universities up and down the country. The campaign has fought to increase the wages of those on the bottom rung of the University’s payroll.

The figure of £7.45, which comprises the ‘living wage’, is calculated by taking into account the basic rate of living, which is higher than the current government-implemented minimum wage of £6.31. This figure rises to £8.55 for those employed in London.

Daniel Turner, press officer for the Oxford University Labour Club, told Cherwell “We’re naturally very pleased that the University has agreed to pay all direct employees a living wage. OULC members have worked hard alongside the Living Wage Campaign, and we will continue to agitate for fairer pay for college staff and for those employed indirectly by the university.

“The Labour-controlled City Council is a living wage employer, and Labour’s 2013 manifesto for Oxfordshire calls for the County Council to do the same. Our work is part of a broader movement in Labour Students to spread the living wage in Britain’s universities, with several major successes so far.”

Sarah Santhosham, OUSU charities chair told Cherwell, “For many years the OUSU Living Wage Campaign has been pressing for staff employed by the University and its Colleges to be paid an amount that they can afford to live on, in collaboration with many student groups, community groups, the Council and most importantly the workers themselves.

“It is a very welcome development that all directly employed staff are now being paid a Living but the problem of poverty pay still persists for the hundreds of contracted workers at the University and much remains to be done. The OUSU campaign will keep on fighting for these changes, while actively continuing to support campaigns run by students
across the Colleges.”

The university’s recent decision does not affect those indirectly working for them, such as the employees of contractors. In a document published on the 15th March by the university’s personnel services it was stated that “The Personnel Committee has made no commitments relating to future increases in the Living Wage or to employees of contractors who are working on university premises. A working party will be set up to consider how to assist departments who wish to pay the Living Wage to the employees of university contractors.”

The document went on to state that “A working group is being set up to consider how best to assist departments who wish to ensure that staff of contractors working on university premises are paid at the Living Wage. More information on this will be available in due course.”