The Shake-Cake-Bake-Off  @ the Turl Street Kitchen

One of the stranger events of Bardfest was the Shakespeare-themed cake competition, the ‘Shake-Cake-Bake-Off’. On the afternoon of 22nd May people flocked to the library of the TSK with their cupcakes, sponges and biscuits for a celebration of ‘Shakey Baking’. With G&D’s judging and awarding prizes, the atmosphere was tense as the bakers passive-aggressively proffered their wares for tasting. One of the entries was a group of cupcakes emblazoned with letters spelling out ‘Alas Poor Damien’. The sequence was concluded with a cake depicting a skull. After staring blankly at this culinary display for a while, the link was explained to me: it was a reference to Damien Hirst, whose famous diamond encrusted skull is a bit like that one in Hamlet, which is addressed in the play with the famous words, ‘Alas Poor Yorick’. Hmmmm. Who knew food could be so intellectualised: cakes that comment on flagging artistic credentials? If you fancied tasting one of the cakes you had ensure the sequence still made a word. The winner of the competition was a trio of cupcakes decked in flowers and glitter and labelled ‘Titania’, ‘Oberon’ and ‘Peaseblossom’. A deserving winner in my opinion: easy to understand and consumable without any semantic challenges.

Carmella Crinnion

Montagues & Capulets @ Brasenose College Chapel

What do Prokofiev and Taylor Swift have in common? Romeo and Juliet, apparently, as Oxbard Fest 2012’s Montagues and Capulets displayed in an enjoyable, if frankly slightly bizarre evening of musical couplings which saw songs from Dire Straits performed alongside instrumental selections from Leonard Bernstein’s West Side Story. Opening with the rousing overtures of Prokofiev’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’ suite (made notorious through Apprentice fame), the gild and panelling of Brasenose’s 17th century chapel provides an interesting, but not overwhelming backdrop to the music of literature’s most epic tragic romance. With strong performances from all, special mention should be extended to Jaymee Coonjobeeharry on the flute for a performance both beguiling and well executed (and for having a pretty terrific name, let’s be honest). Sophie Giles sang strongly in her rendition of Taylor Swift’s ‘Love Story’, but attempting to elevate pop schmaltz into any kind of meaningful ballad is always a difficult endeavour. Likewise, Jack Graham singing Dire Straits’ ‘Romeo and Juliet’ was solid and convincing but with only the soft accompaniment of the piano, the overall effect fell a little flat. In comparison to the emotionally wrought falsetto from the Killers’ Brandon Flowers in the band’s 2007 cover, the lack of a pained, highly strung energy seems palpably absent. While putting such a medley of genres on the same bill may seem at best, eccentric and at worst thematically incoherent, this should not detract from what was ultimately an evening of well-executed, well-rounded and highly engaging musical proficiency. A resplendent start to Oxbard Fest 2012.

Olivia Arigho-Stiles

Lend Me Your Ears @ Ashmolean

Set in the beautiful Randolph Sculpture Gallery of the Ashmolean, the concept of the show was to marry Shakespeare with a variety of modern music. The first half of the show consisted musical performances of twentieth century composers Igor Stravinsky and Howard Blake, both of whom wrote song cycles set to and inspired by Shakespearean verse. The performances were musically adept but it was often hard to hear the lyrics, a drawback considering the theme of the event.
Happily, there were no such problems in the second half which saw performances from two of Oxford’s favourite a cappella groups, Out of the Blue and The Oxford Gargoyles, both of whom were superb. Each group performed a set of songs, prefaced by a reading of an extract from a Shakespeare play or sonnet. The idea being that the audience frame the song they were about to hear through the thematically similar extract and thus find new meaning therein. Although the connection wasn’t always obvious, the idea was a good one and the listener couldn’t help marvelling at the continued relevance of the works of the great Bard. Considering this was the purpose of the event, it was, all in all, a great success.

Patrick Scott

Banter of the Bard @ Worcester Gardens

Closing the Shakespeare Festival is ‘Banter of the Bard’; Katie-Ebner Landy, student at Oriel and organiser describes the event as ‘enjoyable, light entertainment, a night filled with music, food, drink and Shakespeare.’ In one evening seven scenes will be performed in Worcester Gardens, with the audience voting for their favourite act. ‘We wanted to do something different,’ Ebner-Landy tells Cherwell, ‘not just another play in a garden. That’s why we turned it into a competition’. The idea arose from the wish to bring theatre into other areas of entertainment, to not just keep as a separate art. They decided to turn it into ‘a proper fest’ with the audience seated on cushions in the middle, surrounded by 4 stages. Phoebe Braithwaite, co-director of the Midsummer Night’s Dream scene, states that the setting of Worcester gardens is perfect for the event, describing them as ‘genuinely rural and very idyllic’. The different plays being performed are a combination of traditional and new scenes, including classics such as Taming of the Shrew and Twelfth Night. All food and drink is centred around the Shakespeare theme, with ‘Shrewdrivers’ and ‘Much Ado about Muffins’ on sale throughout the evening. Although the scenes have been put together by individual groups, the entire event will be hosted and brought together by MC Will Mendelowitz from Worcester, ‘The Bard’. The MC introduces each new act taking on a variety of appearances, including dance critic and naughty schoolboy. Braithwaite explains, ‘It’s a mind-trick for the audience with Will appearing as recognisably himself, but in different guises.’ The final night will see Worcester Provost and Shakespeare expert, Jonathan Bate, who holds a position on the board of the Royal Shakespeare Company, as special guest and judge. Ebner-Landy encourages all to come and enjoy ‘a great night and something which has never been done before. After all the plays shown during the Shakespeare festival, this competition will be a fun finish. See it as the final festival of the entire festival.’
Banter of the Bard takes places on the 3rd, 4th and 5th June in Worcester Gardens.

Isabelle Gerretsen

Titus Andronicus @ University Parks

Revenge, murder, rape, people baked in pies –  the perfect way to spend a summer evening.  With a character survival rate of about ten per cent, Titus Andronicus is not your standard light hearted garden-variety Shakespeare comedy.  Nevertheless, sitting on the grass of University Parks, drinking Pimm’s and eating G&D’s makes for a pleasant evening, even with the constant, gratuitous violence of one of the Bard’s least respected plays. Admittedly, director Rebecca Claire Thomas toned it down a little by substituting the blood for red ribbons strewn generously over the grass, though perhaps went too far in the inclusion of a slightly irritating and overused drum.  The purpose of it was presumably to add ‘dramatic’ emphasis to certain lines and events; a nice concept, but it may have required a slightly more judicious use. The acting, for the most part, was passable.  A few of the central characters (Dionne Farrell as the titular general especially) were well-acted, though the remainder are mostly there to read out their lines in a suitably angry, sad or pleading fashion, depending on the prevailing mood.  This is, not by any stretch, an especially good piece of drama. It is, however, outside: the glorious sun will likely blind you to this production’s various deficiencies, and, for the £3 you pay, it’s a perfectly pleasant evening.

Angus Hawkins

A Shakespearean Evensong  @ New College Chapel

Before the English Reformation, English choral composition enjoyed a richness it was not to recover until Handel in the eighteenth century and Britten in the twentieth. This was an era before polyphony was seen as a barrier to worship, an immoral practice. Choral music was rich, contrapuntal, extravagant.  The nationally acclaimed New College choir led by Edward Higginbottom performed some of these extravagant compositions in the shockingly ornate New college chapel. The frieze of saints stacking above each other like symbols at a catacomb; the eighteenth century glass windows illumined by this Great British Summer. Though the flyers for Bardfest were outside, there was no mention of it. The evensong service was performed as it has been for centuries. The choir process: small boys delicate or ungainly (clearly none of them good at sport), ruffed like little Philip Sidneys, precocious attendants of the liturgy. The service was advertised as singing the music Shakespeare might have heard : choral responses were by the composer Thomas Morley and by William Byrd. The anthem was Weelkes’ ‘Alleluia, I heard a voice’, a profuse and fluid stream of sound (Spotify it). The joy of polyphonic music is watching how casually the melody, or even the voice that you can pick out of the group, is tossed from singer to singer. It’s easy to think of Shakespeare as a modern man, an urban rebel, but he certainly went to church and would have been familiar with the divine services. Perhaps we underestimate the effect of antiphonal singing on dialogue, and the witty ripostes of lovers are heir to the call and response of choirs.

Christy Edwall

‘Hiya kids. Here is an important message from your Uncle Bill. Don’t buy drugs. Become a pop star, and they give you them for free!’ So says Bill Nighy’s character in the hit 2003 romantic comedy Love Actually. However, Nighy’s thoughts in real life could hardly be more different. Speaking with our reporter Xin Fan after his talk at the Union, he sums up his wisdom in a nutshell: ‘Don’t take drugs and pay your taxes, and don’t take anyone’s reputation at face value.’

Having previously graced its chamber in 2004, Nighy’s visit to the Oxford Union was an encore, albeit a delayed one. Whilst most Union speakers have specific agenda in addressing the university (Peter Andre, we’re looking at you) Nighy didn’t dwell on any of his current projects, preferring to ruminate on past performances, and his bemusement at acting in a bodysuit for CGI purposes. What, then, brings him back? ‘I don’t do a great deal of this sort of thing, but I do occasionally think I have something a bit different and practical to say to young people who aspire to act. I flat- ter myself that you don’t get that information everywhere.’ Evidently a humble man, which he is both in background and in person, Nighy clearly felt honoured to be invited to the Union, greeting the awed silence that met his ar- rival with a simple, ‘Fuck.’ 

Nighy is well qualified to comment on, well, life. His career has spanned several decades and has seen him receive numerous accolades for performances in films as diverse as The Girl in the Cafe and Shaun of the Dead. At times, Nighy’s emphasis on what he calls ‘finding another level of naturalism and working as myself’ has been stretched, never more so than when he played half-man, half-squid Davy Jones in the second of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. Nighy might be striving for naturalism but he is as well known for his mannered delivery, à la Love Actually, as he is for his acting chops. There are noticeable inflections in Nighy’s personality, which often resemble those of some of his onscreen counterparts. The blurred line doesn’t bother Nighy. ‘Every actor thinks they’re doing a huge character job until they see the film and go “oh, that’s exactly like me”.’

When it does come down to encouraging Oxford students to try following in his footsteps, Nighy is cautious. The acting life seems to him pretty similar to that of a ‘professional gambler’, and he said that he is certainly under no illusions about his own ‘enormous good fortune’. The risks, he says, ‘are enormous. Bright, educated, lovely people I know have been affected by such ambitions, and not all achieve success.’

But Nighy is a risk-taker, a massive bungee enthusiast, and he wants to leave the door open for those who have a profound desire to emulate his acting success. The most important thing for Nighy is the craft itself, and for all its uncertainties, it is still, for him, ‘a primary art; an honourable tradition.’ And after all, as Nighy aptly puts it, ‘The world is precarious anyway. So what the heck.’

Finals are a weird time. Hard work and long hours are oddly broken up in my case by peri- ods of regimented exercise, as I heave my soul- less body around Christ Church meadow. So what can keep Finals woes at bay? Three words: Made In Chelsea. Yes, the girls may look like a bunch of horse-faced Barbies and the boys might be irritating pre-packaged ‘lads’ that belong in the dark recesses of Gloucester Green, but there is something about Made in Chelsea that transcends the simple pleasure of watching the future wreckers of the world economy unwind. 

Made in Chelsea asks deep questions about subjectivity and objectivity. These questions aren’t just raised in the basic structure of the programme but also in what it means to be human. Is Louise’s relationship with Spencer an indication of the inevitability of true love? Does Ollie’s belief that he can “be bi for the summer” mean you can choose your sexuality? What the fuck is the point of Binky? Even deep seated theological issues are raised: “What would Jesus do?” is Proudlock’s solution to the tempestuous love triangle between Spencer, a cocaine snorting financial manager who looks like a finely waxed testicle, and Louise, the kind of girl that’s more G’n’D’s than Bridge. The nights out aren’t even particularly impressive – most clubs in Chelsea appear to resemble the toilets of Rappongi, minus any semblance of cultural diversity (this cast is whiter than a formal at Merton).

Perhaps more than anything Made in Chelsea uncovers the nightmarish vision of our aspirational future. We think our future lies in the Kettle Chip and Asti-flavoured world of Chelsea when, given the state of the British economy, it more likely rests in urine-soaked crack den in Hounslow. But at least for now we’re able to watch what could have been on Freeview.

Casting earned their money on this one. Cameron Diaz, Jennifer Lopez, The Hunger Games’s Elizabeth Banks, Oscar-nominated Anna Kendrick, Gossip Girl’s Chase Crawford, Glee’s Mat- thew Morrison – the list is endless. With this range of talent the film is a sure box office smash, right? Wrong. This fabulous array of talent cannot detract from the lack of real direction from which this film suffers.

Watching different women take various routes to become pregnant and following them and their partners until birth is neither romantic nor funny. This rules out rom-com and makes you wonder what genre this film is supposed to fill. The comedy is in the misrepresentation of pregnancy in this film. The majority of pregnant women would probably laugh at the shiny actors, the lack of making-ends-meet couples, and cliché after cliché about ‘it all being worth it’. Not to mention the five-minute painless birth scenes.

The plot revolves around five different couples, who have become parents -by adoption in the case of Holly and Alex, by ‘miracle baby’ in the case of Wendy and Gary, and by one-night stand in the case of Rosie and Marco. 

You wait for all these couples to link up and for the side-splittingcomedy to begin.And you wait a long time. Eventually most of them seem to end up in hospital together but they don’t actually meet, and the connections which do exist are very tenuous. Not to unite a cast like this feels like screenwriting lunacy.

Overall it’s difficult to know who this film is for. Those with children will be bored by the misrepresentation of it all and those without will hate the smugness of the buggy brigade. It would help if this was offset by some comedy but laughs are thin on the ground, and the script resorts to comments like ‘She’s like a magical pregnancy unicorn!’ or J-Lo’s declaration, ‘It’s a miracle, isn’t it!’ All I can say is that it’s a miracle this film ever managed to get made.

A trip to see this play would be as vain as the endeavours of both production and actors, which is to say, not at all.  It exhibited everything you look for in Shakespeare, especially one of his comedies: well executed word-play, physical animation (both facial and otherwise) and a set of costumes wholesomely designed.

The surroundings of Christ Church Cathedral gardens lent weight to the idea that I was watching an intimate royal court, attempting to reach intellectual enlightenment through sexual abstinence (on whatever irony that sentence might have I decline to comment).  However, due to the nature of a garden play, voice can often be drowned and, though it was not to the overall detriment of the play, the actors risked not being heard in their quieter moments due to this.  Likewise, some of the direction seemed not to take the audience’s vision in to account (the stage is not raised à la Globe), which was disappointing as I’m sure it was excellent.  The costumes were an absolute delight and costume in general is one aspect that seems to be only lightly treated.  Either a lot of attention had gone into sourcing them, or someone involved has a natural eye for this sort of thing, but whatever the case it was one of the many elements that went into the making of this charming production.

All actors were strong players, each portraying an individually well-grounded character, yet working together sublimely; it is always a pleasure to see a group who exhibit such a strong sense of togetherness, despite it being a relatively large cast.  Merriment came across as genuine merriment and I almost felt envy at being barred from the action.  Indeed, the typical Shakespearean technique of mingling with the crowd incorporated the audience, but never seemed overdone.  Accents were unusually good – I don’t recall hearing a slip; physical animation was used to its full, bordering on, but never descending into, slap-stick; and facial expressions and an ability to stand on stage without looking like they don’t know how to stand on stage were indicators that the director had a strong set of naturally gifted actors.  All of this added to what was a genuinely convincing performance. 

Though I’d like to comment on all players, particular note must go to Moth and the Princess of France’s valet.  The former was in complete control of character, her timing was remarkable and, despite having a smaller role, was a dark horse among the others.  Hudson, on the other hand, was more subtle in comparison and his comic timing exhibited itself in various ways throughout.  To mention just two of the actors is not to take away from the quality of the others; everyone had clearly developed their characters impressively and there was, on anyone’s part, no resort to disingenuous or vapid acting, which is so often the case with student theatre.

I must admit, however, that I’d like to have seen the clear innuendo of the text brought out a little more – it was there at times, but too sparse and the play seemed at times to risk becoming too serious, which meant that the final scene was not as hard-hitting as it could have been.  Similarly, there was nothing too extravagant about what the director had done with this text.  However, daring interpretations of Shakespeare can often just be such a disappointing waste of theatrical space and an audience’s attention, so this middle-of-the-line performance was, in this sense, perfect. 

FOUR AND A HALF STARS