Saturday, May 10, 2025
Blog Page 1681

Disabled Keble drummer goes viral

0

A disabled second year student at Keble College has gone viral on YouTube with 150,000 hits and counting for his drum cover of “Hot Right Now” by DJ Fresh.

Cornel Hrisca-Munn, a student of Philosophy and Theology, was born with a twisted right leg and without any lower arms. In spite of such disabilities, he recorded and posted thirteen videos of his drumming during the Easter vacation, several of which have received well over 100,000 views.

Asked about the reasons behind his snowballing success, Hrisca-Munn answered “I guess there aren’t that many disabled drummers on YouTube.”

Hrisca-Munn is no stranger to media attention, and his entrance to Oxford was documented by the Daily Mail in an article which championed his strength in overcoming his “bleak” upbringing. He was abandoned in an orphanage by his parents at the age of seven months. Two aid workers brought him back to England for treatment, including amputation, and subsequently adopted him.

Hrisca-Munn told Cherwell that he became passionate about playing the drums in high school, explaining, “Initially it was an instrument I thought I could manage, that I could start learning. Then I really took to it and just carried on. I did not think I would get this far!”

When asked for the reasons behind his turning to YouTube, he explained, “I’ve always wanted to do some drum covers, some songs are just begging for drums. Initially I started [recording videos of his drumming] out of boredom. I thought I would do it as I had so much time on my hands

“I just wanted to do it for fun,” he continued, “I saw other people posting covers on YouTube and thought I would give it a go.”

Hrisca-Munn recorded all thirteen tracks in a single day during the vacation, including a cover of “Call me maybe” by Carly Rae Jepsen, which has received over 120,000 views, and “The Adventures of Raindance Maggie” by the Red Hot Chili Peppers.

He describes his technique as improvisation, explaining, “I sort of make it up as I go along.”

When asked how far he wished to pursue his passion, Hrisca-Munn answered, “I’m not sure really. It was so causal to start with and it went a lot further than I could ever have imagined.”

He thinks a lot of the interest has been fuelled by “curiosity,” though added, “Some of it might be pity, which is a shame.”

The YouTube videos have gathered momentum over the past few days following coverage by CBS News and the Huffington Post. Hrisca-Munn explained, “I came back from a tute this week and I had received 500 email notifications from Youtube comments.”

Hrisca-Munn has also been asked for an interview by one of the chief editors of MTV this Sunday. “It will be amazing,” he says, “this should really push things further.” He has also been invited to play at several festivals in the Netherlands in June.

Response to the videos has been unanimously positive, with one commenter posting on the Huffington Post article, “This is a demonstration of the human spirit and its ability to endure. Difficult to compare to so many who have much to be thankful for but do nothing but complain out of an undeserved feeling of entitlement.”

Home births could save NHS millions

0

Encouraging home births could save the NHS millions of pounds a year, an Oxford University study has shown.

The findings, published in the British Medical Journal, studied 60,000 women over two years, all of whom were deemed to have “low risk” pregnancies.  Participants in the study included both women who had given birth before and those who had not, and researchers showed that on average it was £300 cheaper for a woman to give birth at her own home than in a hospital.

The research took into account NHS costs linked to the actual birth, including the cost of midwife care whilst labour is occurring and after birth, medical care, pain relief and procedures required in hospital should anything go wrong. It did not, however, take into account the cost of caring for a baby suffering from birth injuries, a major factor in determining childbirth costs as babies born at home were found to be three times more likely to suffer from such injuries.

Currently only 2.5% of women give birth at home, but Liz Schroder, a co-author of the study, hopes that the findings may encourage them “to request an ‘out of hospital’ birth” and that “the potential for cost savings could make offering women more choice an attractive option for the NHS”.

Others believe that this research will be a wake-up the government, at a time when NHS cuts are being fiercely debated. Louise Silverton, deputy general secretary of the Royal College of Midwives said, “This underlines the need to make a fundamental change in the way we deliver maternity services in this country.” She added that the government is asking for “more for less” and that the research is a “shining example” of how it can be delivered.

However, the findings have failed to convince everybody. Camilla Tomney, writing in The Express, claimed that the study is a classic example of women being made to feel inadequate when they wish to “defy Mother Nature”, even if they “are doing what they believe is best for their babies”.

Students at Oxford have also questioned the findings. One first year medic commented, “Home births are always dangerous.” Another stated that the NHS is not about simply “saving money, but saving lives.”

Words, Words, Words #1

0

Tom Osman from the Philiosophy department of Oxford’s Blackwell Bookshop talks about three of his favourite books and what it is that interests him about them.

Tom’s choices include: Down and Out in Paris and London by George Orwell, The Slap by Christos Tsiolkas and Patrick Suskind’s Perfume

Hirst’s Hidden Gems

0

If only we could separate the art from the man! Damien Hirst’s retrospective taught me that delightful and profound art can be found in the most unlikely of places. However, this message was in danger of being lost in the sheer arrogance of Hirst’s showmanship. This is not an exhibition of art. It is one man’s sensory exposition of fantasy. But what’s the difference?

The difference is that the pieces on show here are incapable of standing up for themselves. A series of frankly uninteresting spot paintings claim an aura of merit only when you see them as part of an artistic journey that starts in room one with Hirst’s first attempt. A room’s worth of canvases stuck with dead butterflies becomes meaningful only after you have contrasted them with the delicate loveliness of the living butterflies roaming in the next room. Even the shark in formorlhyde is unimpressive; it isn’t even ‘terrifying’, which the guide assures me was the artist’s intention.

The diamond skull is the most spectacular example of this showmanship, which is capable of passing off even such a tacky piece as magnificent. It is situated alone in a blacked out box in the turbine hall and the entrance is so dark that I could not even see my hands in front of my face. But, stumble through the hall and there the skull is, four spotlights trained on it. I won’t deny that it is dazzling. The trick of the light ensures that the skull appears to be the source of whatever light there is. And it glitters, it positively glitters with rainbow reflections off the 8, 601 jewels that encrust it. Like a fly to a rotting cow’s head, I was completely enthralled.  

Remarkably, the longer I stayed in the exhibition room the more I appreciated. Like how the skull multiplied into infinity through its reflections in its glass case and how the human faces that looked at it, illuminated palely by the diamonds, uncannily moved in and out of these reflections. At one point I was given a start as one reflection blinked at me. It was a human face overlaid with the image of the skull , an uncanny juxtaposition of the living and the dead, the spectator and the art, which was completely effective and completely unnerving.

But that was for only ten minutes. This impression was killed by the recollection that the skull’s power to dazzle lay in Hirst’s power to show it off to it’s best advantage. Stick the skull in a lighted room and it would seem smaller and far less impressive.

This was the story of the whole exhibition. Each piece was only as impressive as the other pieces or its history allowed it to be. No single piece in this exhibition caught my eye as being singularly ‘great’; every piece relied on the borrowed glory of the artist’s identity and of it position in relation to the other pieces in the exhibition.

That said, I would recommend this collection. Hirst is an important British artist, and this retrospective provides a comprehensive look at his career so far, ranging right from his student days to his newest works, which resonate unashamedly with the fiscal fascination of Hirst with his multi-millionaire collectors. It takes us from technicolour pots to cabinets of diamonds. If you want to be amazed – and completely swindled – visit Hirst at the Tate.

Review: Jack White – Blunderbuss

0

Given that the singles chart is currently topped by the bubblegum pop of Carly Rae Jepsen and Justin Bieber’s attempt at impersonating Justin Timberlake (even The Black Keys’ latest album sounded a tad more polished) it will be interesting to see whether Blunderbuss can match the critical acclaim it has already received with commercial success. After all, White’s music has always been a little…messy. Yet whilst some of the vocal duets veer towards being slightly painful to listen to, it’s this unbounded aspect that gives the album its raw joy.

And boy, White is certainly having fun. Away from the self–imposed constraints of his previous musical projects, he skips between genres with free abandon. The heavy guitar riffs and idiosyncratic screeching solos we’re used to are still in attendance, notably on the stomping ‘Sixteen Saltines’, yet Blunderbuss is dominated by a new keyboard sound, with organ riffs, honky-tonk piano and solos which alternate between jazz on ‘Missing Pieces’ and flamboyantly rock-operatic on ‘Weep Themselves To Sleep’.

Blunderbuss was written following White’s divorce from Karen Elson, thus making it easy to read it as a break-up album. Indeed, the sadomasochistic lyrics on ‘Love Interruption’ about wanting love to ‘Stick a knife inside me’ certainly sound bitter, but given that the couple announced their split with invites to a party to celebrate ‘their upcoming divorce with a positive swing bang hum dinger’, the songs with Elson’s backing vocals seem less Libertines-esque musical brawls and more ironic fun at playing wronged lovers.

The rambunctiously fantastic cover of Rudolph Troombs’ ‘I’m Shakin’’ is a highlight of the album, after which it mellows down into more stripped-back blues. But if we hadn’t already realised White’s cross-genre skills, the album’s final track serves as a tongue-in-cheek reminder, with its faux-ending breaking into a righteous climax. 

FOUR STARS

Review: Spiritualized – Sweet Heart, Sweet Light

0

Jason Pierce (who, for the uninitiated, is Spiritualized) has always been struggling to reach the heights of the work he produced as part of Spacemen 3 – the influential ‘80s psych rock frontrunner. It could be argued that their brand of minimalist drug music prefigured the chillwave scene before synths became a feature of budding artists’ bedsits. Mix that with just a hint of The Velvet Underground’s ‘Heroin’ and you have an idea of what they sounded like.

After Peter Kember and Jason Pierce decided to go their separate ways, few have never felt that the promise they showed as a double act has been fulfilled. Spectrum always felt too straightforward, and Spiritualized just tried too hard (packaging albums as if they are prescription meds).

Sweet Heart Sweet Light may begin to lay these foolish fears to rest. Despite near-death experiences, being slightly too old to be a drug musician, and attempting to name the album ‘Huh?’, Jason Pierce is back on top. The intro is classic Spiritualized, a gentle build, dropping off towards an uncertain conclusion. The brief second’s silence in between this drop and the chugging guitars of ‘Hey Jane’ (a nine minute belter) was the most nerve-wracking moment in the album – a wrong move could have toppled the whole thing.

Pierce is, however, an old hand. Moments of delicate emotion, such as ‘Freedom’ are handled equally as competently as lighters-aloft choruses such as ‘So Long You Pretty Thing’. Lyrics were never Pierce’s strong point, and the pubescent ruminations on death in ‘Little Girl’ can be a little grating, but the orchestration is fantastic. Even when tracks trail off into discords and thrashing, it works.

Spiritualized is no longer trying too hard to regain the cool he once possessed. Pierce has it under control.

FOUR (AND A HALF) STARS

Cherwell Cartoon: Trinity 2012 Week 1

0

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%5248%%[/mm-hide-text]

”Oxford’s Vice Chancellor writes letter of protest to George Osborne over conservative plans to impose unprecedented tax on charitable donations”

Review: Jeff, who lives at home

0

Mumblecore is an interesting phenomenon in modern cinema and one that 98% of cinemagoers would be advised to avoid. But, if you are going to get your mumble on, then the best place to start is with the Duplass brothers, who broke into the mainstream last year with Cyrus starring John C Reilly, Jonah Hill, and Marisa Tomei. They’re back this month with Hollywood stars Jason Segel and Ed Helms in Jeff, Who Lives At Home.

The eponymous Jeff is played by everyone’s favourite Muppet (or man) Jason Segel. He’s a useless, pot-smoking slacker who sees existential connections in the smallest things. The ‘smallest thing’ that gets the film going is a phone-call for someone called Kevin. Thus begins a hunt across Baton Rouge for an explanation to this phenomenon. It’s a hunt that will lead him to cross paths with his paint salesman brother, played by Ed Helms, who suspects that his wife (the wonderful Judy Greer) is having an affair. The two brothers reconnect as their investigation goes on and even though the ending is too absurd to be plausible, there’s something charming about their relationship.

The movie makes its main (perhaps only) misstep in its use of Susan Sarandon as the boys’ mother. Her subplot feels like it’s taken from a sitcom and bears no relation to the main thrust of the film. Still, Sarandon is always likeable, so it’s not unpleasant to see her onscreen. But the film really succeeds when Segel and Helms are allowed to run riot through Louisiana. Their largely improvised dialogue is funny and touching in almost equal measure and, were it not for the surreal ending, as honest as any dra-medy of recent years.

A Mumblecore Genre Guide might want you to watch Puffy Chair or Baghead first but this is as good a jumping-off place as I’ve ever seen (especially as it’s not shot on frustratingly amateurish VHS) and definitely worth catching.

Jeff, Who Lives At Home is the Slacker’s Club choice at The Phoenix Picturehouse on Thursday 26 April at 8.45pm. Just bring your student ID and you get to see the movie for FREE!

5 Minute Tute: Green Economics

0

What are the first steps that countries like the UK need to take to build a green economy?

First, the prices we pay for goods need to tell the ecological truth. If a product has come from the other side of the world and a huge amount of damage has been done in terms of CO2 emissions, then that should be reflected in the price of the product. We also urgently need to redesign our energy sector and make real investments in green technology. Research into new forms of clean energy is important too, but we can’t afford to sit and wait for miraculous green technology before acting.

Can we have green globalisation?

I think that the globalisation of ideas, of friendships and of communities is a very good thing, but we need to separate it from the economy. Firstly, our trade system with poorer countries allows us to wastefully import goods that we could quite easily produce domestically. But also, in a globalised world, local regions don’t have enough control to reshape their economies to better suit the environment; people don’t feel like they have any influence over business practices if companies can just up sticks and move elsewhere.

Can developing countries go green?

There are two things that need to be done: firstly, developed countries need to demonstrate in their actions that they are serious about cutting their own emissions. Rich countries are disproportionately responsible for the climate change that has happened to date, and morally speaking it’s impossible to lecture developing countries about what they should be doing while our own record in cutting emissions is so poor and our ambitions for the future so limited. The second priority has to be technological and financial transfers, and we need to be serious about actually putting money on the table, which is exactly what has been lacking at past climate summits. We keep setting up climate funds and putting very little money in them; the architecture for change is there, but we still need to actually put the money in.

Do environmental reforms depend on government action?

We need to move away from a society that is designed for the production and consumption of more and more stuff, and if we are not focused on producing more stuff, then we need to be far more egalitarian about the goods that we do have. Redistribution has to be a political counterpart to a green economy. At the same time, there are strong local movements in the UK that are working to build more localised economies, in particular with regards to food, but the government has to create a legal framework in which these kinds of local initiatives can flourish. For example, our public procurement laws at the moment make it impossible for local businesses to take on large contracts and actually develop into viable enterprises, so building a localised economy will need government leadership.

Do you find that your policies are always in opposition to business?

Actually, I think that businesses are often ahead of the government on this. There are businesses that are seriously considering how their model would change in a green economy, and that are starting to find ways to operate without being dependant on a throwaway culture – companies that will rent goods, and recycle them once they are worn out, rather than simply throwing them away. I think businesses have to be part of the solution, but we need to focus on social enterprises and mutual co-ops. The shareholder model focuses solely on financial interest, which is very hard to reconcile with a green economy.

Where will the Tories turn after Cameron?

0

As a Brasenose PPEist I’m probably breaking the college spirit by speculating against only our second Prime Minister. In recent weeks, however, it seems that the Conservative leadership isn’t as clever or canny or even conservative as we’ve been told. Whisper it softly, but Cameron will surely not be a two-term PM, even if we see a two-term government.

First the Coalition alienated the public through NHS reform and the 45p tax cut for the 1%. Then in a panic-stricken attempt to win them back the Tories sought to re-establish their centrist credentials through ritually humiliating their base: the granny tax, gay marriage, and a perceived servility to marauding Lib Dem ministers.

The results are predictable – Labour leads the Tories by ten points and Cameron’s personal rating is abysmal, flattered only by Ed’s. The philosophy of government pursued by the Coalition appears masochistic, but it’s not intentional. This recklessness is a consequence of the tension between the traditionalists and the modernisers; between shire Tories and the ‘Notting Hill’ set of social liberals who inhibit the upper echelons of the Party. Those tribes haven’t been able to reconcile their divisions, resulting in a clinical PR job which barely masked instincts that the public still finds unpleasant.

Modernisation is great. It worked for New Labour who won three thumping majorities. Doubtless the Conservatives needed to widen their appeal and convey a social purpose. Yet Cameron’s modernisation – the ‘detoxification’ of the brand – was half-baked. Riding huskies and hugging hoodies may have blunted the teeth of the ‘nasty party’, but it didn’t speak to aspirational working classes who, whilst deserting Labour in droves, didn’t turn Blue.

Twenty years have passed since the Conservatives last won an election outright. 2015 is the last opportunity for the current leadership to demonstrate its worth. But it’s tough to see how they can. The Tories failed to win in 2010 owing to a chronic lack of support amongst three groups which they are now systematically alienating – the public sector, ethnic minorities and the country north of Birmingham. Oh yes, and women. The vilification of Sayeeda Warsi, Conservative co-chair, by backbenchers has been a particularly nasty demonstration of latent prejudice in the party.

Tim Montgomerie, the influential founder of the grass-roots web phenomenon Conservativehome, last week asked prominent right-wingers from media, business and Parliament who they wanted after Dave. The results tell us more about the party today than tomorrow. Hague and Boris do well; Osborne doesn’t. Priti Patel – a relative unknown – actually beat the Chancellor. She wasn’t the only female right-winger to poll strongly. In the absence of success the right has become nostalgic. The conclusion that the Party is ‘yearning for another Thatcher’ seems apt. If Cameron’s Coalition continues to mess things up, we may get one.