Tuesday, April 29, 2025
Blog Page 174

Voëlvry: South African’s Rock’n’Roll Revolution

0

Rock’n’roll revolution is a volatile thing. Not all cultures were ready for electric riffs and transgressive lyricism when the genre originated in the mid-twentieth century. For white Afrikaans speakers, it wasn’t until the late 1980s that the genre truly took off. During the false utopia of Apartheid, the government-aligned media promoted the sanitised music of conservative and sappy ballad singers such as Bles Bridges. But by 1989, five years before the end of Apartheid, a group of young Afrikaners capitalised on the revolutionary spirit that was sweeping the nation and went on a legendary cross-country tour, singing rock songs in Afrikaans. So the Voëlvry Movement was born.

Voëlvry literally translates to “free as a bird”, and also hints at the idea of a ‘jailbird’. This latter meaning was all too relevant as the group of singers associated with the movement were banned and pursued by government forces at every step of the way. Their pseudonyms included Johannes Kerkorrel (think “Johnny Churchorgan”), Bernoldus Niemand (“Bernoldus Nobody”), and band names like “Die Gereformeerde Blues Band” (“The Reformed Blues Band”) which parodied the name of the Dutch Reformed Church.

One of the most famous songs from the Voëlvry Movement, “Sit Dit Af” (Switch it Off), exemplifies the catchiness of the music: lyrics divided into short, snappy lines, a repetitive chanting chorus, heavy electric guitar, and a punchy political message. The song calls for the television to be switched off whenever conservative state leader P.W. Botha–a regular target of Voëlvry protest–appears on screen. Outspoken criticism of Botha’s Afrikaans-majority government from within the Afrikaans community was a radical departure from the past, and even though the tide was turning against the ageing politician by the late 1980s, the Voëlvry Movement’s provocative lyrics were still controversial enough to have their performances banned and their movements followed by the security service.

The rock artists were unperturbed. Koos Kombuis, one of the few figures still alive, even argued against labelling their music as alternative, saying that the mainstream was “unimaginably more weird than we could ever have dreamt of being.” Their music continued to satirise the state, with songs like “Wat ‘n Vriend het Ons in PW” (What a friend we have in PW) and “BMW” taking on conservative Afrikaners’ perspective in order to mock them. “BMW”, for example, opens with a long wailing saxophone solo imitating the annoying sound of a BMW engine, as these cars were associated with the conservative white middle class. 

Unfortunately (and unsurprisingly), the irony of these songs were lost on some of their Afrikaner audience. During one performance in Potchefstroom a group of the audience–presumably of the BMW-driving variety–infamously cheered in support of the satirical lyric “We drive a BMW / Must we give everything to the black people?”. This raises the question of whether the Voëlvry artists could effectively protest the Apartheid government in the very language of the oppressors. As Audre Lorde argued in 1979 (a decade prior to the Voëlvry tour), “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house”. Since the 1976 Soweto uprisings where several students lost their lives protesting against the use of Afrikaans in schools, it was clear that Afrikaans was the master’s bloody tool. In light of this, music from the likes of Miriam Makeba, Hugh Masekela, Abdullah Ibrahim, and Dorothy Masuka, which popularised traditional African music, afropop, and jazz genres are more representative of truly revolutionary anti-Apartheid music. The Voëlvry artists have also been criticised for their male-centric music. Karla Krimpalien was the movement’s only female singer, and her absence on streaming sites and Voëlvry Tour albums is notable. 

It might be more accurate to say that the Voëlvry Movement protested against the Apartheid government than Apartheid itself, drawing on aspects of their rule other than their racist policies. For instance, songs like “Hou my vas, Korporaal” (Hold me, Corporal) were profound criticisms of systems like the conscription of young, white Afrikaans men into the armed forces from 1967 to 1990. The song has a playful tune and lyrics such as, “I play war with my best days […] me and all my playmates together,” allegorising the Angolan Civil War in which South African men were forced to participate as a childhood game. It also employs the Voëlvry’s trademark use of refrain as the song repeats “yes yes yes” dozens of times to refer to the obedience and respect for authority deeply ingrained in Afrikaner culture.

Another defining characteristic of their music was concerned with redefining what it meant to be a male Afrikaner. This is illustrated in songs like “Boer in Beton” (Boer/farmer in concrete) about the adjustment of city living and urbanisation for a people whose identity was deeply ingrained in farming the land. While dismantling Apartheid was certainly part of their punk message, their scope was limited to their own privileged demographic, which unsurprisingly reflected in the demographic of most of their audience. 

This is not to diminish their role in forging a new, less restricted Afrikaans consciousness. For all their swearing and references to drugs and sex which categorised them as punk and caused many an old Afrikaner tannie to clutch at her sakdoek (handkerchief), the movement produced beautifully nuanced music. “Ossewa” (ox wagon), for example, reclaimed the ox wagon that had been a symbol of Afrikaner identity since the Groot Trek, reimagining it as “funky new rock’n’roll” car blaring Elvis songs, instead of completely abandoning their heritage. The Voëlvry artists clearly aimed to provide an example of a way to be both distinctly Afrikaans and disagree with the conservative government: it was now possible to be proudly Afrikaans with one’s Afrikaans-ness rooted in a cause worth fighting for, in liberal protest, in rock music. 

Éric Rohmer: A French Director’s Refreshing Simplicity

In Arthur Penn’s 1975 neo-noir film Night Moves, a surly Gene Hackman remarks, “I saw a Rohmer movie once. It was like watching paint dry.” 

And in a way, it is. 

The films of French New Wave director Éric Rohmer (née Maurice Henri Joseph Schérer, 1920-2010) are ever on the brink of boring. Having seen sixteen of these films in the space of a year, I can admit that the common complaint that they are “talky” and “literary” is certainly true. Made with a low budget in a quite often dull setting, with the presence of music rare, they consist almost solely of dialogue, and this dialogue can be lengthy, intellectual, and even self-indulgent. In the Rohmerian universe, well-articulated discourse is the action. But, a simplicity underpins all of this; despite all possible off-putting pretensions, I think these films are simply rom-coms disguised in a philosophical edge. 

From the Six Moral Tales in the 1960s, to the six Comedies and Proverbs in the 1980s, and the four Tales of the Seasons in the 1990s, Rohmer’s large catalogue of around twenty-six feature films seems all alike: middle class urban intellectuals search for purpose through discussions of love which achieve just about nothing. However, there is a comforting serenity to Rohmer’s films which stops them from quite reaching the boredom towards which they lean. Without any heavy-handed didacticism or 1960s esprit révolutionnaire, they may lack some of the excitement, but also, and perhaps more importantly, they lack the noise of Godard or Truffaut.  

Rohmer is one of the few directors to have been awarded an adjective to describe the particular qualities of his films; ‘Rohmerian’ denotes a film based in conversation, where the characters are intellectually and romantically hyper-aware (this adjective could be used to describe Linklater’s Before trilogy, for example.) Such qualities Rohmer himself anticipated in his own film theory. Beginning his career as one of the leading figures of the Nouvelle Vague group writing for the French magazine Cahiers du Cinéma, alongside influential names like Godard, Chabrol, and Truffaut, Rohmer propagated radical theories on filmmaking. Most evident in his later work, Rohmer’s 1948 essay “For a Talking Cinema,” arguing for a style of film centred in dialogue. 

This can seem intimidating. The 1969 My Night at Maud’s, Rohmer’s first critical success, and certainly most ‘talky’ film, involves several long dinner table scenes where the conversation revolves around topics spanning from Blaise Pascal, to mathematics, to the meaning of existence. None of these are particularly inviting. And such conversations can last for a surprisingly long time. What can become quite erotic discussions—as the title, My Night at Maud’s, might suggest—are never consummated, as Rohmer qualifies his films with a traditional Catholicism; despite any allusions, the ending always points to a conservative morality. 

Such themes do not, surprisingly, weigh down the films. The direct translation of Contes Moraux to Moral Tales loses in translation some cultural nuance; the French literary moraliste is less of a didactic ‘moraliser,’ as one might say in English, but rather an interpreter. Rohmer acts thus not as a missionary, but as a philosopher, looking at human relationships through an analytical but non-invasive lens. Beyond the literary dialogue lie simple tales of lust, destiny, and chance. 

This simplicity is reflected in the visual serenity of Rohmer. His films are not as stunning, nor impressive, as might be those of his Nouvelle Vague contemporaries, but peacefully pleasant. Rohmer’s low budget allows for a sensitivity to light and weather which contributes to a tranquillity; it is a pared-down documentary style of filming. The Rohmerian world is completely comfortable and manageable, without strong action, violence, or vulgarity. This is not artlessness, however. Françoise Etchegaray, the producer for most of Rohmer’s films, revealed that the aesthetic basis for each film has “a painter of reference.” MUBI used this remark to create a 2021 video essay series wryly entitled “Like Watching Paint Dry” (recalling Hackman’s line) to explore the direct influence of certain paintings on Rohmer’s colour scheme; a gradually illuminated painting is set next to scenes from the relevant film, be it Nicolas de Stael for the 1987 My Girlfriend’s Boyfriend, or the geometric palettes of Mondrian for the 1984 Full Moon in Paris.

Perhaps one of the rarer cases of a director’s final films being his best, the 90s Tales of the Seasons encapsulate the spaciousness of Rohmer’s filmography. The resolutions earlier governed by traditional Catholicism give way to simple depictions of human folly and destiny. 

The Tale of Summer (1996), the penultimate of the Four Seasons anthology, is one of my favourites precisely for this unassuming nature. It is the only of the four (and one of the only in his whole catalogue) to feature a male protagonist – the attractive, socially awkward and brooding student Gaspard. Walking along an empty beach on his rather depressing summer holiday in Brittany, Gaspard laments: “I feel everyone’s alive around me but me. I don’t exist. I am transparent, invisible.” Such Sartrean sentiments have as little substance as you might expect. Rohmer doesn’t wish for us to question our whole existence; this is an uncritical demonstration of the dogmatism and melodrama of youth. The conclusion of the film reflects this irony; Gaspard does not find his great love, but rather leaves town because he has found a good deal on music recording equipment. The final of the series, The Tale of Autumn, (one of Rohmer’s last films, made when he was 78) is another bittersweet and unassuming, truly ‘Rohmerian’farewell; characters in the autumn of their life who own a vineyard with similarly maturing grapes (however absurd that might sound as a comparison) find love through humorous coincidence. 

Ending on an ambiguous and un-profound note is perhaps where Rohmer finds his simple romantic profundity. Philosophising gets us nowhere, why not just leave life up to destiny?

Crossing the Pond: Thoughts of a Prospective Transgender Studies PhD Student

0

After finishing my undergraduate degree last summer, I crossed the pond and went absolutely nowhere, from Cambridge to Oxford. I’m clearly a fan of jaw-breaker degree titles: Human, Social and Political Sciences (pretentious, low word-to-substance ratio) and Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies (ostensibly much more intelligible, though ask me to define any of those constituent terms conclusively and I’ll be obliged to give you the poststructuralist spiel about the dangers of definitional certitude – the first article on our reading list was Wendy Brown’s “The Impossibility of Women’s Studies”).

I’m hoping to pursue a career in academia, but I forgoed applying during this year’s admissions cycle. I did this for self-preservation purposes, mostly. If the pressures of Oxford are bad enough, try waiting on what will inevitably feel like yet more judgement about your academic worth or indeed, even being in close proximity to those who did decide to take the plunge and apply.

I also did this (or rather, didn’t do anything) because the state of my field, trans studies, is pretty dire in the UK, to say the least – aside from ruining the Harry Potter series, the hostile climate of trans-antagonistic rhetoric and government policy makes it difficult to research anything more interesting than that pertaining to the defence of my existence, let alone receive funding for it. A provisional dissertation thesis carrying the title “Genital Imperatives, Sticky Penises, and the Trans [Un]remarkable: Toward a Trans-Inclusive Sexual Ethics” doesn’t stand much of a chance. Every academic that I’ve spoken to here has advised me to cross another pond, the Atlantic Ocean, where apparently the grass is comparatively greener and the money somewhat more available. One gave me a rather ambivalent motivational speech suffused with existential warning: if I lived and breathed learning and couldn’t see myself doing anything else, then by all means go ahead, but be prepared to frequent food banks for at least a few years.

The politics of PhD departments and funding opportunities are bewildering, especially for a still somewhat doe-eyed Master’s student. It is undoubtedly a privilege to be able to consult a whole network of eminent Oxbridge professors with insider knowledge of the process, but I’ve somehow found myself caught up in precisely the frame of mind that I was once trying, I think judiciously, to avoid: that of obsessively poring over Sociology department websites and emailing potential supervisors about whether they’re open to expressions of interest from prospective PhD applicants.

On that note, there’s something simultaneously self-flagellating and self-aggrandising about having to write those emails – “please consider me”. I’m trying to calm down; to breathe, and know that I’ve done what I can so far. The ever-churning – and spitting – wheel of Oxbridge makes it difficult to do so, with much of the emphasis at postgraduate level being on career progression and “next steps”. This is necessary but still utterly terrifying: academia is, of course, far from meritocratic, but there is still some sense in which you are relying on the power of your own brain to continuously devise something promising to say – and for a funding body to believe in you, whatever the criteria for that belief actually entails. But for now, I’ll focus on my Master’s dissertation, and try to cut down on that emailing.

Image Credit: Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office/ CC BY 2.0 via Flickr.

Sex and The Spires

0

Roses are red, violets are blue … Valentine’s is dead and romance is too…

I like to consider myself an activist and so I’ve joined a very worthwhile campaign: banning Valentine’s Day. The chocolates, the flowers, the kisses, the sex – the goal is to ban all forms of love on February fourteenth each year. I’ll continue to work on this valuable mission for as long as I’m single. 

It’s come and gone, the annual anti-single day is behind us for another year. And what a shame! What’s not to love about a day devoted to making those who aren’t in a relationship feel as if they are the world’s biggest loner, and the bank accounts of those who are romantically involved, suffer unnecessarily? It’s a day which fuels capitalism, keeping Cadbury’s in business and providing every florist’s biggest pay-day. 

If you did have a romance filled, lovey, dovey Valentine’s, then good for you. If you’re delusional enough to actually look forward to the made-up holiday every year, then I hope you enjoyed your 24 hours in fairyland. I’m not a cynic, but I’m sure those romantic illusions are wilting by now, at just about the same pace as those flowers you were gifted. The day itself is like the Olympics of Love – the race to get the reddest roses, dipping strawberries in chocolate in record time and managing to secure your personal best in public displays of affection per minute. 

Maybe you are part of an even more infuriating group of Valentine’s celebrators – the ‘Galentiners’. Quit pretending that all you need is your friends, you’re kidding yourself if you think they’ll give you the validation you crave. And talk about being exclusive, what kind of a friend are you to leave your girl out of the Galentine’s celebration just because she has a boyfriend. You know who you are and you should be ashamed. 

Congratulations if you made it through the day as a singleton while faced with the injustice of being bombarded with obnoxious, over-affectionate couples taking hold of every restaurant – as well as your entire Instagram feed. This year, we were really f**ked. The fact that Valentine’s Day fell in 5th week seems like a cruel joke from the Universe. Forget reds and pinks, this week has been Blues all round. 

If you’re still reeling from feelings of loneliness and the fear of being forever single, then why not give yourself some love? For those who have decided to give themselves over to the darkness (also known as being in a relationship) then isn’t everyday Valentine’s when love is in the air? If you’re a devoted narcissist like me then love is always in the air… because I love myself more than anyone else. 

So why not treat yourself to some ‘you’ time and experience some relief from the dullness of existing. No awkward chit-chat before, no finger numbness from swiping right on Tinder and no walk of shame home because you can do it from home. In fact, contrary to some beliefs, there’s no shame at all in having a good time in your own company. 

Anne Summers is doing a clearance sale for what I presume is all the returned items after the love spell broke for many this week and the ‘Private Shop’ on Cowley Road has just had a much needed ‘makeover’. Take the plunge and invest in something saucy for yourself. You obviously can’t be happy if you’re single, but you can be slightly less sad  while the pain of Valentine’s and 5th week begins to subside. 

But who am I to be talking about embracing your singlehood? I wasn’t going to sit at home sipping vino with my gal pals, kidding myself into thinking that Anne Summers is a replacement for romance, or sobbing over The Notebook. That’s how I spend the other 364 days of the year. 

I had three options to choose from on Tuesday night. You see, writing a sex column really does pay off. But I never kiss and tell … well I do, but I’ll leave you wanting more. 

Valentine’s Day in Oxford: $$$ Edition

0

Valentine’s Day is just around the corner, and whether this is your first Valentine’s with that special someone, or you’re celebrating your single, thriving status, be prepared for some of the best food Oxford has to offer. On top of the date night restaurants introduced in my previous column, here are some other fancy restaurants that will almost certainly break the bank, hence why they have been sadly relegated to the once-a-year, only-on-Valentine’s list. 

Parsonage Grill, Oxford

Location: Old Parsonage Hotel, St Giles

Offering ‘modern British dishes with a light touch’ with locally sourced ingredients whenever possible, Parsonage Grill serves some of the most delectable (and expensive) food in Oxford, ranging from ‘twice-baked goat’s cheese & thyme soufflé’ to ‘confit duck leg, roasted celeriac & juniper berry sauce’. The restaurant is lavishly decorated with plush velvet chairs and sleek navy walls, and its gorgeous terrace is simply delightful in the daytime, though chattering in the freezing cold at night is probably less romantic.

The Alice

Location: The Randolph Hotel

A British brasserie at the ‘heart of historic Oxford’, The Alice is a jaw-droppingly stunning restaurant – pink sofas, velvet cushions, crystal chandeliers, patterned wallpaper and high ceilings make this restaurant a feast for the eyes. Its wide-ranging a la carte selection includes warm smoked eel with pork crackling, citrus cured salmon, 35-day dry aged flat iron steak, and duck with grilled clementine and onion pommes anna, with its dessert menu similarly creative and succulent. Come for an exquisite meal, then grab an Alice in Wonderland-themed cocktail in their gorgeously-decorated bar.

No. 1 Ship Street

Location: Ship Street

Located in central Oxford and boasting a ‘sophisticated ambiance’, No. 1 Ship Street was voted as Oxfordshire’s Best Restaurant in 2022 and 2020 for good reason. Serving rock oysters, devilled lambs kidneys and a surf & turf for two with whole lobsters, the food is eye-wateringly expensive, but mouth-wateringly good. The decor is cosy and perhaps less extravagant than you would expect, but its incredibly central location puts it above many others on this list, especially if you have other Valentine’s Day plans at the movies, the rink or a cheeky Blackwell’s trip.

Cherwell Boathouse

Location: North Oxford (past Hugh’s and LMH, unfortunately)

Following the previous theme of dining on the river, Cherwell Boathouse provides an ‘understated but upscale’ European feasting experience with an innovative menu including pressed wild mushroom lasagna with walnut purée, truffle and dashi, caramelised plaice with celeriac and capers, and smoked duck toastie with confit egg yolk, onion relish and mushroom ketchup. Despite its dreaded OX2 postcode, the food is slightly less expensive than the others on this list, and its relatively remote location is perfect if you’re worried about an unwelcome, awkward encounter with your ex.

RUSH! Hour: Måneskin In Review 

0

“They ask me why so hot/Cause I’m Italiano.” So go the words of Damiano David, lead singer of Italian four-piece rock band Måneskin. Bursting onto the Italian music scene like a bat out of hell in 2017 after placing second on X-Factor: Italy, Måneskin have gone on to win Eurovision in 2021, Best New Artist at the VMAs (after snubbing a headlining slot at Reading Festival), and now, with the release of RUSH!, score their first Top 20 album in the US Billboard 200. Not bad for a bunch of pretty faces.  

Comprised of vocalist Damiano David, guitarist Thomas Raggi, bassist Victoria di Angelis and drummer Ethan Torchio, Måneskin are best known for their electric cover of the Four Seasons classic “Beggin” and the hard-rocking “Zitti E Buoni”. In an era dominated by everything but rock, their unapologetic, flamboyant, and most importantly, marketable brand of glam rock is a welcome refresher. Remember when rock stars were sleazy, untouchable, larger-than-life libertines? Neither do I, but Måneskin is the closest – and highest-profile – act we’ve got.  

RUSH! is proof that Måneskin’s stratospheric rise to prominence is backed up by more than just sex appeal (although, I concede, that is certainly part of the charm) and the glitzy glamour of Eurovision. With many bands laying down their grunge-rock, riff-laden credentials (the Arctic Monkeys’ The Car and The Vaccines’ Back in Love City particularly unfortunate examples), Måneskin is living proof that a simple riff goes a long way. Collaborating with funk-metal giant Tom Morello of Rage Against the Machine, “GOSSIP” stomps along to a driving, made-for-the-stadium guitar riff, punctuated by Morello’s signature whammy-heavy solos. “GOSSIP” bites back.  

Amp up the volume – RUSH! is jam-packed with arena-ready singalongs. “GASOLINE” is a bass-heavy, power-metal anthem, driven by the wind-tunnel roar of guitars. “DON’T WANNA SLEEP”—one of the standouts—is a rip-roaring track that takes advantage of Raggi’s penchant for funk-laden rhythm and a punchy riff. Måneskin’s songs are as catchy as they are formulaic, relying on wickedly minimalistic, stomping grooves for a four-chord earworm.  

One minute David is “a lion tamer/ of indecent behavior/ making love with danger”, the next he’s singing his heart out on the magnificent “IF NOT FOR YOU”. For a band characterised by their riotously provocative performances—replete with assless chaps, nipple pasties and latex—”IF NOT FOR YOU” is one of the few contemplative moments of the album. Recorded in one take, David’s vocals are front-and-centre, drenched in reverb and accompanied with lush strings. They may not be Meatloaf, but they sure can write a power ballad.  

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Di Angelis takes a page out of Jack White’s book and revives the art of the bassline in the bombastic “MAMMAMIA”, whereas Raggi recalls Frusciante in the Chilli Peppers-reminiscent ‘SUPERMODEL’. A coked-up Nineties supermodel steals a Basquiat off the wall – it may sound like the beginning of a bad joke, but Måneskin have certainly earned the right to party. 

However, RUSH! is self-satirical to the point of ridiculousness—the rockstar shtick only works so many times. The sneering “BLA BLA BLA” and “KOOL KIDS” feature bathroom-wall lyrics like “I hate your face, but I like your mum”. The stratospheric jump between “MARK CHAPMAN”—a song sung in their native Italian about Lennon’s obsessive, fame-craving murderer—and the new-wave spoken delivery of “ha ha ha ha-ha-ha-ha/I wanna fuck, let’s go to my spa” is never more evident.  

While turning their nose up at critical snobbery and embracing the whirlwind of newfound fame, Måneskin also fall prey to a cardinal album sin, namely, ‘bad decisions in track listings’. Much like actual rush hour, the album feels congested with repetitive rock-star epithets. Singles “MAMMAMIA”, “SUPERMODEL” and “THE LONELIEST” are tacked onto the end of the album, with the front half saturated with lurid pop-punk. Much like actual rush hour, the album feels congested with repetitive rock-star epithets. Cocaine was cool the first time you did it, but by the fifth track, the album needs some rehab. 

I’ll be the first to point out that snobbish rock n’ roll purist nonsense is losing sight of the spirit of the genre—neither Deep Purple nor Van Halen were formed with the goal of fawning Rolling Stone sycophantism in mind—yet Måneskin seem to have remained firmly within arena-friendly turf. From the carefully crafted pop hooks to the processed drumbeats, pop giant Max Martin’s fingerprints are all over the seventeen-track album, turning the subversive four-piece (Måneskin’s live acts are always one to watch, when they haven’t cancelled their shows in favour of the VMAs) into a prepackaged, palatable, straight-to-arena rock band. There’s a reason the most popular X-Factor acts are the likes of One Direction and Little Mix, and we regard rock n’ roll reunion acts like the upcoming Def Leppard/Mötley Crüe reunion tour with a degree of pity – once the giants of the eighties, these fading, has-been, hard-rocking dinosaurs are slowly going extinct in the streaming age. Rock stars have become a curiosity, fodder for the recent appetite for biopics. Acts like Måneskin and Greta van Fleet step in and yet can’t help but be compared with those that came before them. Without falling into clichés of ‘music was better in the good old days’ (that I most certainly wasn’t alive for), as an ardent rock fan I certainly hope the rock scene will continue to have more to offer.  

With that being said, Måneskin clearly still has a lot to offer. Raggi is a genuinely talented guitarist, drawing from Frusciante’s funk to Page’s blues-inspired playing. Di Angelis’ cocksure strut, supreme ease while playing the bass and unapologetic bisexuality places her firmly alongside the likes of Joan Jett and Suzie Quatro. Torchio’s is as frenetic as he is magnetic, and David joins Greta van Fleet’s Josh Kiszka and The Black Keys’ Daniel Auerbach as some of the best rock vocalists today. To cry about the sad state of the music industry is to ignore the evolution of rock—far from fizzling out into obscurity, it has found a home in genres as diverse as Michael Kiwanuka’s indie-soul to Foals’ psychedelia (not to mention rollicking rock acts like The Reytons, Larkin Poe and Christone ‘Kingfish’ Ingram). Too often people equate subversiveness with having ‘real’ rock n’ roll credentials (remember The Monkees?)—while Måneskin may not (yet) be revolutionary, they certainly aren’t—the dreaded word—sellouts, convincingly carrying the torch from glam rockers like KISS, Aerosmith, Whitesnake and Bon Jovi.  

Punchy, slick, and infinitely danceable, RUSH! is an album with teeth. In the words of Ronnie James Dio: Long Live Rock n’ Roll. Alex Turner, eat your heart out.  

Netflix’s Disappointing Monsters

0

Sometimes it is easier to confront the monsters that pop up on our screens rather than dealing with the ones in real life. 2022 was certainly a year of real life terrors and, perhaps not coincidentally, it was also one of the most successful years for Netflix in terms of fantasy horror shows. The highly-anticipated fourth season of Stranger Things was released in May, and in early June it set the record for the most hours watched in a single week on the platform (over 335 million, to be precise). This feat has now been surpassed by a newcomer to the streaming service, Tim Burton’s Wednesday, which offers viewers the latest reimagining of the Addams family franchise, and has now been renewed for a second season.

In Wednesday’s first season, we follow the titular character on her hunt to get to the bottom of a mysterious murder spree in the area; the monster responsible for these killings is first shown towards the end of episode one. According to Alfred Gough, the co-director of the show, the team working on the monster sketched out fifty to sixty different possible versions of its physical form, at which point Burton himself created a watercolour painting of a big-eyed, grey hued creature: this is what we ultimately see in the series. Despite its originality and Burton’s eminence, the monster falls flat. It is sadly let down by a reliance on shoddy CGI which makes its appearance almost comic.

In episode seven, Wednesday, with the help of Uncle Fester, discovers that the monster is known as a ‘Hyde’ – a not-so-subtle reference to Robert Louis Stevenson’s 1886 Gothic novella, The Strange Case of Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde. However, the series’ creators seem to have missed a key aspect from their source material: the potency of Stevenson’s idea derives from Mr Hyde never being fully described. As such, the monster doesn’t survive the shift in medium from text to screen: the mysterious alter ego that should have remained in the shadows becomes a garish nine-foot-tall CGI creation. 

It is tempting to argue that had the creators of Wednesday opted for practical effects – prosthetics, makeup, stilts – to create the Hyde, they would have succeeded in constructing a monster that was truly terrifying, or perhaps more importantly, disturbing. After all, this is the secret to the genius of the monsters in Guillermo del Toro’s films. Just think of the ‘Pale Man’ from Pan’s Labyrinth (2006), or the unsettling amphibious creature from the more recent The Shape of Water (2017), both of whom were played by Doug Jones, a contortionist-turned-actor known specifically for his portrayal of Hollywood’s most famous practical effect monsters. 

As the latest season of Stranger Things demonstrates, however, not all practical effects are made equal. The series has had an impressive run of monsters in its four seasons, scaring viewers with ‘demogorgons’, ‘demodogs’ (which, despite what their ridiculous name may suggest, are just as scary), and the ‘Mindflayer’, but it has faltered somewhat in the visual design of Vecna, introduced in the fourth season as the villain behind the ‘Upside Down.’ The practical effects used to transform the actor Jamie Campbell Bower into Vecna took eight hours to apply, and another two to remove. Vecna’s origin story requires the monster to have a humanoid shape, presenting an issue which the season’s creators seem to have ignored: as opposed to the demogorgons’ classic long predator legs, enabled with stilts and CGI, he has human legs which end in stocky ankles. There are several sequences in the season which show Vecna hunting down his victims, but what could be unbearably tense (and indeed is, but only once the camera pans in) becomes slightly too comic when we see him stomping around. In comparison to the other creatures in the Stranger Things universe, Vecna is too human to pose a constant threat. He must be shoved in our faces or banished off-screen to truly scare us.

Both Vecna and the Hyde are illustrative of the same problem: there is a very fine line that television and filmmakers must tread to ensure that their monsters are neither too human nor too inhuman. Monsters of all shapes and sizes have now graced our screens for over a hundred years. The earliest examples were in silent films, The Golem (1915) and Nosferatu (1922), both products of a Germany embroiled in war and its aftermath. This long tradition has trained audiences and, as such, the expectations of Netflix’s viewers are finely tuned. While visual design is not the only aspect of on-screen monsters that contributes to their ‘scare factor’, ignoring this balance – unique in each instance – results in disappointing monsters who fail to fully terrify. In the midst of inevitably ongoing global turmoil, let’s hope Netflix will provide viewers with monsters scarier than headlines.

Oxford issues warnings over gonorrhoea outbreak

0

Several colleges have issued warnings that gonorrhoea cases are increasing amongst 18-25 year-olds in Oxford, and are urging students to carry condoms if meeting for sex.

The news comes after the UK Health Security Agency reported that the sexually transmitted infection is being seen amongst the student population in Oxford. People of all genders and sexualities are affected.

Numerous colleges have circulated advisory emails concerning the disease, its symptoms and actions students can take to protect themselves and get tested. The University’s Welfare Forum urges the use of protective measures like condoms with all new and casual sexual partners. They also stress that anyone who suspects they may have an STI or is seeing a new sexual partner have a sexually transmitted infection (STI) check-up.

The warnings noted that gonorrhoea may be asymptomatic, and that those who experience symptoms complain of unusual discharge, pain when urinating or abdominal pain. The UKHSA notes that “if treated early, gonorrhoea is unlikely to lead to any long-term complications, but without treatment it can spread to other parts of the body and cause serious problems – including severe pain in the reproductive organs and infertility.”

Free at-home STI test kits are available through the NHS. Visits to a physical clinic, which can be found through an online locator tool, or calls to the national sexual help hotline are also free of charge.

European research funding for Oxbridge plummets due to Brexit

0

Oxford and Cambridge now receive only £1m from European research programmes between them. Previously, the top UK universities received over £130m a year from European research programmes. Oxford had previously won €523m combined from 2014-2020 of the Horizon 2020 programme but has only been awarded €2m in the new Horizon Europe 2021-2027 programme. 

According to the negotiated Brexit deal, the UK should still be part of the €95.5bn Horizon Europe university funding programme. However, the approval of this aspect of the deal was disrupted after the UK failed to implement the Northern Ireland Protocol. The programme is crucial for implementing partnerships between UK and European universities and carries considerable international prestige.

Professor of higher education at Oxford, Simon Marginson, told The Guardian that “For higher education and research, there are no new opportunities and no actual possible upsides from Brexit.” He said Brexit was a “historic error of monumental proportions”, describing the new data on Oxford and Cambridge as “very worrying”.

Despite the government’s assurances that it will cover the lost Horizon Europe funding, many academics are leaving the UK for European and American universities.

Paul Pharoah, a researcher into the genetic epidemiology of ovarian cancer, is an example of such an academic. He worked at Cambridge University for 26 years and was involved in EU-funded projects for the last 15 years but has now taken up a post at Cedar Sinai hospital in Los Angeles.

In making his decision to move, he said it was much harder to come by funding in his field in the UK since Brexit. “The lack of opportunity to apply for EU funding made the outlook even more bleak.”

In April, 150 UK academics who won funding from the European Research Council were given two months to choose whether to take up posts at EU institutions or sacrifice their funding. Whilst the UK government matched the threatened ERC funding, 1 in 8 ERC funded academics still left the UK.

Professor Augusta McMahon, an archaeologist who had also worked at Cambridge for 26 years left for Chicago University. She said that fewer European lecturers were applying for UK jobs.

Since Brexit UK universities have witnessed a large decline in the number of enrolled European students. This decline has been felt most severely at undergraduate level. Whilst 37,530 EU students enrolled for the first year of a primary degree at a UK university in 2020, the figure was just 13,155 in 2021.

Since Brexit, EU students have no longer had access to domestic fees and UK student loans. Fewer EU students on UK university campuses has consequences for the diversity of the student population. The finances of UK universities have also taken a hit, particularly as EU students were previously more likely to pay for a full 3- or 4-year undergraduate degree than other international students.

Oxford study shows one third of learning was lost during the pandemic

0

According to a study published in Human Nature Behaviour on the 30th of January, school children have lost one third of what they would have learned in a normal school year due to the pandemic and lockdown.

 The paper on learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, written by Dr Betthäuser, Dr Bach-Mortenson and Dr Engzell, suggests that students lost out on ‘about 35% of a school year’s worth of learning’. Through a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence, the paper concluded that on average, the learning progress of school-aged children ‘slowed substantially’ during the pandemic.

The paper reports that long-term impacts from the pandemic on school education is inevitable and uses historical precedents to justify its conclusions. The study illustrates that though some may have expected children to recover learning after adjustments to new learning conditions were made: “existing research on teacher strikes in Belgium and Argentina, shortened school years in Germany and disruptions to education during World War II suggests that learning deficits are difficult to compensate and tend to persist in the long run”.

 The study suggests that any fears of an “accumulation of learning deficits” have not materialised and Dr Betthäuser told the university that on a positive side, as the pandemic continued, parents, teachers and children were ‘successful in preventing early learning deficits from growing even larger’ than they already were.

 It shows that progress in Maths learning has been heavily affected. Moreover, it depicts how the pandemic intensified the educational inequalities between children from different socio-economic backgrounds. This gap was already large before the pandemic hit and is only worsening.

 There were heightened disparities between countries with higher-income and lower-income countries, many of which were already struggling from education crises before 2020. Indeed, from undertaking the meta-analysis, Dr Bach-Mortensen notes that ‘children in poorer countries lost out on more learning than their peers in richer countries’.

The study proposes that policy initiatives to counteract learning deficits and discrepancies need to prioritise supporting children from lower socio-economic backgrounds in order to aid recovery of the critical learning they lost during the COVID-19 outbreak and spread.