Wednesday, April 30, 2025
Blog Page 1753

Mansfield Entz team under fire

0

Two members of the Mansfield Entz team have apologised to the college’s JCR after confusion surrounding a recent intercollegiate trip to the Ministry of Sound, a nightclub in London.

The two students involved told Mansfield JCR members they were sorry “for not appreciating the sensitivity surrounding the issue of profit made from Ministry of Sound tickets sold to members of other colleges.”

Controversy first arose before the  trip took place, as it emerged that one of the pair had made a profit from selling tickets to other colleges.

By the terms of the Mansfield JCR constitution, members of the JCR committee or “Bench” are not allowed to make a personal profit if in the sale they are acting in their capacity as a Bench member.

The Mansfield College Scrutiny Committee looked into the case and found that although “the member in question did not actively tell the buyers that he/she was acting as a Bench member” (indeed, Entz Committee members are not officially Bench members), nonetheless buyers in other colleges “had come to the assumption that they had bought tickets from Mansfield’s JCR.”

The Scrutiny Committee’s report concluded, “A line must be drawn between JCR activity and private activity. In this instance, such a distinction was blurred in a way that the Scrutiny Committee feels was irresponsible and misleading.”

A settlement was reached whereby buyers were given the option either to accept a refund for the tickets or to proceed with the transaction in a personal capacity with the JCR committee members in question.  The members of the Entz committee were allowed to keep any profits they had made as a result of these personal transactions.

However, the incident was the subject of further controversy this week, concerning the way in which these profits were allegedly spent. In an email sent to the Mansfield JCR this week, JCR President Maia Muir Wood claimed that members of the Entz team “were involved in posting on the Mansfield Entz Facebook account about the way in which they ‘spent’ the profit” and that “the SC [Scrutiny Committee] agree that this was grossly irresponsible.”

According to unconfirmed reports by a source who wished to remain anonymous, the members in question went to The Ritz Hotel in London on Saturday to spend the profits they had made, then informed college members of this fact on Facebook.

A Mansfield second year said that “where they spent the money is not the issue”, but took a dim view of the fact that members of the Entz committee made a personal profit from ticket sales.

She said, “I think it’s totally embarrassing and they should pay the money back. If it’s not money spent on the JCR, then I don’t think they had a right to take it.”

The two JCR committee members responsible for the apology both declined to comment when contacted by Cherwell this week.

Muir Wood, telling college members she wanted to “clear the air” about these events, concluded, “There is no turning back the clocks, and I believe strongly that the time has come to draw the line under this episode”, adding, “generally we as a college must now look to the future and ensure that this doesn’t happen again.”

Pembroke email hacker retracts job applications

0

Emails were sent from a Pembroke student’s computer this week cancelling job applications they had made.

The student’s unlocked room was accessed on Friday and Saturday, and the emails sent from their Nexus account, which had been left logged in. The student realised what had happened when he received an email from JP Morgan acknowledging the withdrawal of his application. However, all the emails sent to employers had been deleted from their sent and deleted mail folders.

The third year student, who lives in Pembroke’s GAB building on the other side of Folly Bridge, wished to remain anonymous since the investigation is still ongoing. It was, however, pointed out by other students that it was very unlikely that someone from outside Pembroke could have accessed the building without a swipe card, and still less known the location of the victim’s room and the jobs they had applied for.

Pembroke students expressed their shock that someone living in the building, which houses mainly third years, but also graduates and fourth years, would have sent the emails. Maurus Wuethrich, a third year engineer, commented, “I can’t think of anyone in my year who would’ve done such a thing.”

An email was sent to students by Pembroke’s Home Bursar, Dr. Bowyer, describing the incident as “very unpleasant.” He added, “It is possible – though I find it hard to imagine how – that the perpetrator thought of this as a prank; in which case that individual may wish to identify him/herself before the investigation progresses further.  Otherwise we will continue to investigate and, subject to the wishes of the victim, may opt to call in the police.”

The email also noted that detailed activity logs had been taken from the victim’s computer, which had been passed onto the Dean to “progress the investigation.” The Dean, Dr. Raphael Hauser, declined to comment further on the matter.

In a separate email to Pembroke students, Bowyer warned students to take care when returning to the GAB through the area of Preachers Lane and Friars Wharf. He said that there had been “several incidents this term already of students being or feeling threatened, intimidated or abused when making their way to/from the GAB.”

The email advised students to return via a different route and to avoid being alone at night.

Wuethrich, who lives in the GAB, said of the route that students have been warned about, “I personally haven’t felt intimidated, but I’m a guy. I could definitely understand why girls would.”

Wuethrich did, however, add that once when he was cycling through the estate a group of young men had jokingly asked for his bike.

Pembroke JCR President, Charlotte Hendy, told Cherwell, “Student safety is always high on the agenda at Pembroke. Both myself and the Home Bursar went to the City Centre Area Forum on Student Safety this week, and we aim to maintain links made there with the Council and other authorities to ensure the safety of our students.”

The big question: are you in or out?

0

A recent article on the BBC website highlighted the fact that Oxford is the least affordable area to live in outside of London and given that, as I write this, I sit in three jumpers while an ominous looking patch of mould watches over me, you’d be forgiven for thinking that having a house just isn’t worth it. Nonetheless, living out provides you with a sense of Real Life; you can have parties and an oven. And as Michaelmas draws to a close the choice for freshers looms.

A recent article on the BBC website highlighted the fact that Oxford is the least affordable area to live in outside of London and given that, as I write this, I sit in three jumpers while an ominous looking patch of mould watches over me, you’d be forgiven for thinking that having a house just isn’t worth it. Nonetheless, living out provides you with a sense of Real Life; you can have parties and an oven. And as Michaelmas draws to a close the           choice for freshers looms.
While your first year is clearly a time for being thrown into collective living and limited independence, and during your finals the priority for living conditions is usually as depressingly close to the library as  possible, some colleges give students the chance to strike out on your own in those difficult inbetween years.  
Once you’ve decided to hit the housing market this of course throws up the initial hurdle of finding people to live with, and then the larger show jump of finding a house.  And then, of course, you can preoccupy yourselves with gas, electricity and broadband providers and who gets which room and whether you’re going to buy collective or individual spatulas. 
Although it’s great being provided with three meals a day and heating, having social spaces like a proper kitchen, living room and a garden is something you don’t quite get in college – as well as having the independence to use (and decorate) them as you please.  And there’s definitely no risk of being interrupted by angry porters or, worse, insomniac finalists.
Nonetheless, the cost of living in can be far cheaper, especially when it’s considered that you’re paying rent for 24 weeks rather than 52. Somerville student, Tess Little, said, ‘I chose to live in this year as my college had just built new accommodation, and it’s a lot cheaper rent wise, there are no bills to sort out, and I don’t have to deal with any difficult property companies. However, I’m finding it grating to share kitchens and bathrooms with such a huge amount of people for a second year, and it’s nice to be able to escape to friends’ houses to socialise or cook dinner.’ 
The housing charity Shelter has said that private rents are now unaffordable in 55% of local authorities in England. And given that we’re one of a very few universities that offer accommodation for the majority of our university lives it can seem like too good an offer to refuse.
On the phone to a friend at uni in Sheffield she remarked, ‘You think halls is like being a real person away from home but it’s actually a really warm, nicely insulated, safe holiday when all you have to worry about is remembering to eat. Wow, why did I leave?’ 
The fact is that at other, ‘normal’, universities most students only live in halls for the very first year and even then, most are in self-catered flats, which is far closer to living out than some Oxford pupils ever do. 
For many people, the fun and experience of living in a house with friends is part of the reason for going to university and living in for your first year is just a stepping stone to this. Frankly, the real world is scary enough as it is so a year or two renting a house while in the safe confines of a university degree seems like a good place to start. And no matter how strenuous your workload, it’s important to learn how to deal with things like that now  – because it’s probably only going to get harder.
Of course, living out brings its own unique set of challenges and horror stories that are definitely all part of ‘the experience’. After a few weeks of an odd smell in his room, one of my housemates discovered a pipe leading from toilet to his bathroom. 
Thankfully our landlord, a man of many talents, kicked the pipe out and slapped on a bit of filler. Add to that the suspicious damp patches and a few exciting ventures into radiator bleeding – I won’t say it’s been an easy first term. On the upside there’s been roast dinners and a trampoline inherited from previous tenants. 
Living out also gives you the chance to build a more permanent base at university and frees you from the tyranny of moving all your earthly belongings at the beginning and end of every term. And you can probably actually use blu tac and maybe even nails around the house, which is very exciting. 
Over the course of this term I’ve found myself becoming increasingly house proud. From finding and rehabilitating  a bookshelf to knocking up a few batches of soup; there’s definitely a lot of fun to be had in the domestic arena.
In my mind, living out at some point during your university career is one of the few things that stops Oxford from seeming like a boarding school. Eventually, we will all have to wake up, burst the bubble and learn how to clean the oven. And frankly, entering the real world with some semblance of what a water bill looks like can only help you on your way. 
Yes, it’s a lot more complicated – but that’s life baby. And even though the heating bills soar and the damp just won’t go away, it’s home.

While your first year is clearly a time for being thrown into collective living and limited independence, and during your finals the priority for living conditions is usually as depressingly close to the library as  possible, some colleges give students the chance to strike out on your own in those difficult inbetween years.  

Once you’ve decided to hit the housing market this of course throws up the initial hurdle of finding people to live with, and then the larger show jump of finding a house.  And then, of course, you can preoccupy yourselves with gas, electricity and broadband providers and who gets which room and whether you’re going to buy collective or individual spatulas. 

Although it’s great being provided with three meals a day and heating, having social spaces like a proper kitchen, living room and a garden is something you don’t quite get in college – as well as having the independence to use (and decorate) them as you please.  And there’s definitely no risk of being interrupted by angry porters or, worse, insomniac finalists.

Nonetheless, the cost of living in can be far cheaper, especially when it’s considered that you’re paying rent for 24 weeks rather than 52. Somerville student, Tess Little, said, ‘I chose to live in this year as my college had just built new accommodation, and it’s a lot cheaper rent wise, there are no bills to sort out, and I don’t have to deal with any difficult property companies. However, I’m finding it grating to share kitchens and bathrooms with such a huge amount of people for a second year, and it’s nice to be able to escape to friends’ houses to socialise or cook dinner.’

The housing charity Shelter has said that private rents are now unaffordable in 55% of local authorities in England. And given that we’re one of a very few universities that offer accommodation for the majority of our university lives it can seem like too good an offer to refuse.

On the phone to a friend at uni in Sheffield she remarked, ‘You think halls is like being a real person away from home but it’s actually a really warm, nicely insulated, safe holiday when all you have to worry about is remembering to eat. Wow, why did I leave?’ 

The fact is that at other, ‘normal’, universities most students only live in halls for the very first year and even then, most are in self-catered flats, which is far closer to living out than some Oxford pupils ever do.

For many people, the fun and experience of living in a house with friends is part of the reason for going to university and living in for your first year is just a stepping stone to this. Frankly, the real world is scary enough as it is so a year or two renting a house while in the safe confines of a university degree seems like a good place to start. And no matter how strenuous your workload, it’s important to learn how to deal with things like that now – because it’s probably only going to get harder.

Of course, living out brings its own unique set of challenges and horror stories that are definitely all part of ‘the experience’. After a few weeks of an odd smell in his room, one of my housemates discovered a pipe leading from toilet to his bathroom.

Thankfully our landlord, a man of many talents, kicked the pipe out and slapped on a bit of filler. Add to that the suspicious damp patches and a few exciting ventures into radiator bleeding – I won’t say it’s been an easy first term. On the upside there’s been roast dinners and a trampoline inherited from previous tenants. 

Living out also gives you the chance to build a more permanent base at university and frees you from the tyranny of moving all your earthly belongings at the beginning and end of every term. And you can probably actually use blu tac and maybe even nails around the house, which is very exciting.

Over the course of this term I’ve found myself becoming increasingly house proud. From finding and rehabilitating a bookshelf to knocking up a few batches of soup; there’s definitely a lot of fun to be had in the domestic arena.

In my mind, living out at some point during your university career is one of the few things that stops Oxford from seeming like a boarding school. Eventually, we will all have to wake up, burst the bubble and learn how to clean the oven. And frankly, entering the real world with some semblance of what a water bill looks like can only help you on your way. 

Yes, it’s a lot more complicated – but that’s life baby. And even though the heating bills soar and the damp just won’t go away, it’s home.

 

Cherwell’s Living Out Tips

Get in there early

Unashamedly pounce on the people you want to live with and don’t let go. Don’t feel sorry for people otherwise it’s gonna be one long year of silently gnawing your tongue away.

Learn to compromise

Arguments about where you as a house, collectively, are going to keep the ketchup can spiral viciously out of control.

Have a cleaning rota

Yes it is fussy and a little dictatorial but you will be so grateful.  And I really do hate to break it to you but there will be no one to take out your bin. On the upside, however, you can bring people back without fear of that awkward knock in the morning while you both pretend to be asleep.

Don’t steal food

It’s not OK.  Keep it up, and you may soon find yourself the receiver of angry post-it notes, that most diplomatic of conflict resolutions. Just go to Tesco.

Make friends with the neighbours

A little recycling banter certainly won’t go amiss when you next want to have a party.

Exploit your status

Wide-eyed freshers will be even more so when you offer them golden tickets to your pleasure-palace: nothing says cool like living out. House parties, dinner parties, coffee breaks; the house becomes an outrageously successful tool for social mobility.

Decoration, decoration, decoration

And when the paperwork is dealt with, the coterie established, and the warm sense of satisfaction starts to seep in, it’s time for the personal touch. Hit the markets, get original.

Paxman accused of University Challenge bias

0

Viewers of the BBC game show University Challenge have accused host Jeremy Paxman of bias towards Cambridge teams. He studied English at the university as an undergraduate at St Catharine’s College.

Elizabeth and Peter Leonard, writing on the BBC Messageboard, stated that they “were disgusted by the blatant favoritism shown by Jeremy Paxman to Homerton College Cambridge.” Their comment continued with the observation that “he sounded delighted when they were the ones to answer and, although hurrying up the Durham side, gave Homerton much more time to answer. When we checked his details we found that he had also attended a Cambridge college and feel that this may have influenced him.”

Another user of the BBC Messageboard, “MsA”, said that “I started noticing an apparent and occasional bias when, about two years ago, a non-Oxbridge University won and Jeremy Paxman looked quite glum at the end, and his comments to the winning side seemed to begrudge them their win.” The user stated, however, that the bias “is subtle and occasional. It’s in no way blatant.”

The Daily Mail reported on the concerns expressed by the viewers in an article of the 10th November, revealing that “the claims come after Homerton was the subject of a row earlier in the series when it was suggested the college was cheated out of victory by Paxman who had said its students wrongly identified a flag during a picture round. Experts had claimed Homerton student Thomas Grinyer had in fact given the correct answer.”

When asked to comment on these specific allegations, the BBC Press Office told Cherwell that  “Jeremy shows no bias towards any of the colleges on University Challenge. Homerton were the winning team in a close match against Durham and Jeremy congratulated them accordingly and was equally as gracious to the Durham team.”

Kyle Haddad-Fonda, a member of the Magdalen team who won University Challenge in 2011, said that “it’s astounding to me how much the British media enjoys inventing scandals where none exist – and even more astounding to me that people in this country get so worked up over University Challenge, a show that really shouldn’t be controversial in any way.”

He went on to say that “in the seven games I played on University Challenge, I found Mr Paxman to be consistently fair to us and to our opponents.  In my (admittedly limited) interactions with him in the green room after our games, he was extremely nice to everybody and always equally excited to talk to both the winners and the losers, no matter what institution they represented.”

Robin McGhee, captain of the St Anne’s team which was defeated by Pembroke College, Cambridge earlier this series, said: “It is clear to the merest intelligence that Paxman doesn’t actually favour Cambridge colleges. The exception, of course, was in our game, where victory was snatched from our worthy grasp by his outrageous tendency to award them more points than us for getting more questions right.”

Fellow team member Kieran Hunt said that “I would say that having watched the television replay of the encounter, anyone would fairly conclude that there was no evidence of bias towards Cambridge. If anything, his acceleration during the catch-up near the end would demonstrate his interest in a good competition far outweighs any “misplaced loyalty.”

A second year modern languages student however, reflected that “when I’ve seen episodes in which an Oxford team has gone head to head against a Cambridge college, it’s clear that Paxman gets more excited when the Cambridge team starts to make a comeback.”

Walking in an indie wonderland

0

There’s a great moment in Razorlight’s hit single, ‘Who Needs Love’, when lead singer Johnny Borrell, worked up in a fit of emotion, shouts out seemingly spontaneously ‘Come on Andy!’, which prompts a manic drum roll before Borrell’s wailing and shouting reaches its climax. Particularly in outfits with big characters for lead singers, glimpses of the other band members can be fleeting, and drummer Andy Burrows might well have considered this name-check his best hope at personal fame; a brief push into the limelight before returning to the anonymity of his position behind the drum kit. There are notable exceptions of course, but I’d bet you’d be hard pressed to name the drummers in more than a handful of bands.

There’s a great moment in Razorlight’s hit single, ‘Who Needs Love’, when lead singer Johnny Borrell, worked up in a fit of emotion, shouts out seemingly spontaneously ‘Come on Andy!’, which prompts a manic drum roll before Borrell’s wailing and shouting reaches its climax. Particularly in outfits with big characters for lead singers, glimpses of the other band members can be fleeting, and drummer Andy Burrows might well have considered this name-check his best hope at personal fame; a brief push into the limelight before returning to the anonymity of his position behind the drum kit. There are notable exceptions of course, but I’d bet you’d be hard pressed to name the drummers in more than a handful of bands.
But Burrows took no back seat in Razorlight, co-penning some of their biggest hits in their glory days, including number one ‘America’. I wonder if the famously egotistical style of bandmate Borrell made it difficult to give his clear creative talents free reign in Razorlight, but Burrows is quick to dispel these thoughts. ‘I’d never written a song before Razorlight, there was a feeling that I was just a drummer. I learned a lot off Johnny, and now I’ve made up for lost time.’ 
He left the band in 2009, a decision he describes as the biggest he’s ever had to make. ‘It was frightening, but I feel super happy. And it wouldn’t be normal and human if I didn’t look back and think, wow, that was pretty impressive. But it’s been nice over the last couple of years to have time to write, and have various outlets, the Scientists [Burrows now drums for We Are Scientists, who he describes as ‘an awesome band’], I Am Arrows [his solo outfit], and time to split between projects.’
It’s Burrows’ latest project that we’re primarily discussing, an album made in collaboration with pal Tom Smith, lead singer of Editors. The pair have taken time off from the day jobs to put together a collection of covers and new material with a Christmassy theme. I’m not sure what’s more incongruous, the idea of listening to a Christmas album before even Oxford’s version has really got going, or the picture on the front cover of said album, Smith and Burrows’ Funny Looking Angels: two rather tired, dishevelled looking men perched on a park bench on a grey day, angel wings strapped awkwardly to their backs. But listening to the album, nostalgia for Christmas begins to seep over me, and it’s clear that Burrows shares the feeling.
‘As a kid I was stupidly excited about Christmas,’ he says enthusiastically. ‘And the meaning changes, and now it’s more about the pub than the lounge, but it’s a time of great togetherness and bizarre optimism – it’s the one time we’re allowed to think next year’s going to be great.’
 It says something about our society that a festival which started out as religious has now become one primarily focused on indulgence, whether financially, in the commercial hype that leads research to suggest that the average Briton will spend a whopping £868 on Christmas this year, or in the temptation to eat and drink far more than normal. But Burrows agrees that the festival’s meaning is really what you make of it, and retains a charming lack of scepticism:  ‘Of course the commercial side’s a pain, it’s very annoying and sad, but I’m not too bothered by it – it’s always been about family and friends. It’s a time when almost everyone traditionally has two days off and puts heart and soul into meeting up.’
The state of the Christmas music scene is a point against which the pair hope to rail, with so much Christmas music these days either apparently tongue in cheek or crass commercial offerings from the flavour of the moment which won’t last any longer than the Christmas dinner leftovers. ‘We’re fans of the old school battle for the number one spot – it was exciting, unpredictable, and great songs came out of it. People used to put lots of effort into writing exciting music for Christmas. And I know chance of big success for us is a David and Goliath situation, but it’s good to offer up a real alternative. But it’s also meant to be a bit of fun.’
 I’m reminded of the 2009 battle to get Rage Against the Machine’s ‘Killing in the Name’ to number one in place of X Factor winner Joe McElderry, and the sadly thwarted 2008 attempts to push the Jeff Buckley and Leonard Cohen versions of ‘Hallelujah’ ahead of Alexandra Burke, all showing that the integrity of the Christmas number one spot is clearly a matter at the forefront of the public’s consciousness. 
The X Factor hopefuls this year will face competition from a Facebook campaign modelled on the 2009 one, attempting to push the 20 year old Nirvana classic ‘Smells Like Teen Spirit’ to number one, which has received over 85,000 ‘likes’. Other arguably more depressing competition comes from the cast of TOWIE’s version of Wham! hit ‘Last Christmas’ and a Mariah Carey and Justin Bieber collaboration on ‘All I Want For Christmas Is You’. While Smith and Burrows may not be realistic competitors for the glory spot, attacking the X Factor bandwagon through music that genuinely attempts to capture something of the atmosphere of the season seems to me an extremely laudable enterprise.
Despite the strong Christmas theme running through the beautifully crafted album, which starts with a slow version of ‘In the Bleak Midwinter’, Burrows insists the plan was not to make a record that was ‘all Jingle Bells and joviality’. The theme came after they’d already recorded a few songs, which they thought ‘started to sound a bit festive.’ ‘It wasn’t always the idea to make a Christmas album. The first track we recorded was ‘Wonderful Life’ (by Black), and then Tom’s manager suggested we do ‘Only You’ (by Yazoo), and ‘On and On’ (by Longpigs) has been a long time favourite of mine. We tried other covers that didn’t work, like ‘Viva La Vida’, and some other Christmassy songs, but we didn’t want it to be cheap and cheesy.’
That’s an accusation that can easily be levelled at so many self professed Christmas albums. While one-off hit singles can get away with it, a whole album of Christmas themed songs can fall into the trap of being repetitive or tacky, hence so many Christmas albums which are just compilations of hit singles, destined to be played as background music at the school disco rather than appreciated in their own right. Sufjan Stevens’ Songs for Christmas is an example of an indie  album that successfully mixes original and traditional songs to produce a beautifully crafted whole, and Smith and Burrows are following in these formidable footsteps. 
Burrows’ enthusiasm is infectious, and it is touching how this record seems genuinely to have been born out of real love, both that for the festive season itself, and the friendship of the two men. Smith and Burrows (the clue is in the name) had been friends and pub buddies for years, before they decided to book a studio and record something together. ‘We always talked about things it would be fun to do one day. We tried our hands at DJing and that was appalling. And once we just had a free day and we booked a studio.’
The lifestyle of a musician seems hectic, especially for one with his fingers in so many pies. The pair plan to tour Funny Looking Angels around Europe before both heading separately to LA (it’s a hard life) to record with their respective bands. ‘But I love the idea of coming back to this. We should do a non-seasonal album at some point. The most exciting thing for me about this record was that it includes the first proper song we wrote together. And that’s a bit of a boundary in a friendship to get over, and we’re both super proud.’
Funny Looking Angels by Smith and Burrows is released on November 28th
www.smithandburrows.com

But Burrows took no back seat in Razorlight, co-penning some of their biggest hits in their glory days, including number one ‘America’. I wonder if the famously egotistical style of bandmate Borrell made it difficult to give his clear creative talents free reign in Razorlight, but Burrows is quick to dispel these thoughts. ‘I’d never written a song before Razorlight, there was a feeling that I was just a drummer. I learned a lot off Johnny, and now I’ve made up for lost time.’

He left the band in 2009, a decision he describes as the biggest he’s ever had to make. ‘It was frightening, but I feel super happy. And it wouldn’t be normal and human if I didn’t look back and think, wow, that was pretty impressive. But it’s been nice over the last couple of years to have time to write, and have various outlets, the Scientists [Burrows now drums for We Are Scientists, who he describes as ‘an awesome band’], I Am Arrows [his solo outfit], and time to split between projects.’

It’s Burrows’ latest project that we’re primarily discussing, an album made in collaboration with pal Tom Smith, lead singer of Editors. The pair have taken time off from the day jobs to put together a collection of covers and new material with a Christmassy theme. I’m not sure what’s more incongruous, the idea of listening to a Christmas album before even Oxford’s version has really got going, or the picture on the front cover of said album, Smith and Burrows’ Funny Looking Angels: two rather tired, dishevelled looking men perched on a park bench on a grey day, angel wings strapped awkwardly to their backs. But listening to the album, nostalgia for Christmas begins to seep over me, and it’s clear that Burrows shares the feeling.

‘As a kid I was stupidly excited about Christmas,’ he says enthusiastically, ‘And the meaning changes, and now it’s more about the pub than the lounge, but it’s a time of great togetherness and bizarre optimism – it’s the one time we’re allowed to think next year’s going to be great.’ 

It says something about our society that a festival which started out as religious has now become one primarily focused on indulgence, whether financially, in the commercial hype that leads research to suggest that the average Briton will spend a whopping £868 on Christmas this year, or in the temptation to eat and drink far more than normal. But Burrows agrees that the festival’s meaning is really what you make of it, and retains a charming lack of scepticism:  ‘Of course the commercial side’s a pain, it’s very annoying and sad, but I’m not too bothered by it – it’s always been about family and friends. It’s a time when almost everyone traditionally has two days off and puts heart and soul into meeting up.

’The state of the Christmas music scene is a point against which the pair hope to rail, with so much Christmas music these days either apparently tongue in cheek or crass commercial offerings from the flavour of the moment which won’t last any longer than the Christmas dinner leftovers.

‘We’re fans of the old school battle for the number one spot – it was exciting, unpredictable, and great songs came out of it. People used to put lots of effort into writing exciting music for Christmas. And I know chance of big success for us is a David and Goliath situation, but it’s good to offer up a real alternative. But it’s also meant to be a bit of fun.’ 

I’m reminded of the 2009 battle to get Rage Against the Machine’s ‘Killing in the Name’ to number one in place of X Factor winner Joe McElderry, and the sadly thwarted 2008 attempts to push the Jeff Buckley and Leonard Cohen versions of ‘Hallelujah’ ahead of Alexandra Burke, all showing that the integrity of the Christmas number one spot is clearly a matter at the forefront of the public’s consciousness.

The X Factor hopefuls this year will face competition from a Facebook campaign modelled on the 2009 one, attempting to push the 20 year old Nirvana classic ‘Smells Like Teen Spirit’ to number one, which has received over 85,000 ‘likes’. Other arguably more depressing competition comes from the cast of TOWIE’s version of Wham! hit ‘Last Christmas’ and a Mariah Carey and Justin Bieber collaboration on ‘All I Want For Christmas Is You’. While Smith and Burrows may not be realistic competitors for the glory spot, attacking the X Factor bandwagon through music that genuinely attempts to capture something of the atmosphere of the season seems to me an extremely laudable enterprise.

Despite the strong Christmas theme running through the beautifully crafted album, which starts with a slow version of ‘In the Bleak Midwinter’, Burrows insists the plan was not to make a record that was ‘all Jingle Bells and joviality’. The theme came after they’d already recorded a few songs, which they thought ‘started to sound a bit festive.’

‘It wasn’t always the idea to make a Christmas album. The first track we recorded was ‘Wonderful Life’ (by Black), and then Tom’s manager suggested we do ‘Only You’ (by Yazoo), and ‘On and On’ (by Longpigs) has been a long time favourite of mine. We tried other covers that didn’t work, like ‘Viva La Vida’, and some other Christmassy songs, but we didn’t want it to be cheap and cheesy.’

That’s an accusation that can easily be levelled at so many self professed Christmas albums. While one-off hit singles can get away with it, a whole album of Christmas themed songs can fall into the trap of being repetitive or tacky, hence so many Christmas albums which are just compilations of hit singles, destined to be played as background music at the school disco rather than appreciated in their own right. Sufjan Stevens’ Songs for Christmas is an example of an indie album that successfully mixes original and traditional songs to produce a beautifully crafted whole, and Smith and Burrows are following in these formidable footsteps.

Burrows’ enthusiasm is infectious, and it is touching how this record seems genuinely to have been born out of real love, both that for the festive season itself, and the friendship of the two men. Smith and Burrows (the clue is in the name) had been friends and pub buddies for years, before they decided to book a studio and record something together.

‘We always talked about things it would be fun to do one day. We tried our hands at DJing and that was appalling. And once we just had a free day and we booked a studio.

’The lifestyle of a musician seems hectic, especially for one with his fingers in so many pies. The pair plan to tour Funny Looking Angels around Europe before both heading separately to LA (it’s a hard life) to record with their respective bands.

‘But I love the idea of coming back to this. We should do a non-seasonal album at some point. The most exciting thing for me about this record was that it includes the first proper song we wrote together. And that’s a bit of a boundary in a friendship to get over, and we’re both super proud.’

Funny Looking Angels by Smith and Burrows is released on November 28th
www.smithandburrows.com

Cherwell Sport gets its bounce on

0

My last experience of trampolining was at a slightly boozy birthday party a (depressing) number of years ago. You know the drill: everyone sits around on the thing, eventually a few people start jumping, it gets competitive, people are flung off in all directions and eventually someone ends up in a four-hour Sunday morning queue for A&E. Anyway, upon discovering that trampolining was not only a recognised sport but an Olympic one at that, my interest was piqued enough to arrive at Iffley one evening in eager anticipation of a cheeky bounce.

The first thing I noticed when I looked at the Iffley Sports Hall floor is that they’re not actually that big. Three metres by two metres sounds large enough, but when you’re suddenly in the air trying to land on it again, having just been fired off in a slightly arbitrary direction, it’s a different kettle of fish. I was told to get into a ‘happy bounce’, staying centred and under control on the cross in the middle of the trampoline.

Having watched innumerable graceful flips and spins it was with some trepidation that I attempted my first skill, a simple tuck jump. It wasn’t pretty, but I survived it, and with a few more goes I was approaching something like coordination. It became clear that core stability is hugely important, allowing you to execute these complicated manoeuvres in mid-air while maintaining full control of your body. Indeed, during the breaks between sessions, the more experienced trampoliners were engaged in some pretty intense strength drills to help in this respect.

Parallels with gymnastics are warranted here, as not only do many people transfer from one to the other, but the format of competition is very similar. You have a routine, constrained by the number of contacts with the mat from the start, which is then marked by technical difficulty and execution.

The dilemma is whether to play it safe for low difficulty marks or go big and then, potentially, home. There are also varying levels of competition, designed to encourage beginners to have a go. I was shown the basic level BUCS routine, which is fully prescribed, and I could nearly have managed by the end of the session, while the top level routine guidlines featured phrases like ‘at least two jumps of 450 degrees rotation’ and looked more like maths homework to my untrained eye.

As the session progressed I tried a few more things out with mixed success, but my bounce got happier and I did start to feel a lot more comfortable. I was told that flips and the like would have to wait, as although there is some padding alongside each trampoline, the floor is very solid and landing on your face is ill-advised. This disappointment aside, it was great fun. Everyone remembers how brilliant trampolines were as a kid, and that simple fact doesn’t change, so head on down and get some bounce back in your life.

English superstars do not breed success

0

Last Saturday England, normally the laughing stock of international football, somehow beat World champions Spain 1-0 at Wembley. How did they do it? More importantly, will this aid success at next year’s European Championships?

The World Cup last year served to confirm what most had grown to realise over the last decade – that the golden generation (Wayne Rooney, John Terry et al) were not only un-golden, but have a habit of self-destructing at major tournaments. For too long England have looked for a hero, a Hollywood narrative of big players and big moments like Michael Owen in 1998 and David Beckham in 2002. Where did we get in those tournaments? Never past the quarter-finals.

In an enlightening interview last week, Xabi Alonso remarked, “Sometimes it seems the English don’t rate those who make the team work rather than standing out themselves”. This should undoubtedly be the basis for a squad in Euro 2012 – a collective identity which performs a function. People shouldn’t shudder at an unglamorous front three of Walcott, Bent and Milner. The team is there to do a job – it’s not there to make some idiot on TalkSport say we have the best eleven in the world.

England aren’t underachievers anymore because they don’t have a world class squad. No player in the England squad for the Spain friendly had been nominated for the Ballon D’Or. England’s win over Spain doesn’t mean we aren’t mediocre –  we are, but this mediocrity doesn’t prevent us from achieving. Plenty of weak squads have gone far in the past – look at Denmark in 1992 and Greece in 2004.

The absence of Wayne Rooney from the group stage due to suspension helps, because whoever his replacement is – Bent, Welbeck or, dare I say it, Zamora – will have to be the right player for the system we use, and not the superstar who excites the imagination. Look at the team that beat the world champions on Saturday. Where were Rooney, Terry and Ferdinand?

England beat Spain because they absorbed pressure. That must be the approach at Euro 2012, a tournament where England could find themselves in a group with Spain, Portugal and France. The danger is that England start to believe they are better than they are. England lost to Germany in the second round in South Africa because they underestimated them (and played Matthew Upson). Humility has never gone hand-in-hand with the England team, but then neither has success.  

For the first time, the phrase “England expects” wasn’t applicable because everyone was convinced Spain were going to win. England didn’t expect, and this time, England won.

Nottingham shoot down Blues

0

The Blues’ disappointing start to the season unfortunately continued on Wednesday with a 2-1 defeat at Nottingham University. Without a dramatic turnaround in results, Oxford will soon be facing a relegation battle, having experienced defeat in the first three of their four games. Bearing in mind that there are only ten games in the BUCS league season, a rapid transformation is needed to get back to winning ways.

Despite this, the results Oxford have had have not reflected their performances. The current team are regarded as one of the best footballing sides Oxford has produced for several years, and this has been proven on several occasions; at times teams have been unable to cope with the counter-attacks and slick pass-and-move football which they have displayed. Furthermore, a 1-1 draw with Hartpury (the best university team in the country) along with other impressive results in pre-season provided the belief and confidence which would have been needed to get a fast start in order to earn promotion to the Premier League.

This was not to be the case however, and the game didn’t start well for the Blues. They looked sloppy and lethargic and Nottingham took full advantage, pegging Oxford back inside their own half for the first ten minutes of the game. Although this pressure was not transformed into any real clear-cut chances, there were a couple of risky moments including one worrying goalmouth scramble inside the Blues box when the ball was cleared poorly.

Against the run of play however, Oxford took the lead. A trademark long throw from Adam Healy was headed half clear by a Nottingham defender, straight to captain Julian Austin whose mishit shot/pinpoint cross looped to the backpost where Alex Biggs was standing to deliver a composed and decisive finish. The goal was very much undeserved but this manner of scoring has been integral to Oxford sides in the past and is undeniably effective; for how else do Stoke stay in the Premier League? The only difference is that Adam Healy gets into the Blues team on merit, whereas Rory Delap appears to have no other discernible skills.

Despite taking the lead, the Blues had no control over the game and it wasn’t long before there was an equaliser. Midway through the first half a scuffed clearance from the Oxford defence left the Nottingham right-back with enough time and space to curl in a decent cross into the box. This was subsequently flicked on to an unmarked player at the back post and the ball was tapped in to level the score.

Almost immediately a swift Nottingham counter-attack split the Blues defence wide open, leaving keeper Tom Haigh alone to protect the Oxford goal. As the Nottingham player neared the goal he failed to round the keeper, managing to simultaneously kick the ball out of play and fall over. In an incredible turn of events the referee awarded a penalty. Although contact was made, the striker was no longer in control of the ball. This was an extremely poor decision for Haigh who has been outstanding all season, pulling off unbelievable saves on a regular basis. One particular instance saw an entire training session stop to engage in a spontaneous round of applause. The penalty was converted.

The first half contained another controversial refereeing decision, this time in the Blues’ favour. Left-back Anthony Beddows was judged to have brought down a Nottingham player outside the penalty area, even though there was no doubt that the foul was committed inside the box. Bizarrely, a free-kick was given, much to the anger of the Nottingham team, who unnecessarily abused the Blues’ temporary linesman Luke Devereux.

After 45 minutes, Oxford still felt aggrieved by the penalty and knew there was plenty of room for improvement. After a much needed motivational team talk, they emerged a different team; sharper, at a higher intensity and playing with a real desire to change the course of the game.

The Nottingham team were no longer allowed to settle on the ball and the Blues began to control proceedings. This period of domination created several chances, the best one falling to Alec Ward, whose shot was unfortunately deflected over the bar following a goalmouth scramble.

But Oxford couldn’t capitalise any further and after this short 10 minute spell of superiority the match fizzled out and the remainder of the game saw neither side do anything memorable. After 80 minutes, all 3 substitutions had been made and the team had switched to a more attacking 4-4-2 but this had no real impact (unthinkable seeing as I was one of the subs) and it was clear that it was not going to happen.

Overall, a substandard performance from Oxford, but they have yet to face a team which has properly merited a victory. To make matters worse, before Wednesday Notts were only one point ahead of Oxford with 1 loss and 2 draws, which makes the result all the more frustrating. The only silver lining on the horizon is that last season’s side had a similarly miserable start and they eventually won the league, but the Blues will need to win every game from now on if they wish to repeat that achievement.

Cherwell sport debate: Blues or college sport?

Blues: Izzy Westbury – International cricket player

The day has come – finally. I thought it would never happen, but oh my goodness that time is now. The adrenaline rush as I got out of bed. That nauseating feeling as I stepped onto the pitch. The relief as they called out my name.

‘Izzy Westbury, your stash is here.’

Okay, so maybe the dishing out of Blues stash shouldn’t be the overriding factor that made me trial for the Blues, but it was a large factor nonetheless. Who wants a college football hoodie when you can swan around Park End in your OUHC ties and matching chinos? We are the elite, the only ones that can march around night clubs looking on the outside like Grandpa Joe stepping out of his air-raid shelter but knowing of course that ultimately, stash is what sets us apart.

But is it really all about stash – surely that is just for the vain and the superficial amongst us. Surely playing Blues sport is an honour, a legacy, a tradition and an achievement to be proud of? Well yes… and no. Playing Blues sport is the pinnacle of the Oxford sporting world and there is most certainly a status attached – but beware its limitations. No-one is here on the merit of their sporting achievements – Oxford doesn’t do such scholarships. We’re all here to work – sport is an extra-curricular activity playing second fiddle to our academic commitments. Or at least, that’s what our tutors wish. Unquestionably Oxford is no Loughborough, no Bath, no Exeter or Birmingham – but we’re pretty damned good considering and we shouldn’t forget that.

For the non-sporting students out there, there is the cry that playing Blues is nothing other than the chance to display our overly-testosterone fuelled aggression once a year as we embark on our infamous drinking bans and the chat focuses solely upon that favourite Blues pastime: bashing the Tabs.

Now I’m all for playing college sport – I’ve done them all – mixed lacrosse, mixed hockey, football, squash, rounders – you name it, but no college match will ever amount to that one experience that makes it all worth it – beating Cambridge.

So Oxford and Cambridge are perhaps not the bastions of Britain’s sporting elite that we once were (there really is no use in kidding ourselves here, let’s be honest), but all other results get erased from living memory as all that matters is whether we get one more in their net than they do ours. This is the ultimate sporting achievement within the confines of Oxford. I wouldn’t give a million and one college cuppers victories for that one feeling of utter euphoria and knowing that, despite everything, we bashed the Tabs.

 

College: Ollie Waring – St Anne’s College 3rds Football captain

People say that you haven’t succeeded at Oxford if you don’t leave with a Blue to your name: those people clearly haven’t dedicated their pre-match warm ups to a live rendition of ‘Thriller’, epitomised Cuppers spirit by spending 45 minutes in goal wearing a mint green afro, or bonded over onion bhajis and ‘intellectual political debate’ at their termly team curry. I have one thing to thank for this – college sport. Oh, and not being a Blue.

College sport provides a welcome opportunity for everyone to get involved and try something new. Totally inept? Join the thirds and have a great laugh. High school legend? Recieve the adoration of your peers as you bang an a hat-trick in every game you play. Either way you’re openly invited to have a slice of the fun. And come back for seconds. Or even thirds.

On the other hand, Blues sport carries with it massive pressure, where a misplaced back pass or late tackle could destroy both your and the team’s credibility. In my team each pass is cheered with great aplomb, each sliced own goal lauded as much as if we’d netted the last minute winner driving us to Cuppers glory. College sport rewards students with a highly fulfilling vent from the stresses of Oxford life: Blues sport pumps a high pressure helium pipeline into already stressed-out Oxford lives. It is for over inflated egos, precariously waiting to explode.

I agree that the quality of Blues sport is much higher, but it’s all relative really. Fair enough, the Blues would annhilate most college teams, but put a Blues team up against any semi-professional side and they’d get taken to the cleaners, hung out to dry and then targeted by passing pigeons. Besides, everyone knows that you get more 40 yard pearlers in the African Cup of Nations than you do when watching Spain grind out one-nils in order to obtain World Cup glory. The former certainly writes better match reports.

Blues sport does however offer its exclusivity – drinking Moet at Vinnie’s with other chino-clad super egos who consider themselves God’s gift to women and pretty much everything else. I’d take a drunken romp to the Park End Cheese Floor every time – the whole team to a man bellowing out ‘Football’s Coming Home’, celebrating the fact that they earlier denied the opposing goalie a clean sheet in a heroic 15-1 loss. You cannot buy that kind of spirit with talent alone.

So if you still aren’t convinced that the passion, joy and banter cultivated by college sport outweighs self important individuals vainly pretending to be the next sporting icon; search for ‘Halloween goal’ or ‘MGA football’ on YouTube. Debate over. I’d rather be a Mint Green than a Blue.

Preview: The Birthday Party

0

Everybody loves Pinter, especially students. Pinter wrote extensively for students himself – his first play, The Room, a one-actor, he sent to a friend at Bristol University who had asked for a script for an annual student drama festival. It is no surprise then that seeing The Homecoming, The Caretaker, No-Man’s Land listed can set alarm bells ringing – uh oh, student fare. In my relatively short time at Oxford, I’ve seen a fair few such productions.  They can make Stanley’s trials seem like child’s play.

However, directors Jake Lancaster and Muj Hameed have absolutely hit the nail on the head with this sophisticated production of Pinter’s most popular drama, demonstrating a real understanding of what makes the play so enduringly popular, whilst maturely introducing some directorial quirks that would kindle the interest even of the most miserablist of student theatregoers.

The Birthday Party deals with a paranoiac Stanley Webber (Rory Fazan), an erstwhile piano player lodging in a dilapidated old boarding house in a backwards seaside town, who has his bleak birthday party intruded upon by two sinister strangers representing an undisclosed organisation. They have been looking for him. The result is a string of grim games which leave Stanley questioning his choices in life, as well as his sanity.

The most impressive aspect of this production of Pinter’s second play is its sense of balance – the achievement lies in its paratactic structuring of comedy and menace. On the one hand, the staging draws upon the bleak and claustrophobic 60s-era set design and costumes of the famously grey 1968 film, the performers penned within a cryptic space by tastelessly wallpapered walls, the stage naturalistically cluttered with all the tat you might expect in the living room of your aging loon.

The lighting is experimental and edgy, casting ominous shadows across the stage. At the same time as all of this, Lancaster and Hameed’s production clearly aims to bring out the humour latent in what is an hysterical script, and very much succeeds in doing so. I found myself laughing, and then immediately feeling like a monster for laughing, which says that the director has definitely got something right here.

What makes this production special though is its subtle and arresting surreality. The absurd is foregrounded without reversion to bonkers gimmicks or sickly melodrama. A bespectacled Stanley, when de-spectacled by his aggressors, fumbles around the stage, eyes asquint and arms outstretched. The image, at first cartoonish, becomes sinister as the violence escalates. The more non-naturalistic direction proves very effective during moments like these. Glesni Ann Euro’s particularly caricatural portrayal of dozy old mare Meg, Stanley’s landlady, also somehow manages to move during her moments of quiet triumph.

An effective tactic of the play is a kind of artificial posturing. The actors and actresses tap into a repertoire of repeated facial expressions and recycled gestures, which can be both farcically funny, but also rather unsettling, to watch – depending on context. Will Hatcher, as Goldberg, is particularly adept at switching between roles, for example that of suave womanizer and sadistic inquisitor, whilst using exactly the same vocal and physical tools. It really is fantastic to watch.

The staging eschews naturalism in favour of uncomfortably off-kilter symmetries and movement has the geometric quality of your more hard-line absurdist play. Bottles are placed in matching pairs on either end of a long table, mirroring each other to the inch. McGann (Barney White) and Goldberg, during the scene in which Stanley is verbally roughhoused by the duo, take it in turns, one to stare, the other to patrol the stage in a wide arc, before a changing of the guard sees the other perform the same action in reverse. By the climax of the scene, both are swirling around the table at which a beleaguered Stanley is slumped. This movement and repetition rewards dramatic scenes with a sense of ceremony absolutely appropriate to Stanley’s ritual humiliation.

The acting is of a very high standard. Hatcher particularly seems to absolutely relish in the language he is given – the scene in which Goldberg exaggeratedly accosts Meg with overblown clichés and bogus French becomes absolutely hilarious in part due to Hatcher’s control of his speech. White has McCann gel into the intellectual and interrogative exchanges, whilst maintaining a thuggish blankness of expression that absolutely convinces – yes, this is what a right-hand man looks and sounds like. 

The playwright once remarked on the infamous ‘Pinter pause’ – “Those silences have achieved such significance that they have overwhelmed the bloody plays – which I find a bloody pain in the arse.” Had Pinter had the pleasure to see this production, he would have found little to be so shirty about. Lengthy silences, though exploited to good effect, by no means overwhelm this bloody play; the timing in early scenes is just right. The more frenetic moments, including the famous cod-philosophical interrogation in the second act, offset the mundanity of the phatic earlier scenes. Again, balance is convincingly shown to be the name of the game.  

There is a fair bit that could be worked on. The odd line sounds a bit over-rehearsed. As a result, some of the back and forth is almost a bit too quick during the torture sequence, the frenzy doesn’t build up perhaps as deliberately as it should (perhaps at the offset Stanley could be prodded a bit more for the answers to those dense, increasingly rhetorical questions, rather than just shouted over from the start). Also, I’m not convinced that the key props (being also powerful symbols) in the play – the drum, the glasses, the bottles of alcohol – are manipulated as they could be. However, I’m essentially just nitpicking here – the production was a joy overall.

It is clear that the director, as well as everyone involved, has dedicated a great deal of hard work and energy, not to mention (most importantly) some careful thought, into realising this difficult play. What I have seen shows the potential, should the standard of performance be maintained over the course of the run, to really impress its audiences.    

FIVE STARS