Hannah Blyth and Ruby Riley talk to the director and cast members of POSH, a play by Laura Wade which is being performed at the Oxford Union Debating Chamber from the 21st to 25th of November.
Blog Page 1768
Review : Wuthering Heights
Like other adaptations of Emily Brontë’s classic, Andrea Arnold’s interpretation of Wuthering Heights focuses entirely on the first half of the novel, sweeping intricate layers of narration and the reconciliatory plot of the second generation aside to focus entirely on the doomed love of Heathcliff and Cathy. Yet the result is not a sensationalist flurry of “dark romance” to feed the appetites of Twilight and Vampire Diaries fans, hungry for their latest Brooding Hunk. Nor is it a comfortable Sunday night period drama; it hardly feels like a period drama at all.
Arnold’s reimagining is stripped down to its bare bones: the majority of the film is spent with the younger couple from Heathcliff’s point of view, whose scrambling excursions across Yorkshire moors see them teetering on the edge of innocent, playful curiosity, threatening at any moment to tumble into wicked sexuality or spitting brutality. The film’s only soundtrack is provided by elemental, natural noises: rushing winds, spattering raindrops, slapping mud – a blunt but welcome opposition to the predictably haunting score underlying most costume dramas. The 4:3 aspect and shaky, handheld camerawork pushes us further into the sensuality of the landscape, completely entrenched one moment in dewy grass, the next lost amongst Cathy’s tangled hair. This simultaneously lends an air of gritty, contemporary documentary to scenes of extreme violence, and there is little concrete sense of setting. The austere dialogue, too, is a radical departure from the eloquence of the novel. Arnold cuts Brontë’s most recognisable lines and inserts some thoroughly modern swearing, while Heathcliff is barely able to speak at all. But it is in these moments of obvious departure that Arnold most captures the spirit of the original work, its stark beauty and brutal savagery translated into something fresh and daring.
After the triumphant performances of Solomon Glave and Shannon Beer, the turn of Kaya Scodelario as Catherine Linton and James Howson as Heathcliff the gentleman, fall flat. The scene of their reunion is bafflingly incongruous with the film’s earlier tone, as the reality of Yorkshire weather is replaced with a hazy summer afternoon, where the now elegant Catherine blandly acknowledges Heathcliff’s return. We are rarely offered glimpses of their earlier primeval behaviour, and in these late stages the lack of dialogue gives way to a inexplicable lack of passion. The film’s final moments thankfully return to the younger Heathcliff roughly pinning down a laughing Cathy, rubbing mud in her face. It is in these instances of fierce affection and blossoming sexuality that Arnold triumphs, arguably creating something more human and genuine than the often melodramatic novel.
4 STARS
Review: Tintin
On paper it seems like a winning combination; two of the greatest directors working together to bring to life a franchise that has sold over 350 million books worldwide and been translated into 80 languages. With Peter Jackson’s eye for detail and Steven Spielberg’s heart the film should have been an instant classic. However, there is something about the film that lacks the necessary sparkle. Like this season’s X Factor, David Cameron or a night in Park End, the film promises much, but delivers so little.
The story of The Adventures of Tintin combines three of the original comics together: The Crab With The Golden Claw (1941), The Secret of the Unicorn (1943) and Red Racham’s Treasure (1944). Doing this meant that there was a lot of material to work with, and although the stories seem to merge together almost seamlessly, the sheer volume of original source material has a negative effect. In trying to fit as much as they can into the 107 minutes the writers have included a few too many chase scenes at the expense of really exploring the motives or drive of Tintin. The only explanation given for why he goes on this adventure is that he is a reporter, which is a bit of a lazy excuse. I don’t imagine Jan Moir will go on any adventures just because she is a reporter. The story also ends up becoming predictable, so much so that the girl sat behind me guessed each twist before it happened.
Although the story might have faults, the visuals are stunning. Each frame looks as if it could have come straight out of the comics themselves. The decision to make Tintin an animated film was the right one as it has allowed the film to be full of the fantastic colour palette that was seen in the comics. What allowed the film to pull off this great animation is the use of the same performance capture technology that was used in Avatar. Because of this technology the film has a stronger sense of realism than it would have using more conventional animation methods. The voice acting behind the characters was excellent, with Andy Serkis demonstrating why he is still the number one actor for animated films. The rest of the cast, which include names such as Jamie Bell, Daniel Craig, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, also bring their characters to life. However the cast member that stole the show was, of course, Snowy. Like every other animated film, the cute animal always wins (just look at Shrek).
Although the film may look stunning to movie-goers it unfortunately lacks the sparkle that is often found in a Spielberg film. Like its CGI star the film looks beautiful, but is dead behind the eyes.
2 1/2 stars
Review: Junkhearts
There should be a warning on this film’s tin: if you’re on antidepressants, of a sensitive disposition, considering suicide, or just having a bad day, STEER WELL CLEAR. The plot centres on an alcoholic war veteran Frank (Eddie Marsan), who meets Lynette (Candese Reid), a homeless teen with a feisty attitude, but (surprise, surprise) hidden depths and a sensitive soul. Before you can put the ‘kitsch’ in ‘kitchen sink realism’, Frank’s already begun his fatherly caring for Lynette whilst her violent boyfriend takes advantage of him and turns his house into a crack den of extremely seedy proportions. All fun and games so far!
Junkhearts is like if Mike Leigh had riotous, relentless meth-fuelled sex with one of his film-studies undergrads. To say I found the whole ninety minutes uncomfortable is a wild underestimation. The movie is littered with shock-tactic imagery, descending into all kinds of unpleasantness which every resident living on a council estate must endure according to the British film industry. There’s also an awkward subplot that never really justifies its own existence; again, it’s a succession of adultery, inept motherhood and drug abuse. By the time the two narratives converge, you’ve either guessed how they connect, lost all interest, or have left the cinema to throw yourself under a train. Even the presence of indie film darling Eddie Marsan cannot lift this glumfest above a half-star rating.
If there was something good about Junkhearts, trying to remember it is like trying to remember the eye colour of someone who killed your entire family. Consider your mental well-being warned.
1/2 a star.
Tinkering with John le Carré
First screened in the ‘golden age’ of BBC drama and eagerly followed by a whole generation, for many critics the original Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy was a perfect espionage thriller in which Alec Guinness could do no wrong. The old guard will claim that Gary Oldman’s George Smiley is that much more ponderous, always with a strained down-turn of the mouth, compared to the naturalness of Guinness’ ease, the zen-like chilly calm with which he polishes his glasses. This is half fair. Oldman does remind me somewhat of Kenneth Branagh’s slightly campy perpetual grump in the BBC re-imagining of Wallander, which Krister Henriksson handles with undeniably greater subtlety. In the original, Alec Guinness can smile, he is funnier, he can fantasise about retiring to a small house in the Cotswolds without us ever doubting that he is inescapably tied to ‘The Circus’. For Oldman, there is little joy, except for the occasional, bracing, ice-cold swim in Hampstead Ponds. We almost trust Oldman too much; Guinness looks like a sweet old man, but he’ll slip out of a second hand bookshop by the backdoor, checking his back when unbolting his door like a geriatric Jason Bourne.
The new Tinker, Tailor film is slow-paced; it is no use to criticise it for not being quite as slow as a 1970s, seven-part TV series (which, incidentally, does not always sustain the tension it pitches for; the sequel Smiley’s People, also starring Guinness, is deadeningly dull). It isn’t that the new film makes the original more exciting; Mark Strong’s character, in the opening minutes of the new film, is shot and seized neatly with only two shots being fired. The opening of the BBC series feels like the opening of a series of 24, with a small army of communist machine gunners chasing Jim Prideaux through a forrest, after blowing up his car and eliminating his driver.
To some extent, the film has to try a lot harder to be slow and thoughtful but it is in a climate in which this is a more of a treat; it’s hard to blame Alfredson for relishing it.
The film cannot help being a reinvention, it is part of its strength. The character of Smiley is a result of constant reinterpretation, having appeared in Le Carré’s early thrillers only as a peripheral character, later fleshed out for Tinker, Tailor. His cult now transcends both the book and the original TV series.
The film is about the old guard, the pre-war generation (the hats are a give-away); its about patriarchy, old school tie, friends and debts. All dues are paid to Guinness, his signature black gloves and glasses are passed on to Oldman. But we can’t just keep on watching re-runs of the TV series. The new film places the action firmly in the past, but just as firmly in the ‘now’ with Oldman, Firth and Cumberbatch now running the show; we are reminded that espionage, corruption, distrust and austerity were not just a 70s thing.
Mansfield Entz team under fire
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
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?
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
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
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