Saturday 27th September 2025
Blog Page 184

The Need for Greed: has F1 gone too far and put its integrity at the back of the pack?

0

We are now five races into the 2023 F1 season, and despite continued Red Bull dominance, we have seen plenty of changes on and off the track. The Miami Grand Prix debuted a new feature of the increasingly long pre-race fanfare, with the drivers being introduced by LL Cool-J to the crowds. Each driver was hailed as some form of ‘the most exciting driver on the grid’ while walking out of jets of smoke to pom-pommed cheerleaders. Opinion is divided over the merits of this sort of segment: while Hamilton has voiced his support, others like Norris and Verstappen have suggested they are less eager and find it awkward. And when watching, that isn’t too hard to tell.

The high-up bosses and decision-makers of Formula 1 are keenly aware of the influx of fans in recent years and are eager to keep expanding and cater to this new generation. A large aspect of this seems to be a push to ramp up the entertainment and ‘show’ factor of the weekend. This is seen particularly in America, where there are now 3 races this season, with Miami being introduced last year and Las Vegas new for this year; the newer races lend themselves more to experimentation with the format, without upsetting the traditionalists. F1 has been trying to ‘break America’ for years, and largely thanks to Drive to Survive, now you could say it has. Moreover, the relatively new owners of F1, Liberty Media, are themselves America and the cynic might well detect a heavy dose of Americanisation behind recent developments both on and off track.

Pageantry is nothing new for Formula 1, but in recent years it seems that there has been a shift towards increasing the celebrity of all the drivers. Certainly, social media has made this easier, but there is a marked and concerted impetus from teams to commercialise and commodify their drivers. This is not necessarily a bad thing – human interest and drama are an important part of most sport, and helps people get invested on a personal level. People loved Drive to Survive so much because it provided this aspect of the sport, which is – for many – undeniably gripping and enjoyable. Nevertheless, the pressure on drivers to be public personalities seems greater than ever.

Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in the fate of Daniel Ricciardo. Once the darling of the paddock, magnetic and charming, he seemed a real contender for a future title with Red Bull. Enter Max Verstappen, and exit Danny Ric. A series of optimistic but unsuccessful team changes later, the

Australian found himself seatless for the 2023 season. That is until the unthinkable happened, and his return to Red Bull was announced – but as a reserve or ‘third’ driver. Fans were thrilled at the prospect of a return to his glory days, but Christian Horner made explicit the clinical reality that it was, in short, a personality hire. They recognised his incredible PR potential and realised that perhaps this is what was needed to patch up the team’s toxic reputation.

More universally, the desire for drama and excitement in the race itself has led to some decisions which were at best controversial and at worst outright condemned by drivers and fans alike. I don’t even need to say more than Abu Dhabi for people to offer their passionately held opinions. But perhaps even more concerningly, Spa 2021 demonstrated the subservience of safety to spectacle, when lives were arguably recklessly and even knowingly endangered (more than usual) in undrivable conditions. Vettel’s warnings being quickly followed by Norris’ huge crash was like a scene out of a tragedy; the wise tragic warning was ignored, and it was lucky the consequent disaster wasn’t of the kind seen in other races in Spa over the years. On the opposite end of the scale, some would argue that over several years – despite Massi’s departure – there have been increased instances of yellow and red flags when perhaps they are not obviously needed, with the hope of some restart drama. Add in the still-developing vision of sprint races, which seem sometimes just another opportunity for drivers to ruin their cars before Raceday at vast expense, and you begin to wonder if multiple crashes a weekend is actually all they’re really looking for.

Perhaps the problem here lies in the ‘boring’ nature of some tracks, which are not only more difficult to overtake on, but are also shadowed by successive eras of Mercedes and Red Bull dominance. A variety of track styles and conditions are integral to the format of the sport. Nevertheless, there are some tracks which are staples of the calendar being eyed up for removal: those in charge argue they haven’t been as exciting in recent years, while many in the community believe it would be an outrage to remove tracks of such historic significance. Thus, the traditionalists find fault in the changemakers, and vice versa, as it ever was. It is difficult to think of a sport which redefines itself as keenly and consistently as Formula 1 does currently, but perhaps this is the secret to its enduring allure and renown. A compromise between maintaining the integrity of the sport itself, and attracting and entertaining an ever-growing audience must be found.

Image Credit: Meghana Geetha

Review of Christ Church governance recommends major reforms

0

Following the completion of an independent review, Dominic Grieve KC has issued a report to Christ Church’s Governing Body which includes recommendations to separate governance of the college and the cathedral. For the first time in the college’s nearly 500-year history, the Review suggests that the Head of House does not need to be a member of the clergy.

The Review also comes after multiple incidents related to governors and the governance of the college. These include warnings from the Charity Commision and a 2019 Financial Times investigation that claimed Christ Church was “virtually ungovernable” due to the dispute between the Governing Body and the Dean. According to Christ Church, the Review was commissioned in June 2022 “to ensure that Christ Church’s governance meets the needs of a University of Oxford college in the 21st century”.

Grieve, the former Attorney General for England and Wales, has made “substantial” recommendations “that Christ Church can make to ensure its structures meet the demands of modern standards of governance”. Notably, the Review concluded that the Head of House or head of the college does not need to be a member of the clergy, giving the Governing Body the opportunity to “choose from a wider pool of candidates”. This new Head of House would be appointed on a renewable and written fixed-term contract. The Review recommends the Dean of Christ Church Cathedral cease to be the head of the Foundation and thus will no longer be the leader of both the Cathedral and college. A new Committee of Chapter has also been suggested to help run the Cathedral.

These two recommendations, if implemented, would create two separate posts for the leadership of the College and the Cathedral for the first time in Christ Church’s history. Christ Church was originally founded by Henry VIII in 1546 as a joint cathedral and college, making it the only academic institution in the world which is also a cathedral. Grieve acknowledges the magnitude of the recommendations stating that they “would represent the first fundamental changes to its governance structure since 1867”. He added that while completing the Review it became evident “that significant reform is necessary at Christ Church, and that it would be widely welcomed”.

Other recommendations of the Review include the creation of a smaller Governing Council that would meet more regularly than the current Governing Body. The Review also underscores that “reforms to the disciplinary and grievance arrangements” are needed. 

The Dean Designate of Christ Church, Professor Sarah Foot thanked Grieve for his “meticulous, thoughtful, and constructive work over the last year” his “important recommendations”, and told Cherwell that “this vital process will lay firm foundations for the future as we approach the 500th anniversary of Christ Church’s foundation”.

The recommendations will now be considered by Christ Church’s Governing Body. The process of implementing subsequent changes will require consultation with the University, the Church of England, the Charity Commission, and the approval of the Privy Council and Parliament. 

The Review can be read in full here:

https://www.chch.ox.ac.uk/news/house/christ-church-publishes-independent-governance-review-dominic-grieve-kc

Graduate scholarship for lower caste Indian students launched

0

The Oxford India Centre for Sustainable Development (OICSD) at Somerville College is launching a new scholarship for Indian students from lower caste backgrounds and/or first-generation students. This is the UK’s first fully-funded graduate scholarship geared towards Indian students from these underrepresented backgrounds. 

According to a tweet from the OICSD, the scholarship will “support the next generation of leaders from Dalit, Adivasi and other underrepresented background”. The college and the OICSD established this scholarship in recognition of “the effects of historic and current caste-based discrimination and prejudice including household poverty and lack of opportunity as well as lack of information, advice and careers guidance in multiple spaces.” The Phule Scholar will participate in the centre’s academic and leadership workshops and receive access to the OICSD’s large alumni network.

The scholarship is “inspired by the pioneering work eradicating gender and caste barriers to education” of Savitrabi Phule, a nineteenth century social reformer and education activist. The 2023 Phule scholar will be part of the wider cohort of OICSD scholars. 

The OICSD is a research hub that focuses on issues like climate change and healthcare. Launched in 2013 through a partnership between the Government of India and the University of Oxford, the centre honours Somerville College’s “strong links with India by supporting a community of Indian students who would otherwise not be able to take up their place at the University”. The OICSD aims to facilitate “engagement across sectors on sustainable development issues with India, UK and beyond” and its alumni include numerous leaders in sustainability and development in India

Jan Royall, Principal of Somerville College explains that Somerville’s “motto of including the excluded extends to people who have been subject to generations of social discrimination and prejudice under the caste system, and it is thrilling to think that these scholarships will offer brilliant young people from these under-represented groups a platform by which to change the world”. 

The inaugural Phule scholar will be Niharika Singh, who will study who will take an MSc in Nature, Society and Environmental Governance programme at the School of Geography and the Environment, starting in October 2023. Singh expressed her gratitude towards the University and the OICSD, adding “the opportunity will immensely support my larger goals of contributing in inclusive community development,”. 

Singh hopes to represent the Dalit community and “bridge the gap between environmental stability and caste marginality in India”. She underscores that “Dalits in India are invisible from the broader discourse of the environment as issues concerning accessibility to natural resources, discrimination and multidimensional vulnerabilities are largely unaddressed in the current environmental policy and discourse in India.”

Oxford’s Rugby League Glory

0

This Saturday saw the Women’s Rugby League Blues team defeat Cambridge in their second Varsity since reinstating the club in 2022. The Varsity season had been a mixed bag for the Oxford University Rugby League Club so far, as the Men’s 2s team pulled off an impressive and convincing victory yet the 1s narrowly lost 14-12. Not only did the women’s team have the title-calling pressure on this match, but they also wanted to continue their run of fantastic form after winning the BUCS Club of the Year award for last year’s season; pressure was certainly on.

The day began with the Old Boy’s match, bringing fans down to Iffley Road stadium in their masses, assuring that the support base was already there for the women’s game. It was a warm sunny day with food and drinks flowing freely, and Oxford had a considerable home team advantage, setting a comfortable scene for the match to come.

Straight from the kick-off Oxford were strong, aggressive, and clearly the better team. This strong start was quickly awarded with Tolu Atilola scoring the first try in two minutes, promising of her performance to come. Oxford dominated, playing silky passes across the pitch, putting in powerful tackles and clearly knew rugby league inside out, as they were careful and tactical in the six-tackle movements. Cambridge got a try back, but Rachel Hewitt began her hattrick game soon after, breaking through the back line with impressive strength. She followed this with another try, catching a clever silky kick forward by Iona Ffrench-Adam. When the whistle blew the score was 14-4, and Oxford went into the changing room confident in their performance.

The second half only saw Oxford dominate even further, working as a dynamic unit to delay the Cambridge attack and push the play backwards, and they were a force to be reckoned with when charging forward. Hewitt continued her incredible performance in the 55th minute, pushing over the line once more, and Iona Ffrench-Adam put her conversion through the posts. This half saw more injuries for both sides, calling the medics on a fair few times, and even saw the Oxford medic almost get involved in a tackle trying when treating a player. Although Cambridge had force and some great performances by Bryher Smith and Nancy Twigg, the number 9 and 1 respectively, they simply couldn’t break down the Oxford cohesive defence, even when a few metres out. Atilola finished Cambridge off in a moment of perfect symmetry to bring the final score to 24-4 in Oxford’s favour.

It was overall a very successful day on the pitch for the girls, and a generally enjoyable game to watch. The communal atmosphere the Rugby League club encouraged in the stands and all over the pitch was fantastic to watch. The president was on hand to run water bottles onto the pitch and lead chants from the stands. The roar from the crowd after every try was nearly deafening, and every onlooker was clearly invested in the game. It was almost emotional to see the girls being clapped out of the changing rooms through a manmade tunnel in both halves, as was the celebration at the end, clearly a whole club affair as they piled on top of one another. A brilliant game of rugby made for a successful and enjoyable day, and OURL set an example for all Oxford clubs on how to have a successful Varsity fixture.

Image Credit: Jessica Cullen

Oxford is third highest CO2 emitter of all UK Universities, says new study.

0

The University of Oxford has the third largest carbon footprint of all universities in the United Kingdom, according to a new study by Utility Bidder. Their calculations reveal that Oxford University emits an estimated 1.7 million tonnes of carbon for every 1,000 students, the third highest of any institution. It is outranked only by Imperial College London and Cranfield University.

By plotting the data of the total carbon emissions against the total number of students, Utility Bidder was able to build a scale that ranked each university’s carbon footprint proportional to the size of their student population. Utility Bidder also broke down the rankings into sub-fields of carbon emissions, which revealed that Oxford University was also in the top three biggest emitters of carbon related to business travel.

Oxford Brookes University, although not in the top ten for total carbon emissions, produced more waste-related carbon emissions than any other university in the United Kingdom.

These figures do not reflect the initiatives that have already been put in place to curb emissions. Under the Environmental Sustainability Strategy, launched in 2021, Oxford University has pledged to be carbon neutral by 2035, reducing emissions by more than a quarter of a million tonnes each year. Oxford Brookes University, in an effort to reduce its high ‘waste’ emissions, has devised a reduction strategy that aims, amongst other things, to achieve a ninety-percent recycling rate.

A spokesperson from Oxford University told Cherwell: ‘The University takes its environmental responsibility seriously and is committed to reaching net zero carbon and biodiversity net gain by 2035. In order to achieve these goals, the University has established the Oxford Sustainability Fund with an income of more than £5m a year and a revolving capital investment fund of £50m.  The University’s carbon emissions have been on a downwards trend since 2010, despite a large expansion in the size of the University estate, partly driven by the installation of over 2,000 solar panels, combined heat and power (CHP) and ground source heat pumps. 

‘Sustainable principles are incorporated into the design of all new buildings, and we are working to reduce the environmental impact of our activities further, for example collaborating with laboratories across the University to reduce their energy use and emissions by replacing old, inefficient equipment.”

Oxford Student Union argues that Oxford University’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy does not cover colleges because of the federal system. There are some issues where the gap between university policy and college policy is significant. In the matter of fossil fuel divestment, for instance, the university has committed to moving its investments out of fossil fuel companies, but many colleges have not followed suit.

Oxford to remove Sackler name from buildings and faculty positions

0

The University of Oxford has decided that it will remove ties to the Sackler family, following an internal review. The announcement involves a range of changes to the names of University buildings, spaces, and staff positions that currently operate under the Sackler name.

The Sackler family owns Purdue Pharma, the pharmaceutical company which played a role in the US opioid epidemic which killed over 500,000 Americans alone since 1999, according to Bloomberg News. OxyContin, a prescription painkiller and opioid introduced and heavily promoted by Purdue Pharma, had many side effects including potenital for misuse resulting in addiction, overdose and death.

Since 1991, the University has received over £11 million in donations from the Sacklers’ trusts and from the family themselves. These funds went towards building the Sackler library and  funding the Sackler Keeper of Antiquities at the Ashmolean.

Whilst the University states that it has not received any donations since January 2019, all the donations received will be ‘retained for their intended educational purposes’,  according to a Univeristy spokesperson.

The University has previously denied reconsidering renaming the buildings supported by the Sackler funds, even after the SU had submitted a motion to lobby for the changes.

In a statement, the University states that it will remove the Sackler name from Sackler Rome Gallery (Ashmolean Museum), Sackler Gallery of Life after Death in Ancient Egypt (Ashmolean Museum), Sackler Keeper of Antiquities (Ashmolean Museum), Sackler Learning Officer (Ashmolean Museum) Sackler Library, which will now become the Bodleian Art, Archaeology and Ancient World Library Sackler-Clarendon Associate Professorship of Sedimentary Geology.

The decision was approved by the Univeristy Council at a meeting on May 15 2023 and has ‘the full support of the Sackler family’.
The Sackler name will be retained on the Clarendon Arch and Ashmolean Museum’s donor board.

The Times apologises to Magdalen President for “incorrect” reporting

0

Dinah Rose KC received an apology in an open court and damage payments from The Times. On 21 November 2022, the paper erroneously suggested that Rose, the Magdalen president, had been “ruled against for recklessness by the Bar Standards Board”.

Rose tweeted on Tuesday, 16 May that The Times and its legal editor would apologise to her in court on the same day for “the libel they published about me last November”, relating to her participation in a case opposing same-sex marriage in the Cayman Islands. The newspaper had previously reported that the Bar Standards Board had told a Caribbean LGBT rights group that Rose’s interpretation of legal rules “might possibly amount to evidence of recklessness”.

Rose had claimed that her professional obligations required her to take on representation of the Cayman Islands government in the Privy Council case under the “cab rank” rule. Although her participation in the case came under fire, including from students here in Oxford and from the Oxford LGBTQ+ Society, many lawyers, including the appellants in the Cayman Islands case, sided with Rose.

The Times removed their original story after the Bar Standards Board issued a clarifying statement on 22 November, 2022. They also issued an official apology online early Tuesday morning, where they admit their original reporting was “incorrect”. The Times continued: “The Board made no ruling against her and found no evidence of recklessness. We accept that under the constitutional principles which she cited, the Bar rules did not allow her to refuse a brief for the Cayman Islands government in a case concerning the right to same sex-marriage. The article was therefore misleading. We apologise to Ms Rose for the distress caused, and have agreed to pay her substantial damages and legal costs.”

Pleasure in the age of panic

0

The 2023 Met Gala was another display of glamour and excess. The world’s A-listers raided Karl Lagerfeld’s closest and modelled the spoils of the fashion world. However, in my post-Met morning trawl through Instagram I found something more striking than Dua Lipa’s stunningly simple Chanel gown or Doja Cat’s furry take on her own title.

I was mesmerised by a video of the actress and singer Janelle Monae declaring that “this is the age of pleasure” at the Met Gala After Party. Recorded on fashion blogger @evanrosskatz’s Instagram, the Afrofuturist artist proclaimed she had “been in the age of struggle. I’ve been in the age of uncertainty. But tonight, this year, we are in the age of motherfucking pleasure. We’re actively doing the things that make us feel good, unapologetically.”

So, what does pleasure mean in 2023? I’m sure that for Janelle Monae, a Black, queer woman it means something very different to those who have never experienced oppression. It is perhaps an act of self-care reacting to centuries of historic and institutionalised injustice. Acknowledging this, I consider what a hedonist philosophy is on a more universal level, against the backdrop of the Met Gala, a cost of living crisis, and raging climate injustice. 

Pleasure is closely linked to hedonism, derived from the Greek hedone [pleasure]. Hedonists in the Ancient Greek Cyrenaic school advocate that life should be based around sentient pleasure – squeezing as much enjoyment out of life as possible. Epicurians have a different take on hedonism. They argue that pleasure is the absence of pain. Sounds familiar? That’s because it is incorporated into utilitarian philosophy developed in the industrial revolution. Utilitarianism forms the basis of our capitalist society. Through utilitarianism, pleasure becomes inextricably linked to capitalism.

It seems easy to say that the Met Gala signals a night of capitalist excess and hedonistic pleasure; after paying $50,000 for a ticket you would surely hope so. It marks the culmination of the icons and gods of Western society. They pose, clad in designer dresses and posited on the top of the Metropolitan Museum’s gilded steps, a veritable Mount Olympus for the modern age. It seems obvious that this is the age of pleasure: it has always been the age of pleasure in celebrity circles. Considering the exorbitant amounts of wealth bandied about on one evening, was this declaration from the dizzying heights of fame tone deaf to the cries of mortals below? Or is Monelle’s assertion a deeply considered insight into global futurity?

For those forced to choose between eating a hot meal or living in a warm home this winter the answer is clear. There is little pleasure when you are warm yet still hungry, or full but cold. Similarly, for those concerned with the world’s future which seems increasingly jeopardised by war and rising temperatures, this year has more closely resembled Auden’s The Age of Anxiety than Monae’s ‘Age of Pleasure’. For most, pleasure involves the sacrifice of something else. Opting for pleasure tends to stand for taking the easy way out through the avoidance of discomfort. However, personal sacrifices and lifestyle changes are needed to avoid ecological and climate crises. We have entered an age where the most useful thing we can be doing is buying less and flying less. Pleasure ought to be sacrificed for long term planetary goals: as Lord Byron puts in Don Juan “O Pleasure! you’re indeed a pleasant thing, / Although one must be damn’d for you, no doubt.”

The idea that we must be damned for our enjoyment marks pleasure, and its opponent, sacrifice, as part of utilitarian philosophy. Utilitarianism constructs the idea that to gain pleasure we must lose. Within capitalism, this loss is usually our money. Achievement of pleasure has become a capitalist construct. Pleasure has become marked by an instant dopamine hit of a card against a reader, a confirmation email, or the exchange of notes and coins. The search for pleasure is marked by fast fashion, where ‘stuff’ becomes disposable, rather than built for longevity. Stuff is thrown away so more can be bought. 

The creation of unenduring items which suit rapid and regular doses of dopamine marks an ecological nightmare. Pleasure-seeking, whether it be materialistic or travel, tends to conflict with climate planning. We need our goods to be fewer, and last longer, rather than have more which last less. In sum, we need to make decisions which decrease our pleasure for the sake of the planet. The afforded 1.5C of warming agreed in the Paris Agreement is forecast to be exceeded and achieving Net 0 by 2050 cannot roll around fast enough. For many, this is an age of panic.

So is there room for pleasure in the age of panic? What must we sacrifice to feel ephemeral joy in a time of crisis? Can we feel joy without sacrifice?

In order to answer these questions we have to ask ourselves, what is pleasure? Adrienne Maree Brown posits that our notion of pleasure has been constructed by white capitalist networks to suit its own ends in her book Pleasure Activism. Pleasure has come to be defined on material terms – it is the opening of a parcel or the buzz of ‘likes’ on a picture. Yet, if we remove constructed notions created by oppressive institutions and strip our notion of pleasure down to its roots it centres around primitive senses: love, good sex, art, natural beauty, good food, standing up for what is right. These primitive feelings, when carried out ethically and sustainably constitute a kind of ecological hedonism which need not revolve around sacrifice. They are both essential and adjunctive to our lives.

Adrienne Maree Brown argues that pleasure can be used to the advantage of activism in Pleasure Activism, but this only works if we re-evaluate what pleasure is. She posits that activism itself can be a form of pleasure rather than self-flagellating sacrifice. After all, how can we keep going if we live in a constant state of self-denial? Both pleasure and panic are ephemeral feelings. They are not sustainable feelings. Activism, commonly associated with uphill struggle and tireless effort, often leads to burnout. Maree Brown contends that activism can incorporate pleasure into it, as well as act alongside it. We can feel joy from being activists and encourage others to act rather than cultivate cultures of climate anxiety, depression and shame. 

Pleasure should no longer be defined by backward-looking oppressive institutions. Pleasure can be gained from, and alongside, activism. Pleasure can be seeing the colour of the sky, fighting for futurity, Black liberation. Pleasure need not sacrifice the safety of the planet or oppress others. By utilising pleasure and incorporating it into activism, perhaps we can combat nihilistic climate depression brought about by activist burnout. For Maree Brown and perhaps Monae herself, pleasure is derived by liberation from the capitalist establishment. Pleasure is freedom and justice. 

Image Credit: oatsy40/ CC BY 2.0 via Flickr 

Scientists highlight the importance of ethics in tackling the next global pandemic

0

Estimates predict that there is currently more than a one in four chance of another global pandemic in the next decade, and scientists are seeking to find ethical solutions.

However, scientists are unable to estimate what kind of pandemic it will be. Whilst it could be a coronavirus (like COVID or SARS) or influenza, there is also the possibility of something which has not been seen before. This unknown future threat is referred to by The World Health Organisation as “Disease X”.

The threat of “Disease X” has seen scientists start preparations. This has involved the “100 day mission” which aims to develop a vaccine for use within 100 days of an outbreak of a new pandemic. 

Ongoing preparations have also started raining questions concerning medical ethics and priorities. 

In a newly published book from Oxford University press, Oxford’s Professor Dominic Wilkinson and Professor Julian Savulescu (National University of Singapore) tackle the question of an ethical approach to pandemics.

In it, Professor Wilkinson writes: “Pandemics raise the deepest ethical questions about the value of life, and how to weigh health against liberty. There is no simple formula.”

He adds that during the COVID-19 global pandemic and lockdowns, politicians said that “We need to follow science”. Professor Wilkinson worries that “science can’t tell us whether we should have a lockdown, or mandatory vaccination. For that we need thoughtful, careful ethical analysis”.

On the subject of priorities, the issues seen during COVID; i.e. not being able to treat everyone who needs a hospital bed, ventilator, oxygen or a vaccine are drawn to light. The book also stresses  the conflict of prioritising national versus international interests as well as the difficult barter between protecting public health during a pandemic and maintaining and growing economic activity.

These conflicts highlight the need to factor in ethics when attempting to ease the impacts and find solutions to the future “Disease X”.

Professors Wilkinson and Savulescu have successfully assembled a group of international experts in ethics, economics, philosophy and law to examine and evaluate the problems and lessons from COVID-19. Hopefully, they can distill the best solutions for future pandemics.

Have you Met the King? The Met Gala and the Coronation have more in common than you might think

0

I always get inordinately excited about the Met Gala. I spend hours the next day going through the photos of the Gala, choosing my favourites, insulting the worst dressed and pretending like my opinion at all matters or that anyone asked for it. This year, however, the Met Gala happened to be in the same week as another event of enormous grandeur and splendour: the Coronation. It occurred to me that both are more similar than they may seem, though they took place thousands of miles apart.

They both have star-studded guest lists. Well, the Coronation had quite an eclectic assembly of people, as though the King had forgotten to invite enough people. It gives the impression that he went through his contacts and texted whoever could come. Lionel Richie? Yeah, he’ll get on with Andrew Lloyd Webber. Emma Thompson? She was great in  Nanny McPhee, put her in the front row. Penny Mordaunt? Everyone else said no- so let’s have her. 

Another thing crucial to both ceremonies is what we call pomp and splendour for the Coronation and campness for the Met Gala. The Coronation became a red carpet for the press. ‘What colours were in?’ ‘Ooh, did you see what the king was wearing?’ ‘I want one of those royal girdles for myself.’ 

I am personally not well acquainted with fashion. I have a rotation of the same clothes that I hope no one notices. My idea of fashion is wearing the same pair of jeans for a week, with a shirt and rolled-up sleeves. Anna Wintour I am not. However, I don’t think this is a prerequisite to judge the clothes either of the Coronation or of the Met Gala. As Simon Cowell would frequently say on the X factor: ‘you’re the one trying to have a singing career, not me’. They’re the ones trying to look fashionable, not me (evidently). 

Both events are undoubtedly controversial for reasons that at points overlap. Both are controversial for their unapologetic extravagance in a time when the country has the dark cloud of inflation looming over it. Despite the supposedly pared-down ceremony, it can seem insensitive and unfair that the king gets to ride in a golden carriage with gold trappings and jewels and riches. The Met Gala, similarly, looks like a scene from the Capitol in the Hunger Games, with everyone wearing opulent gowns whilst most are struggling to make ends meet.

It’s a sensitive issue. I understand that argument and I understand that people, quite fairly, take issue with the ostentation of each event. One is perhaps more unfairly criticised than the other. The Met Gala last year raised $17.4 million for charity; the Coronation cost the taxpayer tens of millions for security and the procession. 

However, other arguments for the existence of the royal family aside, I think that the coronation provides the country with a moment of aesthetic splendour. It may not seem worth it in the moment, but the unusualness of the event occuring in the 21st century causes such great pleasure. It is almost like buying a ticket to a ball – you can’t easily justify spending so much on a single night of your life. But it is a moment that most people won’t ever forget. 

The Coronation is a moment of great campness, like the Met Gala. It is a moment that is extravagant for extravagance’s sake. It is like inviting people to your house for a dinner party and putting out the fine china, the crystal glasses, the things you would never dream of using on a normal day. Although, if the King was crowned in a college, it would probably get shut down by the porters before he even had got the crown on his head. Yet the event provides us with joy from the fact we get to see something aesthetically pleasing, something that hasn’t happened for over half a century. There is something valuable in that. 

This country is beset by an inequitable distribution of wealth. However, the monarchy is the wrong place to direct your vitriol. They provide the country with occasions that will never be forgotten, occasions of enormous campness. When was the last time Elon Musk put on a concert for everyone?

Perhaps the Monarchy would have softened some of this vitriol by giving away part of their estate. The Royals don’t pay inheritance tax – what if they gave the same amount away to charity? Or what if the Queen in her will had left everyone in the UK five pounds? I think that would have made them a lot more popular. Caesar left everyone in Rome 300 sesterces in his will – if he could do it, why couldn’t she? 

I also know that this argument won’t change any people’s minds. People’s hatred for the royals sometimes seems to be innate, similar to a distaste for marmite or sardines. But hopefully it can explain part of the joy that people from every corner of the country gain from the Royal Family.

Image Credit: UK Parliament/ CC BY-NC 2.0 via Flickr