Thursday, May 1, 2025
Blog Page 185

The Brookes Side

0

Michael Pista examines the differences between Oxford University and Oxford Brookes…

Living in the student city of Oxford is such a unique experience. In a place holding two large universities, chaos and activity is expected. However, the life of a Brookes student – campus, home, social – is slightly different to the life of an Oxford University student. Although we share a similar environment, your culture and our daily lives differ.

In relation to our schedules and how we spend our time on campus, I suspect it’s unlike that of an Oxford University student. At Brookes, our courses are typically taught in lectures, then solidified in seminars. Our lectures are usually two hours long and used for introducing, explaining and exploring new content. This is done in large groups with minimal participation. Most of the time, seminars come right after lectures, and they last for about an hour. Here we are in smaller groups discussing the content learned, exploring it further, and clarifying things where needed. This is an opportunity for us to dig deeper and interact with the content, as well as with each other. This structure works well and manages to effectively teach difficult topics and concepts. 

On a normal week, we can expect four days on campus, with a lecture and seminar on each day. Occasionally, as a part of certain courses, workshops require attendance. This would usually be an opportunity to work on more practical skills. For example, a ‘communication skills for lawyers’ workshop is required as part of the Law LLB course, where practical court etiquette is taught. As Brookes students, we are fortunate enough to have a dedicated bus route with Oxford Buses (U5). This service is free to all Brookes undergraduates, and is a lifesaver all year round in terms of saving time and money. 

While on campus, there is also plenty to do. One of our greatest features is access to modern sporting facilities such as pitches, courts and gyms. These facilities are available to Brookes students at all times, for free or for just a small fee. Going to the gym on campus can save almost £15 every month when compared to other memberships in the area.

Term-time home life has proved to be a positive experience for Brookes students as well. We have a selection of university and private company accommodations available to us. Typically they are in the areas of Headington and Cowley, as these are close to the campus. Luckily,most of the student accommodation also falls on our free bus route, resulting in incredibly convenient, free travel to campus or town. Furthermore, Oxford Brookes provides affordable houses for students in the same areas. The prices are fair and facilities are of high quality- no complaints.

One thing we may have in common is that after hard work comes a hard party. Oxford is one of the best student cities in the UK, and caters to us in endless ways. The diversity of food and drinks, and entertainment is one of the best things about it. Our favourite restaurants include European cuisine such as ‘Moya’ just by St Clements,or Nepalese cuisine such as ‘Yeti’ in Cowley. For some well-priced and deserved drinks, the ‘Swan and Castle’ is a regular, in addition to smaller and cosier pubs such as the ‘Corner House’ in Headington. When on a bigger mission, and celebrating hard, visits to clubs such as ‘Atik’ and ‘The Bridge’  are a must. These are amazing nightclubs right in the heart of Oxford, that are loved by us all. When the party’s over, making use of the parks and greenery around Oxford is essential. Among our favourites definitely has to be ‘South Park’, or the ‘Shotover Country Park’. These make for great walks and talks, and are definitely popular among the Brookes students living in the surrounding areas. As well as this, we all make sure to make use of the brilliant museums such as the ‘Ashmolean’, and other attractions such as the ‘Botanical Gardens’, which are all free to us students. Not to forget, visiting the ‘New Theatre’ and catching a show has also proved to have been fantastic. A breathtaking tribute to ‘Pink Floyd’ was on just before the new year, and it was the best £30 spent!

Living in Oxford as a Brookes student is very pleasant and (most of the time) trouble-free. The city is incredibly well adapted for all the students that live there, and our universities act as great support.

Despite holding two large, very different universities, everything is in order. While our learning environment and methods may perhaps differ, I suspect our social lives are very similar. After all, every student is always on a hunt for a bargain and fun university memories.

Crap start to term: Hazmats remove waste from Univ as students face fine

0

University College’s messy discovery earlier this week sparked what has since been coined the ‘Oxshit’ scandal. 

College residents awoke to discover that a student had defecated in a ground floor bathroom in the Durham Building II, which houses first-years. Univ told Cherwell: “On 16 January it was reported that a shower in a student accommodation block had human faeces spread across the seating, walls and the flooring of the shower. On further investigation it became clear that the shower had been used as a lavatory.”

An email sent by college soon after the incident’s discovery threatened residents of the building with, “a £1000 fine to get an external cleaning company in” if the culprit themselves, or the residents collectively, did not clean up the mess before the end of the day. Univ further told Cherwell: “As a result of this incident the College has closed the shower block until a professional cleansing company equipped to deal with such biohazards is able to clean and disinfect the area concerned.”

Since the original email, the figure of £1000 may alter, depending on the actual costs. A statement the College made to Cherwell made it clear that: “The costs associated with this sort of cleaning, in the absence of any student owning up to the incident, will be shared among residents in the normal way.” 

University College’s original request was that the building’s occupants cleaned up the mess themselves. The College left gloves and cleaning products in the bathroom for this, and withdrew scouting from the building. 

However, this request was not fulfilled. Instead, Univ students have reported to Cherwell that they saw two people in Hazmat suits entering the affected block on January 17th

When asked to comment on the JCR reaction and plans, the JCR President, Shermar Pryce, told Cherwell: “It is our hope that the college administration will consider the potential impact on students who were not involved in the incident before rendering any decision. From my interactions with the relevant staff at Univ, it is clear they are also cognizant of the potential injustice of such a fine and are sympathetic to the students’ predicament. 

“While I am unable to comment on the specifics of a hypothetical response from the JCR in the event of the imposition of monetary fines, I can assure you that we stand in solidarity with the affected students, particularly in light of the ongoing cost of living crisis.” 

The reaction to this incident has sparked a feeling of disgust among both students and staff. 

The email the students received the following day described such behaviour as “repulsive” going “beyond any bounds of what could be considered reasonable.” 

Pryce told Cherwell: “the reaction of the student population at Univ to the recent incident in the accommodation bathroom has been one of disgust, dismay, and disbelief.”

When asked how they aim to address the incident from the wellbeing perspective of the student involved Univ told Cherwell:

“The College prides itself on being a community and a family. The behaviour of the student involved in this incident has fallen well below the standard we should be able to expect of a member of our community and we hope for better in the future.”

A further email from Univ shows that the Domestic Bursary still intends to process the fines, but acknowledged “I understand that this news may evoke feelings of consternation and disappointment among you.”

No Sex in the City

0

Once upon a time a young woman came to study amongst the idyllic spires of Oxford. She dreamed of being ‘Crazy in Love’ as she strolled hand-in-hand across the cobblestones, having ‘Sex on Fire’ beside a bookcase in the corner of the Old Bod, and of a handsome PPEist proclaiming his love to her by means of a placard and a stereo in the middle of Broad Street. 

Instead, she soon discovered that she was not Crazy in Love, but rather driven crazy by her weekly essay; having sex that was far more forgettable than explosive. She was often found standing in the middle of Broad Street having yet another existential crisis, fuelled by her dwindling academic prospects and her romantic disillusionment that now involved ‘she’s as well as ‘he’s. 

As I performed my umpteenth walk of shame down Broad Street at the end of last term, clenching my best Ann Summers lace bra under my arm, I couldn’t help but wonder, is romance dead? And if so, who killed it? Or had I just been brainwashed by a childhood of Richard Curtis films into thinking that there ever was such a thing? Welcome to ‘No Sex in the City’, a hopeless (and single) romantic’s attempt to put words to the often gruelling, but exhilarating, struggles of dating at Oxford University. 

I recently read about a virgin in her late twenties who found the ‘love of her life’ through writing a sex and relationships column. And so, here goes… What’s the worst that can happen? I find people throwing stones at my window overwhelmed by a desire to have me as their regular booty call? Or my innocent friends banging on my door to burn me at the stake after I expose all of their worst sexual escapades? 

There are over 25,000 students at Oxford University. I only need one. And I’m not picky, but you better be good looking, funny and about 500 other things (I can send the list to any potential prospects). From incestuous college flings, uncontrollable horniness around housemates, to passing a one night stand on the tescalator, Oxford certainly throws up its challenges. But has romance become too much to expect? If you search for ‘love’ on SOLO, you’ll find over 9 million results…so we certainly have enough reading on the topic. 

Watching  some of my friends’ beautiful and mature  relationships certainly helps to expel any cynicism I might have and so, I’m optimistic. Single life is the most practical option for many students ; some of us are simply trying to make it out the other side of this place with a degree in hand. I’ve tried that approach – telling myself I’m far too busy and important to be obsessing over my love life, but then I find myself coming to the same realisation as Bridget Jones, “that unless something changes soon [I’m] going to live a life where my major relationship was with a bottle of wine”. At least in my case, I’ve had three major relationships: with a bottle of wine, gin, and tequila. 

According to a Student Room survey, 35% of Oxford graduates found their true love at uni and they fared as most likely to marry their university love at 79%. I’m not setting out to be part of that statistic but I’d certainly like to rack up a few romantic anecdotes that don’t start with something like “that time in the Bridge toilets”. 

I’ve asked friends who are familiar with the show, which ‘Sex and the City’ character I most resemble, and I’m chuffed when I’m told that, of course, I’m Carrie. For those of you who don’t know, that means I’m a successful columnist living in New York who is funny, sexy, insightful and incredibly attractive (okay, you got me, I don’t possess all of her qualities). She’s the natural leader of the iconic friendship group, strong willed and ever optimistic about finding true love. But I also recognise that I share the qualities I’d rather ignore: she’s self-absorbed, has a problem with boundaries, and let’s face it, spent 6 seasons, 2 films and a reboot completely obsessed with love, sex and men. 

It’s no secret that many of the tropes of the show are outdated and controversial, and in ways, have instilled many negative ideas about relationships and beauty standards in me, personally. The show is the inspiration behind this column but its similarities end here because unlike Carrie, it’s not going to take me a decade of writing it to find ‘the one’ (it better not because a graduate writing for Cherwell is just too pathetic). 

The Cherwell Sex Survey last year found that you’re most likely to find someone to bring home in Plush and offering advice on finding sexual partners, a respondent said that “Piers Gav helps”. I’ve frequented Plush more regularly and filled out a membership form for Piers Gav, but to no avail. So it’s time for some new advice.

Because I’m a finalist and obviously have little work to do, I’ll be devoting this term to an experiment in Oxford dating. The number of Tinder dates I’ve had rivals the number of lectures I’ve attended since coming to Oxford and Cupid’s arrow over here at Cherpse has always missed the target. But I’m not giving up on love and in the name of my non-existent Cherwell readership, I’ll leave no stone unturned. I’ll be sharing my own experiences as well as the anecdotes of others, in an effort to shed light on what sex and dating is really like at Oxford. But I’d also love to hear from you! Your stories, suggestions and questions (maybe scrap that one because who am I to be answering them) and if you so wish, date offers. 

XO

Dolores Grey
Email [email protected] to get in touch.

Census data shows Oxford is getting smarter 

0

The most recent census data, published January 10th, shows that Oxford’s residential population is one of the best educated nationwide. Oxford, a city which has education at the heart of its local economy, is getting smarter. 

The number of Oxford residents with no or lower level qualifications is falling, while the proportion of the population with higher-level qualifications is considerably increasing. Census data shows that 48.1% of Oxford’s usual resident population holds degrees and high-level vocational qualifications (Level 4), a significant increase from the previous 42.6%. 

Leader of Oxford City Council, Susan Brown, told the council’s news feed that the City council aims to “encourage employers and developers to ensure more local people are developing skills, gaining qualifications and accessing high value, well paid jobs”. Oxford’s Level 3 (A-Levels, BTEC national levels, NVQ level 3 and equivalents) attainment average has seen a substantial rise; it has risen from 17.8% to 20.6%. This is far higher than the county of Oxfordshire’s level 3 and 4 averages at 17.1% and 42.0%. 

The City Council has said it is investing in the “growth of the knowledge economy”. Roles in teaching, research and healthcare are being actively promoted. Those sectors are increasingly attracting a highly qualified workforce. Additionally, the census data suggests that far more graduates are choosing to settle down in Oxford after finishing their courses to contribute to the growth of the education sector. Moreover, the Oxford City Council has enabled the increase of the number of organisations paying the Oxford Living Wage, which is currently set at 90% of the London Living Wage, to stimulate local growth.

Other than London, Oxford ranks in the UK’s top 5 for percentage of population with a level 4 qualification or more. Those that beat Oxford include St Albans (53.0%), Elmbridge (52.1%) and Cambridge (55.8%).

In recent years, increased opportunity to join the workforce, as well as to do apprenticeships and non-formal qualifications, seeks to benefit the local economy. The strategy of Oxford City Council may well continue to make Oxford’s resident population smarter.

Motion to disaffiliate from NUS over antisemitism report withdrawn from Oxford SU

0

Following an independent investigation that found evidence of extensive antisemitism within the National Union of Students (NUS), a motion to call a referendum on disaffiliation was put to the Oxford University SU Student Council. However, the motion was withdrawn over concerns that it lacked clarity.

The motion, proposed by Magdalen JCR president Ciaron Tobin and seconded by Mundher Ba-Shammakh, claimed the SU should disaffiliate from the NUS because the SU “serves the interest of Oxford students more”, citing “the horrendous issues the NUS has continually been associated with” alongside “numerous robust reasons including financial cost”. The motion resolved to “call a binding referendum on the SU’s continued affiliation with the NUS, with a view to disaffiliating from the NUS”.

An amendment was proposed by Joshua Loo to change the wording of the motion to clearly state that “in light of antisemitic conduct in the NUS and the findings of the report, the question of continued affiliation should be put to the membership”. Introducing his amendment in the council meeting, Loo spoke of the antisemitism report as “pretty grim” and showing “utterly contemptible behaviour”.

A report was published on 12th January on Rebecca Tuck KC’s independent investigation into antisemitism within the NUS which the union commissioned itself in May 2022. According to NUS, the report that has emerged subsequently is “a detailed and shocking account of antisemitism within the student movement”. The report itself states that the investigation found “numerous instances of antisemitism” including antisemitic tropes and holding Jewish students responsible for the actions of the Israeli government. One testimony in the report noted “I never initially entered student politics to talk solely about Jewish issues, but my time in the movement became defined with defending Jewish students’ rights to even be in the room”. In another incident, a Jewish student was targeted with a tweet that “invoked the notoriously antisemitic blood libel … that Jews use the blood of babies or young children to make Matzah”.

Following the report, the NUS states that “[t]here is no place for antisemitism within NUS and we are committed to ensuring that Jewish students feel safe and welcome in every corner of our movement”. The NUS has developed an “action plan”, based on the investigation’s recommendations, that includes establishing “[p]ermanent formal representation for Jewish students”.

In debating whether Loo’s amendment should be accepted, discussion at the SU Student Council meeting shifted to reasons for and against disaffiliation. Members of the council meeting spoke with frustration of limited SU budgets, especially for the Disabilities Campaign and the LGBTQ+ Campaign, and noted that the SU pays about £20,000 in NUS membership fees. Others expressed concern that disaffiliation would dilute the SU’s influence on student issues that extend beyond Oxford.

A representative from the Oxford Jewish Society (JSoc) said they had been disturbed by the contents of the antisemitism report and wanted to make sure the NUS had the best chance of actualising the report’s recommendations. The JSoc representative asked for clarification on the motive of the motion, noting that if the motion was primarily motivated by the potential financial and bureaucratic benefits of NUS disaffiliation then the timing was unfortunate as the ensuing debate would revolve around antisemitism and possibly impact Jewish students. Ciaron Tobin, the motion’s proposer, was unavailable for discussion as he was attending the meeting online and had lost connection.

Mundher, the motion’s seconder, told Cherwell: “My reasons for [supporting disaffiliation] are [three] fold; [antisemitism], dissatisfaction in the NUS and a view that money can be better spent on a local level. First and foremost [antisemitism] at the SU is something that cannot be ignored – to represent students you must represent students of all faiths and when there is a pattern of behaviour among the higher levels of this organisation that has spanned the last decade […] I cannot stay silent. […]

“Secondly I [believe] the NUS spends a great deal of time embroiled in policy debates, activism and political dealings unrelated to student issues and while I welcome any student who feels empowered enough to take on a national issue and attempt to affect change on a matter they deeply care about, I do not believe that extends into the duties of the NUS. The NUS has one and only one remit and that is to fight for the interests of students, be it for increased bursaries, rent cuts [or] student support from the government […].

“And finally the Oxford SU pays £20,478 in membership fees to the NUS a year, that money can and should be spent on our students which we have a moral duty to look after, with SU money going to local issues we have a better ability to […] deal with pressing issues such as the sexual harassment on our campus.”

Jojo Sugarman, JSoc President, told Cherwell: “My comment before, which I stand by was that, ‘The report confirms, as Jewish students have long been aware, that the NUS has a problem with antisemitism. We very much hope that NUS use this report as an opportunity to alter the hostile environment that it has created for Jewish students, by following the recommendations made by Rececca Tuck’. That comment was not made in relation to any talk of disaffiliation. As the representative of [J]ewish students, [JSoc] has not been spoken to by those proposing disaffiliation. Our main concern is to represent Jewish students and we try to stay away from political matters. We would need to speak to Jewish students and to learn more about the consequences of disaffiliation to determine whether it is the right thing to support.”

Members of the meeting debated different procedural means to change and clarify the motion, with suggestions ranging from delaying the motion to the next meeting or moving it to a special or ‘extraordinary meeting’. A general consensus emerged that withdrawing the motion altogether was the best option. This would allow for consultation with students likely to be affected with a view to submitting a new and improved motion in due course, although no concrete plans were made. By this point it had become apparent that the meeting was inquorate because it had been running for nearly three hours and too many members had already left. Ciaron Tobin reconnected briefly via video to withdraw his motion and the meeting was brought to a close. 

Peter Thiel bashes “Greta and the autistic children’s crusade” at Oxford Union

0

The Oxford Union opened its bicentenary year on Monday with an address by Peter Thiel, the entrepreneur and investor who co-founded Paypal and Palantir. He spoke primarily on the culture war in the West, arguing for what he called “anti-anti-anti-anti-classical liberalism”.  

Thiel began by asking the audience, “What is the antonym of diversity?” Someone shouted in reply, “University!” For the rest of the event, he delved into politically charged topics, declaring that “stagnation” is the greatest crisis of our time and to blame are universities, environmentalism, and the establishment. 

Thiel characterised the study of humanities as “flaky” and pointless, while he described climate change as “one of the controversial subjects of the sciences.” He also described the modern environmentalist movement as “Greta and the autistic children’s crusade”. Later, he encountered pushback on his comments during the Q&A period, with one student staying, “I’ve met Greta and she’s actually quite lovely,” resulting in cheers.

Thiel is currently the Chairman of Palantir and presumed to be its largest shareholder. The company has been contracted by NHS England to provide data services; it is also the current front-runner to win an additional £360 million contract, despite pressure from a coalition of civil liberties groups concerned about privacy, data security, and Palantir’s track record as a “key enabler” of mass surveillance and Donald Trump’s anti-immigration policies. When questioned on how he would fix the NHS given his lack of faith in government, Thiel quipped, “The NHS makes people sick,” and said, “The first step is to get out of the Stockholm syndrome.”

In brief, Thiel described the current world as “stalled” and “deranged” due to the overwhelming influence of the “centre-left zombie straightjacket” has replaced bygone values of “classical liberalism.” “It is all stalled out beyond belief,” he emphasised. Part of the solution, he said, is shifting public opinion, which is why these talks are important to him. 

A Union spokesperson acknowledged in a statement to Cherwell that some of its guest speakers may “hold views which are regarded as unacceptable”. However, the Union believes that it is central to their function as a debating society “to facilitate open and respectful discourse on controversial views and topics.” Thiel echoed this sentiment. He believes it is important  to discuss contemporary issues in a public forum, arguing that many modern woes, including stagnation, can be partially solved by shifting public opinion. 

Thiel also expanded on his contrarian views in a 2009 essay, saying, “I stand against confiscatory taxes, totalitarian collectives, and the ideology of the inevitability of the death of every individual. … Most importantly, I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.”

A prominent donor to Donald Trump’s electoral campaign in 2016, one member asked him once the floor was opened to questions, why he backed Trump. Thiel responded that it was based on a “very deep conviction that things were too far off track, too locked down, too stagnant.” As a member of the executive committee of Trump’s transition team, Thiel proposed that a top climate change skeptic be appointed to White House science advisor and that a bitcoin entrepreneur lead the Food and Drug Administration. The former US president has praised Thiel, saying once at a meeting after his 2016 victory, that the entrepreneur was “a very special guy.” Thiel continues to donate to conservative politicians in the US.

Union President Charlie Mackintosh told Cherwell: “I am incredibly proud that, two-hundred years on, the Oxford Union remains true to its founding principles of free speech and debate. By hosting people with differing views, the Union presents its members with unique opportunities to challenge viewpoints they disagree with and engage in open discussions.”

Driven: how Oxford’s BNOC culture is symptomatic of today’s political ills

0

Most people in Oxford know what constitutes a BNOC as the acronym for ‘Big Name on Campus’. Collins dictionary defines it as ‘a student who has gained wide recognition or notoriety among [their] peers’. These are the types who believe a degree is much more than just studying. They relentlessly engage in extracurricular activities, particularly in the Oxford Union where they regularly try and win votes by sending a flurry of copy-and-paste messages to members they may only have met once to try and secure a top position. 

All this activity is to secure a leadership position in a society whose main role is putting on events and finding speakers for them. When we see Union Slates (political running mates) named ‘Imagine’ and ‘Fulfil’ with huge promises to transform the Union, and sounding quite similar to a national election manifesto. It is clear to see the exaggeration of these pitches as like those of today’s politicians, who are bound to inaction by our broken system, they have little power to achieve any of this.

Instead, hidden behind the facade of these pitches is a common drive from wannabe-BNOCs to place themselves ahead of the rest of the pack. Will it help in the real world? Potentially it may, as in many highly competitive industries it takes a focused mindset to achieve this, and BNOCs will acquire employable skills in their roles. But then again, nowhere is it likely to have a whole three years to focus solely on getting to the top of your position, while simultaneously managing independent adult life and the complexities of it.

If we look to history as a judge, the Union, and Oxford as an institution, have produced some notable figures in public life today. Boris Johnson is a former Union President, with Michael Gove and Jacob Rees Mogg also BNOCs in their time. But that was thirty years ago, and times have changed in a manifold of ways. In politics, those playing the game are now seen by some on both the left and right as enemies. We only have to look at the scenes over electing a new speaker of the US House of Representatives to see that the establishment, rightly or wrongly, is under attack. It is clear we need innovation, not the status quo. The Union may have produced the politicians of today, but in an ever-connected social media-dominated society, it could be said to be unlikely to produce the politicians of tomorrow. 

The issue is that there is no other alternative clear-cut route into politics or top roles of society without connections in the field. The most ‘Oxford’ individuals in Oxford can be the Etonians and Winchesterians, but for the most part, are those from more humble backgrounds who aspire to be the Oxford-type, analogous with success. Whether this be from an internalised insecurity and or a career-driven mindset, it is a recipe for people putting themselves as a person before their stance as an individual. The normal path for a gifted student is Oxbridge for University but once here they find themselves overshadowed by a plethora of successful people with individual brilliance, and unable to continue standing out solely because of their academic excellence.

I believe the main reason for the BNOC culture in Oxford is the opportunity to make connections. Those coming from a top school are likely to already have many connections with top roles, their friend’s father might be the Director of a top company, and using a school like Eton’s repertoire gives a springboard from which a successful BNOC career seems like a given rather than an earned prospect. Those who are using Oxford to make their connections cannot be faulted for their proactivity, as these connections are an asset to have. However, the manner they are sometimes garnered is eyebrow-raising. “I only make friends with people who can help me in life, not because they’re actually my type of person.” This is a statement many will hear uttered during their time in Oxford, and is perhaps one of the saddest.  

I sympathise with students who have few connections before coming here; I am one of them. And I look to those who choose to disregard this extra-curricular area of Oxford life and instead fill their time with partying not with disdain but with acknowledgement. We at Oxford are free to choose how we engage with our student community. Becoming a BNOC is not a necessary but chosen path, and we should place enjoyment of our university experience on par with forming connections. It is very possible to do both. Those who enjoy the chase of becoming a BNOC should not be frowned upon, but we should recognise and respect every individual choice of how they consume university. Being a BNOC does not make you better than anyone else. It takes a person who thrives off attention, and validation from others, and those may not materialise to be helpful traits in the future. 

What is a glaring error in our politics is the desire to get to the top of the pile not because of what you believe in, but because you want the title out of vanity. The ‘Hackery’ of the Union and student politics alike, if left unchecked, will continue this cycle into the future. So perhaps it is not a bad thing that times are changing. When we look at the Harry and Meghan saga, the consequences of an institutional monarchy unable to be held to account become clear. Regardless of your opinion on the pair, the family drama and supposed treachery within is not a shining example of favouring the continuation of the monarchy. Yet the politics of today would be unlikely to produce a brilliant candidate for head of state either. We need a reevaluation of who politics is for, and what it is about. It is for the people, not the person. The sustenance of BNOC culture in Oxford is pervading the ills of politics we suffer from today, and the first step to tackling this challenge is to stop revering BNOCs and free students from the pressure of becoming one.

Image Credit: Jakub Trybull

Vivienne Westwood: Cultural Provocateur and True Original

When Vivienne Westwood was granted an OBE medal in 1992, she wore a sombre grey skirt suit to meet Queen Elizabeth II. Outside Buckingham Palace, she twirled for the photographers—sans underwear. The Queen was supposedly amused. 

The provocative mother of punk had little time for prudery or propriety. Westwood took the anti-establishment ethos of punk and allied it with haute couture, rewriting the rule book of fashion. While the designer may be remembered primarily for her sartorial ingenuity, she was also fiercely political, an enemy of convention, and a relentless climate activist. She was a rebel with a cause. 

From her early days of championing the punk look with then-partner Malcolm McLaren and the Sex Pistols, Westwood knew that fashion could—must—be political. “I was messianic about punk, seeing if one could put a spoke in the system in some way,” she said of the punk years. “ I realised there was no subversion without ideas. It’s not enough to want to destroy everything.”

Westwood and McLaren opened a scene-establishing boutique on King’s Road in 1971, which took on several lives, including rebranding as Sex in 1974 and as World’s End in 1979. It was a haunt of the bands she outfitted, a spiritual home for punk fashion, and a finger up at the establishment. The clothes were deliberately transgressive: bondage trousers, rubber skirts and safety pins mocked polite society. Westwood and McLaren designed the 1981 New Romantic-inspired Pirate collection, their entrée into high fashion, under the World’s End label before they parted ways. 

Westwood’s runways would continue to remix and invert historical references: crinoline re-cut as the ‘mini-crini’ took inspiration from 17th century style, corsets played with 18th century dress. She parodied British looks, reinventing materials such as tartan and Harris Tweed. Westwood relished the tension between conservative historical references and anarchic subversion. 

Her catwalk was also her political platform, though her activism extended beyond fashion. In 1989 she posed as Margaret Thatcher, whom she thought had done “real damage” to the world, for the cover of Tatler magazine over a caption that read: “This woman was once a punk.” Months after the shooting of the innocent Jean Charles de Menezes in London, T-shirts from her spring/summer 2006 collection were emblazoned with the slogan “I Am Not A Terrorist, Please Don’t Arrest Me”, in a bid to challenge the government’s proposed anti-terror legislation. In the July 2008 issue of Dazed, she incited readers to “Get a Life!”, subvert the status quo, and think about rising sea levels. 

Westwood was intensely committed to the fight against climate change. She launched her campaign to address climate change issues, Climate Revolution, at the closing ceremony of the 2012 London Paralympics; her autumn/winter 2015 show called for viewers to “VOTE GREEN”; placards at her spring/summer 2016 show penned the slogans “fracking is a crime” and “austerity is a crime”; she supported PETA, Oxfam, the Green Party, and rainforest charity Cool Earth. In 2015, she took the fracking debate to David Cameron—by driving an armoured vehicle to his house.  

Westwood was, in many ways, full of contradictions: a revolutionary honoured by the Queen, anti-consumerist despite her own business interests. Yet she did not turn away from the fact that fashion plays a huge role in the climate catastrophe. In fact, she was one of the first to raise her voice and demand that fashion do better.

Wags in the Rag

0

This week Ciara introduces the St John’s kittens…

One of the real joys of the vacation is getting to go home and spend time with my pets. Living in a city, there are less opportunities to spend time with animals, especially with the stress that term time often brings. Getting to see my three cats at home was the perfect way to decompress and unwind over the Christmas holidays. 

However, as I showed in this column during Michaelmas, and will continue to do this Hilary, there are plenty of pets within our own college communities that we can spend time with during term. Often brought in to help with student welfare, college pets become an integral part of their respective communities, and icons across the university. I found that I missed my cats even more than usual when I left to return home at the end of Michaelmas, but I took comfort in the fact that I would still get a chance to spend time with animals upon my return to Oxford 

The newest additions to Oxford’s collective of animals have recently moved into St John’s College. The President, Professor Dame Sue Black, welcomed three kittens to College during the winter vacation, and they were hugely anticipated by the community. After consulting all John’s students, the cats were given the names Case, Laud, and Baylie, after three well-known John’s Fellows. 

The college did have another cat in the past and a previous President kept chickens, but the kittens are the first pets that St John’s has had in some time. Described as a ‘cuddle of kittens’ by the President, they were brought to the college primarily to help with student and staff welfare and to make the college feel more homely. Once mature, the three will be encouraged to wander around the grounds to help destress any anxious students. They were introduced at a carefully chosen time of year and should  be mature enough to roam around outside once the weather improves, but for now they live in the President’s Lodgings which will remain their base.

Though they are still young, the kittens have already developed their own distinct characters. Case is the largest of the trio and has the biggest personality to match. He’s full of energy but he also loves a cuddle, and will surely welcome the adoration he is bound to receive. Baylie is described as the most handsome, though he is more timid than the others. Finally, there is Laud. Initially, the intention was to introduce only two cats,but when the President found out he was the runt of the litter and the last boy left, it seemed impossible to leave Laud behind. Despite his size, he runs the show, even stealing food from under the noses of his siblings. 

Indeed, the kittens’ cuteness will help them do their job well. They’ll be improving college wellbeing one purr at a time. . They will be fed and will sleep in the President’s Lodgings, but we hope that they will be all over the college in the coming months acting as welfare assistants. The kittens are a snuggly reminder of  the real value of having pets around college for comfort and support, and their ability to make what can be a daunting place feel just that little bit more like home.

Jessic

Time to BeReal…all the time

0

Phoebe Walls discusses how even the realest social media yet is subject to “late” realness.

Once a day phones across the world ping with the famous notification: ‘Time to BeReal – 2 mins left to capture a BeReal and see what your friends are up to’. BeReal provides spontaneous, unfiltered glimpses into friends’ lives, be it messy bedrooms or thousands of open tabs. Instagram offers the highlights but on BeReal, it’s acceptable to be out of focus and still in pyjamas at 2pm. The question stands: is this call for realness a burden or a blessing? 

BeReal is an ideal way to keep in touch. Rather than liking someone’s glamorous Instagram, you see them everyday at a random time. Most importantly, it feels real; no filters or time spent choosing the perfect curation of life’s highs. The opportunity to flick through the calendar and see exactly what you were doing one day two months ago is also strangely satisfying. Not to mention the end-of-year replay: a short video created by the app that allows users to watch the year flash before their eyes. BeReal captures the magic in the mundane. 

However, not everyone is being real. Despite the obvious yellow warning sign emojis, the pressure of the 2-minute timer is an idle threat. An increasing number of people post after the chosen time, sometimes as many as 20 hours late, at which point my phone is bombarded with notifications of a ‘late’ post. When it gets to that stage,  I wonder what the point is. Surelythen the app becomes just like any other social media platform. In a society where our identities are often defined by our online presence, the burden of being constantly available can make young people fear that they are boring. I admit I’ve sometimes wanted to wait until my makeup is fully blended, or I’ve worried about still being in a dressing gown at 11am after the timer has gone off. I’d rather post when I’m with my friends than when I’m sitting at my desk. It can also be frustrating when  I wake up to the notification with my eyes still clamped shut like a badger to then see someone else has waited twelve hours to boast their thrilling night out. 

Sometimes the ‘realness’ also creates unnecessary pressure. My feed is full of Oxford students studying at all hours of the day, which makes me feel guilty for relaxing during the vacation. Even on Christmas day, I was tormented by pictures of tutorial sheets and collections revision.

BeReal offers a sense of casual posting for people who prefer to maintain a sense of mystery to their online life. Those with one Instagram post to their name enjoy the lack of pressure on a photo that forms an archive only the user can see. It’s impossible to  stalk a BeReal account and stumble upon a tagged photograph of someone when they were 13 years old. Posts disappear and instead form personal, private calendars. Nevertheless, my Nana was frightened of the app and ran out of the room before the timer got a chance to capture her realness… 

It seems that the ticking time bomb of the BeReal notification is just another excuse to stay glued to our phones. Although less fake than the photo ‘dumps’ found on Instagram (a deliberate selection of photos), BeReal still offers its users the chance to post late and becomes like the forms of social media it has tried to estrange itself from. If we’re being truly real, this is just another online version of ourselves. Perhaps we should aim to spend more time in the real world, having fun with friends and doing things we love, rather than relying on social media to permit ‘realness’. Realness is all around us, we just have to let it in.