Friday, April 25, 2025
Blog Page 201

Covid, War, Climate change: the end of our globalised world?

Johannes Moehrle
-
0
Covid, War, Climate change: the end of our globalised world?

The last three years have presented us with a series of events that have shaken the world to its core; therefore, it went through irreversible changes that might alter the functioning of our globalised world. For those who haven’t guessed, I am referring to the Covid pandemic, the ongoing war in Ukraine, and the consequences of climate change. Looking at the rapid succession of global crises, it seems that the stars have aligned to weaken an interconnected world that has taken decades to build. 

Before the pandemic, it seemed like the only enemies of globalisation were protectionist and populist politicians and ideologies, which were gaining traction in most western countries. Euroscepticism has progressed in all EU countries, Brexit being the most obvious manifestation of it; across the Atlantic, even before Trump and the MAGA movement, the United States of America started slowly retracting from the world stage. Whilst many of us first opposed these protectionist tendencies, the past three years have changed our opinion on how we engage with other countries. In many cases, cooperation with a foreign power has become synonymous with dependency. 

The pandemic is the first crisis in line that has revealed the fragility of our globalised world. When international cooperation should have helped, it failed us. In the spring of 2020, countries worldwide set aside their ideals for better cooperation and solidarity in their attempt to secure their reserves of masks and ventilators. Even the government of former German chancellor Angela Merkel, a figurehead of a united Europe, ordered a ban on all exports of medical material to its neighbouring countries. Less than a year later, similar disputes resurfaced regarding the distribution of vaccines, where again, nationalism trumped cooperation.

The worldwide outbreak of Covid-19 also destabilised entire sectors of the world economy and disrupted international cooperation. Supply chains were interrupted since countries we relied on for all sorts of spare parts and materials locked down and closed their borders. The pandemic revealed how much we relied on other countries to produce the most trivial objects. It put the production of cars, computers, bicycles and many more essentials on hold, and as countries experienced successive infection waves, our international supply chains proved to lack resilience. China’s zero Covid policy, for instance, has repeatedly brought to halt the production and exportation of their products. The closing down of Shanghai, home to the world’s busiest container port, in April 2022 created a logjam that was felt globally across all industries. 

Vladimir Putin’s recent invasion of Ukraine, and the ongoing war that has resulted from it, represent another shock to our perception of a united world. Indeed, since the end of the Cold War, tremendous efforts were directed towards the integration of the former USSR into the Western globalised world. In 2001, the German government handed Putin the rare honour of addressing them on their home turf in the  Reichstag. There he spoke of European and world unity and expressed the wish to turn the page of the Cold War for good, saying that “For us (Russians), the Berlin Wall doesn’t exist anymore”, and that “the peace and unity of Europe should be a precursor to the peace and unity of the world.” Nevertheless, the hope for stronger cooperation with Russia started crumbling within the next decade. First, in 2014 when the annexation of Crimea created a diplomatic shift between western powers and Russia, and now, with the war in Ukraine, it looks like we are back to square one, albeit that we have developed a strong dependence on Russia from which we can’t seem to free ourselves. 

Europe has come to rely on Russian gas so much that it is now fearing a winter of cold and shortages since discovering that Putin is capable of using his position to turn the taps off. Even the strictest sanctions imposed on Russia seem to be dwarfed by the millions Europe sends to Russia every day as they hope to get through the coming winter. In the UK, it is not Russian gas on which we rely so much, but Russian money. Indeed, close allies of Putin have been investing in the London property markets for years, buying up football clubs, and donating to politicians’ campaigns and their parties. In both cases, whether money or gas, it gives Putin the upper hand to know that we cannot seriously harm him without harming ourselves. 

The relationship between the West and Russia has already disintegrated, but another diplomatic and economic bomb is waiting to explode: our dependency on China. If we’re having a hard time separating ourselves from Russia, we should start to face the fact that any attempt to distance ourselves from China will be considerably more arduous. Since China opened its door at the end of the last century, we have relied on its cheap labour and industrial development in nearly all sectors. China has become the leading import partner of most western countries, making us dependent on it and powerless against it. Most of our technological devices, clothes, nuclear reactors, and means of transportation can be traced back to China: a country with little regard for human rights and an aggressive approach to international law yet one which remains impossible to sanction economically. 

In recent years, Western powers have issued moral condemnation about the human rights abuses in China: whether it be the situation of the Uyghurs minority, the encroachment on Hong Kong’s democracy and freedom of speech, and the repression of anyone who dares to speak out against the Communist Party. Nevertheless, when it came to taking action, they were powerless, and our leaders could only go as far as boycotting the opening ceremony of the 2022 winter Olympics. The incoming PM Liz Truss has promised a tough stance on China and considers the country an official national security threat; similarly, the new German government is reconsidering its China policy. Nonetheless, there isn’t much either of these governments can do to reduce their dependency on China without limiting trade with it. 

We are in a situation where refusing to import any goods from (or indeed export goods to) China would be economic and political suicide for our leaders. This fact is becoming increasingly worrying as the mainland Chinese government repeatedly threatens Taiwan’s freedom. This insecurity is why the United States has started investing massively in its own production of microchips and semiconductors, as they feel that relying on China or Taiwan for these key technologies is no longer possible. Similarly, for the first time since the iPhone’s creation in 2007, has Apple decided to shift its production to India, a proof that the trust in China is crumbling because of its repeated lockdowns and its aggressive foreign policy.

If a pandemic, a war, and diplomatic tensions are not enough to weaken our trust in a global world, the consequences of climate change might force us to stop relying on others. Droughts, heatwaves, floods and other extreme climate conditions in remote parts of the world significantly impact our supply chains. Last month, a record-high heatwave and a drought in southwestern China forced factories in an entire region to shut. The water in the Yangtze River was running at an all-time low, meaning that factories and ships could no longer use its water for cooling and navigation, which delayed the production and transportation of goods. Such climatic incidents have global repercussions as they freeze supply chains for a significant proportion of the automobile and electronic industry, sectors which have already suffered from instabilities throughout the pandemic. 

Considering the past three years, the pandemic, the war, and the perceptible consequences of climate change, it seems unimaginable that we continue to trust the global nature of our world. We have learnt the hard way how partners can turn into enemies, how our global economy depends on the environment, and how different handling of a health crisis could lead to the collapsing of entire supply chains. Whilst the solution is not to barricade ourselves from others, it is also time to reconsider how we cooperate with others. For years, we have looked abroad for more and cheaper, yet as pleasant as this was, it seems that we cannot continue to rely solely on others’ resources and labour, independently of their political, environmental, and social situation. In the future, it would be foolish not to consider more than just a country’s economic attractiveness without asking ourselves whether some trade deals won’t leave us more vulnerable in the long run.

Image credit: Kentaro Iemoto/CC BY-SA 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

Careers and Connections – the One Woman Mission

Sophie Lord
-
0
Careers and Connections – the One Woman Mission

A question that instils immediate fear into the heart of any Finalist is the dreaded, ‘So, what are your plans for next year?’ Studying Theology (no, I don’t want to become a priest) any talk about careers, though inevitable, is immediately anxiety inducing. Though in these conversations I can describe the sort of job I would like, getting to this point was not easy – and not because I had no clue as to sort of the career route I wanted to go down. 

This reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend from home over the summer, who studies Law at Cambridge. After comparing parallel stories about the people we had met and catching up about the academic year that had past, she began to tell me about the deadlines she had missed for internships. She didn’t know where to look and when to apply, whilst other people on her course were being paid to go and work at a family member’s law firm. Rather fittingly, we concluded that career-hunting as the first member of your family to go to Oxbridge was in her words, a ‘one-woman mission.

Being an Oxbridge graduate is said to open doors – but not if you don’t know which doors to push. Thinking about careers requires a specific type of cultural knowledge. Undoubtedly, you can learn it yourself, but it is a world facilitated by familial connection and London-centeredness. I can speak to people at employment events and add as many people I want on LinkedIn, but the next person will not have to – and this is not fair.

So many of the industries that are consistently name-dropped are, to me, entirely enshrouded in mystery. Despite many of my friends attempting to explain to me what ‘consulting’ actually is, I still don’t fully understand – my favourite explanation so far, though, was that it is a ‘glorified pyramid scheme’. This could be because of my own ignorance, sure, but I wonder if it points to a slightly more significant issue.

Oxford is changing. Every year, the percentage of students from state-schools increases and the student body diversifies. Yet, when we are here, and we are on the brink of leaving the place we worked so hard to get into, there seems to be a void. The industries that want Oxbridge graduates still feel out of reach and unlike our University, they are still dominated by people from high socio-economic backgrounds and private schools. An Oxbridge degree will, ideally, let us get there regardless – but I doubt that the imposter syndrome I felt for years at Oxford will disappear anytime soon.

Even though I can attend networking events and add as many people as I want on LinkedIn, it is still just that – a ‘one woman mission’. I worry that even if I can enter the job sector I dream of, I won’t love it for long, and instead be clouded by imposter syndrome in an industry that was not made to include the voices of people like me.

Image credit: Janay Symonette/CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

University refused St Benet’s £40m lifeline…but why?

Cecilia Catmur
-
0
University refused St Benet’s £40m lifeline…but why?

The University of Oxford blocked a £40 million rescue offer to keep St Benet’s Hall open this summer. Instead it closed on 7th October 2022.  

John Barry, a businessman, offered to donate the multi-million pound sum to save St Benet’s Hall. He is the CEO of Prospect Capital, an $8.4 million investment company. 

The money was enough to sort out the College’s existing financial issues, grant the hall an endowment, introduce scholarships for poorer students, and give everyone a pay rise. 

The university’s statement confirmed this donation was refused owing to concerns over “ongoing financial uncertainty.” 

An Oxford University spokesman, similarly, said, “The university did not feel that the offers provided sufficient assurance of the long-term sustainability and independence of the hall.” 

Oxford’s vice chancellor wrote that attempts to save St Benet’s failed due to unease over “financial sustainability” and concerns “donors sought to influence aspects of the student experiences, nature and ethos of the hall.” 

The College’s independence was a pressing fear in negotiations. Those involved asked “How do we ensure this board will stay independent?” 

The university also refused to countenance the original board in negotiations. Instead Master, Richard Cooper, set up a new board to ensure no undue influence. However even this proposal was rejected at a University Council meeting on 9th May. Richard Cooper was “shocked” by this move. 

However Barry has countered claims he sought influence over the running of the college. He did not want to influence any “governance issues and issues having to do with education, teaching and scholarship.” He was “prepared to provide funding on terms that should have been acceptable to St Benet’s leadership and to the leadership of the university. These terms did not involve ‘control’ by me or ‘undue influence’ of any type.” He only asked for the names of the future board members to whom he was handing over £40 million. 

Barry Cooper confirmed, “To this day, I have been given no reason for the rejection of my offer.” He was given a statement concerning an “absence of adequate finance” when he questioned the decision. 

Oxford donations are reviewed by a whole committee. However one source involved in this investigation told the Spectator Barry passed “with flying colours”. 

Henry Woudhuysen was head of the committee which represents colleges to the university. He thought the Barry proposal “was more than appropriate, something that would really benefit the university.” 

A spokesman for the university told Barry Cooper: “The university did not feel that the offers provided sufficient assurance of the long-term sustainability and independence of the Hall.” Yet the university refused to explain why it felt the Barry was a threat to the Hall’s independence. 

Learning this, a student from St Benet’s, commented: “I don’t understand why the University would wait for Benet’s to pursue potential options for donors if it would end up rejecting these options anyway. I almost seems like they delayed starting the reallocation process in order to appear credible in giving the Hall a chance to be saved.”

Robert George, a Princeton professor and well-known public intellectual in the US, was in conversation with Barry, involved trying to save Benet’s. However, when he came to Oxford in March to be involved in negotiations rumours were spreading that he was an employee of John Barry so potentially compromised. He reflected there were simply a lot of people in Oxford “who would like to see Benet’s fail.” 

One St Benet’s fellow told the Spectator, “Increasingly the people who put themselves forward for Oxford’s committees dislike traditional Oxford and religious halls. These people tend to be more aggressively secular.” Jonathan Price, a fellow of St Cross College and Pusey House commented Oxford’s secularisation aligns with “centralisation and modernisation.” 

Albert Hawkins, reallocated to LMH, commented: “It is a great pity that a wonderfully diverse PPH, full of people from many different backgrounds and cultures, had to close – unnecessarily as it turns out. It sends a terrible message to would-be donors that the university can afford to decline major gifts. It is noted that new students were being allocated to Benet’s when the university knew that Benet’s was facing a degree of financial difficulty.”

Alexander Stafford, a former alumni, now Tory MP, commented, “The closure of the hall feels akin to losing a friend. It nourished me, forming who I am as a person. It is hard to believe the hall will no longer be there waiting for me. It was a truly wonderful place.” 

He finds the refused saving of the college “remarkable.” Mr Stafford feels “the university should have permitted the Hall to continue operating with its newly secured financial support. There needs to be a thorough and urgent examination of the reasons why this was not allowed to happen.” 

This decision also impacted many staff, academics and administrators, who lost their jobs. 

St Benet’s has sold its buildings to St Hilda’s College. Its two buildings were in central Oxford and thought to be worth millions of pounds.  

Editors note: This article was updated on Friday 14th October to correct an error that appeared in the print edition which suggested that it was St Benet’s Hall, rather than the University, which blocked the donation.

Image Credit: Janet McKnight/CC BY 2.0

Exclusive: The SU controversies that dogged Liz Truss’ time at Oxford

Bintia Dennog and Olivia Boyle
-
0
Exclusive: The SU controversies that dogged Liz Truss’ time at Oxford

Cherwell can exclusively reveal that during her time at Oxford, Liz Truss was involved in several damaging Student Union (OUSU) controversies, including the alleged mishandling of an LGBTQ+ welfare issue and an attempt to abolish the SU’s Women’s VP position.

After being approached on the SU helpline for an LGB welfare rep [as it was called at the time], Truss reportedly yelled across the room “is there anyone here from the LGB?”, which the distressed caller heard. This instance of carelessness led to a formal investigation. Instead of apologising, she branded this as a personal attack describing it as a “petty device” that targeted her for having different political convictions. The Welfare Officer at the time, Ros Wynne-Jones, clarified that the matter would have been dealt with in the same manner irrespective of Truss’s involvement as it was first and foremost a welfare issue. Yet, it became an issue “squeezed out by the orthodoxy of intolerance”, as Akaash Maharaj, the OUSU president put it, and was thenceforth forgotten.

When Balliol’s 1994 JCR committee proposed the abolition of their college’s Women’s Officer on grounds that it was “unfair and patronising that a single special-interest group should be given restricted representation on the JCR committee”, Liz Truss, the OUSU’s Executive Officer at the time, was vocally supportive of the motion. She claimed in The Oxford Student that the role of Women’s Officer was “patronising and sexist” arguing for “less women in women’s groups and more in the main political arena”. The Vice-President (Women) of the SU called this “very short-sighted and a huge step backwards” especially in macho 1990s Oxford.

A year later, Truss also slammed the position of VP (Women), calling it “completely undemocratic” as it was elected by only the women’s committee. Simultaneously, she questioned whether the OUSU was “representative of student opinion”. Her proclamation was evidently at odds with the general student feeling and the role of women’s officer was reaffirmed by an overwhelming majority. A few years later, Oxford East MP Annalise Dodds, was elected president of the SU. Dodds is currently the Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities – a position simply called ‘Minister of Equalities’ in the government cabinet.

Along with her activities in OUSU, Truss was involved in two different Oxford political societies. She started out as a member of the Oxford Liberal Democrat Society, rose to President and later changed allegiances and became a supporter of the Conservative Party. The OUSU quickly distanced themselves from the issues surrounding Liz Truss’s actions and in the last month, Liberal Democrats did the same. After Truss took up the premiership, Oxford Lib Dems (OULD) had one thing to say: “sorry” (Tweet from 06/09/22).

The Lib Dems are not the only ones feeling the need to apologise on the PM’s behalf. Her old Merton Politics tutor, Marc Stears, opened up earlier this year about observing Truss in her Oxford years. He remembered that “she almost never backed down” and yet, she also had “a capacity to shift, unblinkingly, from one fiercely held belief to another”. Stears worries that this approach leads one to neglect the wisdom of those with more experience and expertise.

The Student Union conflicts involving Truss sparked other significant debates on freedom of speech and political correctness within the OUSU; issues which have only grown since she left Oxford. At the time, a 1994 letter to the editor that argued against the anti-Truss backlash also claimed that ‘inverted prejudice and political intolerance’ must be overcome in order to make the OUSU relevant again. The extent to which personal proclamations that conflict with the official policy of the SU should be allowed became a cause for deliberation. Questions were also raised over whether the source of these remarks should be clarified. The president of the Student Union at the time claimed that suppressing self-criticism would only harm the SU, and that internal debate is fundamentally valuable; the opinion’s level of merit is irrelevant. However, he did accentuate that the organisation’s reputation was “invariably the loser”.

Truss graduated from Oxford with a degree in PPE in 1996. She has described her university-aged self as a “professional controversialist”.

The battle for our screens

Khusrau Islam
-
0
The battle for our screens

The logical position seems to be that streaming will kill off cinema. Watching a film from your sofa is much more convenient than going out to the cinema, and often works out much cheaper. Instead, I would argue that streaming and the cinema will enter a symbiotic relationship.

Matt Damon, while eating some wings, explained that the reason studios don’t take chances on smaller movies anymore was because of the rise of streaming and the death of the DVD. A film used to generate revenue at the box office and also in the form of DVDs. 

But streaming killed the DVD. In the UK, the Subscription Video on Demand (SVoD) market (streaming services) rose from <£1mn in 2009 to £495mn in 2018; the physical video rental market fell from £200mn to £30mn, and physical video film sales fell from £1.31bn to £451mn in the same time period. Films no longer generate that second form of revenue. 

Growth of the theatrical release market has stagnated over that period too. While box office revenue has increased about 16%, the revenue-per-film has decreased from £2.23mn to £1.66mn. 

A cinema’s success depends on the performance of each particular film. Blockbusters like No Time to Die helped the recovery of the cinema in the “post-pandemic” era. Blockbusters reliably attract customers, so they can help offset the risks associated with playing a less-publicised film. 

Conversely, a service like Netflix only generates income through subscriptions. While a successful hit like Squid Game can attract more subscribers, it does not generate revenue itself. 

As producers of exclusive Netflix content did not reap any rewards for success, there was no incentive to generate quality content, and since a bad movie generates as much direct revenue as a good one on a streaming service (i.e., none), Netflix felt it could afford to take a chance on a wide array of content. 

Such a subscription model suited Netflix very well. Until it didn’t. Over the past year, Netflix’ share price has fallen ~63% since the beginning of the year. Their growth has stagnated, and they lost 970,000 subscribers in the second quarter of this year. Their production costs are huge, so while they had a positive cash balance at the end of the most recent quarter of ~$6bn, their streaming content obligations represent a future cash outflow of $16bn payable over the next three years. Moreover, Netflix’ growth opportunities have been threatened by other major SVoD players entering the scene. The fragmentation of the market makes it harder for Netflix to acquire more subscriptions, as consumers have other options for content (and with current cost-of-living issues, having any service or more than one is more and more unlikely). So, investors are less convinced by Netflix’ growth-at-all-costs approach – the growth has shrunk, while the costs have increased. 

That’s where the theatrical-SVoD hybrid model comes in, where movies are released in theatres and then on subscription services, e.g., a film having a shorter theatrical run, before joining a subscription service’s content library, e.g., Marvel films joining Disney+ soon after leaving theatres. 

While subscriptions generate constant, recurring revenue, theatrical releases have the capacity to generate more revenue per title – Universal earned $500mn in 2020 from digital titles, while Avengers Endgame made $800mn at the domestic box office. So, while there are risks and costs associated with theatrical releases, including the risk of poor performance killing interest or marketing costs, a successful film can constitute a major payday and attract interest to the service, providing a new growth opportunity.

Successful hybrid releases would 1) generate their own revenue, paying for themselves and other titles, and 2) attract subscribers for the platform. And the box office may have taken a hit during Covid-19, but in the UK at least, it was still worth a sizeable £556mn post-pandemic. On the consumer side, direct revenue from titles would encourage greater quality, and would give wider access to content in the form of cinemas. 

The theatrical release is not dead. And the subscription market is threatened by itself. But if the two were to combine successfully, it would not only be mutually beneficial for them, the consumer would also win out in the end.  

Image: CC2:0 via Unsplash

Wags in the Rag

Ciara Rushton
-
0
Wags in the Rag

Few of Oxford’s college pets are as iconic as Hertford’s college cat, Simpkin. When I first visited Oxford before applying, back in the lockdown summer of 2020, I remember walking past the Bridge of Sighs and coming across a black cat with beautiful long fur. Having heard of this mystical creature from a friend attending Hertford at the time, I was naturally awestruck at coming across such a celebrity. The name Simpkin, also held by three previous Hertford cats, comes from Beatrix Potter’s book ‘The Tailor of Gloucester’. The three previous Simpkins were all chosen as they had white chests and feet, resembling sub fusc, though the current cat is all black. 

Image credit: Charlie Hancock

Prior to his coming to Hertford in 2017 and being cared for by David Haxell, Hertford porter who kindly spoke to me for this piece, Simpkin’s life was rather tumultuous. He was originally a stray cat, living in the Torquay area, who was adopted from an animal shelter by a woman, but sadly was bullied by her other cats to the extent that he experienced extreme stress and began losing fur. When he returned to the shelter for treatment and re-homing, the shelter was sadly destroyed in a gale by a falling tree. All of the shelter’s animals had to be rehomed, and Simpkin was moved to Blue Cross Animal Home near Burford in Oxfordshire, where David found him whilst looking for a successor to the third Simpkin who had recently died. Since then, he has served as Hertford’s 4th Simpkin, and 5th college cat overall, carrying on a continuous tradition of cats at Hertford since the 1970s.

Described by his owners as ‘Feisty, Furry, and Formidable’, Simpkin enjoys invading libraries, curling up in students’ laps, and stroking and petting, though on his own terms. Many Hertford students speak adoringly of him, featuring on many an Instagram story throughout the term. He even has his own account, ran by the college’s JCR, testimony to how popular he is among students.

Though an extremely friendly and kind cat to most, Simpkin does have his enemies. He has notably been involved in a public feud with Walter, Exeter’s college cat, hiding in their college library and stealing Walter’s favourite seats and food. This led to him being banned from Exeter’s library in January 2022, yet defying this on multiple occasions. Though there has been less animosity between the two as of late, the saga negatively impacted Simpkin’s reputation, with the story even making it to Mumsnet where many declared themselves to be #TeamWalter, though many on Oxfess declared themselves Simpkin loyalists.

Despite this scandal, Simpkin remains a treasure of Hertford college, and continues to provide stability and comfort against the turmoil and stress of Oxford life. Like many other college pets, he holds an important place in the college community, as well as playing a significant role in everyday student welfare. Even outside of the college, it’s incredibly entertaining to see their adventures on social media, especially when missing my own cats at home. A true rags to riches story, Simpkin is a beloved member of the University, and undoubtedly one of its most famous animals.

Image credit: Charlie Hancock

Bop to the top

Phoebe Walls
-
0
Bop to the top

Bops are Oxford’s fancy dress parties that form some of my fondest memories in college. For bops held in college bars, there’s no need to trek to Atik and pay an arm and a leg just to walk through the metal detector. There’s no fumbling around for change for the cloakroom, only to run the risk of losing the precious scrap of paper which secures a reunion with the Oxford puffer at the end of the night. Unlike a club, a bop in college is full of people you know. There won’t be a fifty-year-old man begging you to dance with his friends, or the thirty-five-year-old following you around for hours trying to kiss as sweat drops down from Plush’s walls. Bops are full of familiar faces, yet everybody looks remarkably different from their usual selves. Shy boys strut around in satin bodycon dresses and nineteen-year-olds live out their childhood dreams as Tellie Tubbies.

For a punk bop I enjoyed cutting up a cheap t shirt with scissors, and backcombing my hair into a bird’s nest. Bops in Lincoln start at eight and finish at midnight. They begin with tentative dancing and escalate to meek, mild mosh pits. The night always ends with Lincolnites forming a sweaty circle and slow dancing to Robbie William’s Angels, a rather random tradition that took some getting used to. Then a drunken crowd belts I’m Lincoln till I die, swaying on the death trap that is the sticky floor. Bop juice creates a slip and slide that glistens when the lights are turned back on.

Bop juice has recently been banned at Lincoln college and replaced with just buying drinks at the bar. Bop juice is a lethal blend of juvenile juice with vodka, sickly sweet wine, and the finishing touch of a sophisticated mint leaf. One cup of bop juice, served from a plastic tub of corona virus soup, contains an unknown amount of alcohol. The mysterious lack of measurements led to the removal of this beloved beverage. A drink that tastes like juice is therefore easy to guzzle and is also free of charge, leading to unnerving hangovers. Bops are popular on the last night of term, which has personally led to some sickly train journeys back to Edinburgh.

Some Bops involve a short walk to a nightclub. Recently I broke the promise to myself that I would not go to Bridge the night before my French translation collection. Sometimes I feel like I have a devil and angel weighing on my shoulders. The angel tells me to get an early night and be well rested for the collection of my intellect the next day. The devil insists that I won’t sleep anyway because Bear Lane is so loud, and when I’m old I’ll remember a night out more than a collection. Bops in clubs welcome collaboration with other Entz teams. The space age Turl Street Bop invaded Plush in Trinity term. Hundreds of space buns bopped it to the top. I put a lot of trust into a silver slither of fabric.

Bops invite rifling through sale racks for a costume. Halloween happens three times a term here. Rather controversially I wish bops didn’t involve the dressing up. I’d rather just wear an outfit that I already own instead of sourcing a costume or making a sign. This week I pottered around Westgate looking for a beret. The theme for Lincoln’s freshers bop was ‘When I was three, I wanted to be…’ Some Lincolnites even wanted to be priests or prisoners. I went as an artist without a paintbrush. The beret became itchy and a few hours into the night I put it down and then discovered it was stolen. The Entz chair delivered it to my pidge.

Despite the hassle of the obscure themes, bops are some of the best nights in college. Reunited with my beret and Atik bound, I was uplifted by dancing at my dream university to the music I used to listen to in the car on the way to nursery.

Image credit: Cecilia Catmur

Special report: Colleges to raise rates by up to 13% amidst cost-of-living crisis

Charlie Hancock
-
0
Special report: Colleges to raise rates by up to 13% amidst cost-of-living crisis

As students pay their battels for Michaelmas Term, they will be faced with increased costs for accommodation as the cost of living crisis bites. But these rent hikes could be anything from 1.8-12.9%, depending on which college a student attends, highlighting another discrepancy between the experiences of students at different colleges.

For many students, these rent increases will amount to a real-terms rent cut because some colleges have kept them below the rate of inflation. But this does not mean that students will be left with money to spare. The value of maintenance loans has fallen to its lowest level in seven years, according to a June report by the Institute For Fiscal Studies, placing increased pressure on students’ budgets. 

Cherwell has collected data on rent changes from colleges across the University. Of the colleges which responded, the average increase in rents was 7.6%. However, some colleges were notable outliers. Balliol College increased charges by just 1.8%, while other colleges saw double-digit increases.

Christ Church already charged one of the highest average rents out of the university. Prices have risen by 12.9% this year, the highest Cherwell found. However, most Christ Church students actually pay less than the average rent charged for accommodation because the college provides them with financial assistance. Students from households with an annual income up to £27,500 can access a 50% discount on their rent and ‘season tickets’ for college dinners. Those earning up to £42,875 can access a 25% discount.

A recent analysis by Cherwell found that students of wealthier colleges could expect to pay less for their rent than those at poorer ones. For the 2021-22 academic year, seven of the ten wealthiest colleges ranked among the ten lowest weekly rents in the University. 

The uncertain economic climate has prompted the University to recommend that students anticipate that their living expenses could rise by 5% or more each year. A key driver of inflation in the UK (and elsewhere) is the cost of producing energy, which has soared since Russia invaded Ukraine. Similarly, rising utilities costs have driven up rents in Oxford: students living in Jesus College’s Turl Street site are facing rent increases 2.5% more than their college-mates living in college-owned accommodation in Jericho or Cowley. These students do not have their electricity included in their rent, and thus have to pay for it separately.

Colleges also use different methods of determining the amount by which to raise rents. St Peter’s used the Consumer Price Index in Michaelmas Term 2021 plus 2.7%. Christ Church used the Van Noorden Index, an Oxford-specific measure of inflation. The index has been accused of lacking transparency, and failing to take into account the different levels of provision available to students at different colleges. Tia Patel and Samuel Prosser, President and Treasurer of the Christ Church JCR, told Cherwell the common room had not been involved in these negotiations, but are always available for students to discuss related matters, or direct them to extra financial support.

Some common rooms were able to successfully negotiate with colleges to reduce proposed rent hikes. Hertford and Pembroke both initially proposed to raise rents by 12.8% in line with the Van Noorden Index. At Pembroke, student common rooms negotiated the hike down to 9.6%, while Hertford secured 8.5%.

While not all common rooms were able to negotiate rent hikes down to more comfortable levels, colleges have taken measures to support students. Jesus raised bursaries by £100, and Queen’s increased the amount of money in the College hardship fund. Other colleges like University and Corpus Christi have agreed to implement the Oxford Living Wage of £10.50 an hour.

A spokesperson from Oxford University said: “We recognise that the rising cost of living is a source of anxiety for many students and are continuing our efforts to ensure our financial support addresses this. The University of Oxford offers a range of financial support packages to help students from all backgrounds to study with us. This includes funding for undergraduates from lower-income households through the Crankstart Scholarship, which has received an uplift of £500 (10%) from July 2022.  In addition, support can be accessed through University and college hardship funds for students who find themselves in unexpected financial difficulty. We also have a number of scholarship schemes which provide full funding to graduate applicants from disadvantaged and under-represented backgrounds. Our ambition is to ensure that no one with outstanding academic potential is deterred from studying here because of their background, personal circumstances, or finances.”

Week 1 editorial

Cherwell Editors
-
0
Week 1 editorial

Statement of retraction: On Tuesday night, we received a complaint about an article which had been published in our Life section and which was intended as satirical in tone. In the context of Oxford’s socioeconomic realities, however, the humour was in poor taste. The article was taken down the same evening, although cache delays meant it was visible for longer. We have reiterated our rigorous editorial policies to our staff to prevent such errors in future. If readers would like to discuss this or any other editorial policy, we can always be reached at [email protected].

Pieter Garicano, Cherwell Editor-in-Chief:

This week’s front page, detailing some of Liz Truss’ escapades as an undergraduate in the 90s was possible not just due to effective reporting then; it also required a willingness to name the subject and store it for posterity. Having a historical record is useful. Indeed, over the summer an unnamed London publication approached Cherwell looking for information on the fresher adventures of Truss’ then-opponent, Rishi Sunak. One has to wonder if today’s Cherwell, more hesitant to name names and write about other students, would be the same source of archival material when the current crop of hacks become cabinet members two or three decades from now.

John Evelyn, for example, is a column dedicated to chronicling the exploits of other undergraduates. Over time, this has come to mean the Union politicos and their electioneering — and not much else. However, the use of increasingly elaborate nicknames for the subjects observed means that it has become virtually inaccessible for all but the most informed hacks. A staffer going through the archives in 2047 would not find it easy to understand who ‘Major General Chosen One’ or ‘DJ Gladstone’ are.

However, the benefits of the historical record are also its downsides. Permanence can come at a cost. Some of the most frequent requests we receive are from embarrassed graduates asking whether articles featuring their names can be anonymised. A bemused banker emailed arguing that a decade-old piece reporting on his arrest for streaking Cornmarket was defamatory as he had been ‘detained not arrested’. When choosing whether or not to report on student events, a sense of what’s proportionate matters. Cherwell reporting on students can easily become punching down, simply due to the size of the platform. Some Oxford papers do not name students at all. Cherwell only does a select few. Even if the choice is made to name them now, this does not necessarily mean naming them in perpetuity. Individuals can grow and change. Many of the decisions made aged 18 do not reflect what someone is like aged 40. Should those mistakes then still chase them?

Leah Mitchell, Cherwell Editor-in-Chief:

Why do we write? 

This might seem a strange question for the editor of a newspaper and a humanities student to ask; I am more or less constantly absorbed in reading and writing. But I think it is useful nonetheless, as with most things, to think about why. To refuse to take it for granted.

Writing of course takes many forms and so has many purposes. The sharing of information which is in the public interest alongside discourse about it, and the role which the publication of this kind of writing has in underpinning a democracy comprised of informed (and opinionated) citizens, is of course a major function of a newspaper. In our own small-scale way – in the context of Oxford and the University – I like to think we contribute to this task at Cherwell. However, if I’m being honest, I personally have never been much of a reporter; and yet, I have always been a writer, from short stories and diary entries through to (bad) poetry and (I hope slightly better) essays. Most of what I have written for this very paper, though, is perhaps best described as confessional writing. The thing is, I cringe even to describe it in these terms; it sounds so pretentious and self-absorbed – and what sin is it that I am even supposedly confessing? 

And yet, while like almost any writer I look back on old work and cringe a little at the odd clumsy word choice or underdeveloped idea, I am by and large quite proud of it. And the messages I have had from readers who have told me that something I have written has resonated with them – felt like an articulation of their own thoughts, or helped them to understand others a little more – constitute without a doubt the most meaningful and soul-enriching feedback I have ever received. Writing has for me provided a gateway to some of the purest moments of connection I’ve ever had with other human beings – especially with people I don’t often talk to, or whom I would never have expected to have any interest in or anything to learn from what I think about in the shower or while lying in bed at 1am. Then again – why wouldn’t they? I am always interested in what other people think about when there is nothing to distract them. In fact, I think that this curiosity, this straining towards understanding and connection, is nothing short of a fundamental human impulse, and one which underpins the best writing and art in general, just as it underpins the best conversations. 

Telling the truth that lies inside you is not some scandalous “confession”. It is rather something essential and human and beautiful – and perhaps even a step on the path to our collective liberation from our increasingly atomised and polarised social environment. What happens in your head at 1am is not (just) individualistic and self-indulgent nonsense, but may just constitute the most basic collective truth of all. So this week, pore over our (excellent and highly interesting!) news pages by all means – but make sure to look elsewhere too, including, and perhaps most of all, inside yourself.

Don’t Worry Darling – Review

Madi Hopper
-
0
Don’t Worry Darling – Review

Intrigued by the well-documented drama which dogged the cast throughout their pre-release press junkets, not to mention the viral clips of Styles’ bid for Academy gold, I found myself toddling down to Curzon to investigate, much as you might find yourself unable to look away from a car crash. And a car crash it certainly was – a film where the hype behind Olivia Wilde’s lauded directorial debut – ‘Booksmart’ clearly meant a studio had handed her a ridiculous budget and not enough people said ‘no’. The premise of the film is one that lends itself well to the feminist lens that made ‘Booksmart’ such a runaway hit – but where the feminist message of that film was so successfully fresh, ‘Don’t Worry Darling’ falls back on tired cliches that it simultaneously fails to fully investigate.

Set around the idyllic desert suburb of Victory, CA – a company town attached to the mysterious, male-run Victory Project – and the equally picturesque white-picket-fence lives of its inhabitants, the plot derives from housewife Alice’s (Pugh) suspicions that all – including her husband, Jack (Styles) is not what it seems – I won’t spoil the twist for you – apart from to say it was so abrupt and so shallow that it left me with far more questions than it answered. 

So far, so feminist – the idea of the gaslit housewife is admittedly a classic. And this is the problem – the film doesn’t really build upon a concept that was so masterfully updated by 2004’s  ‘Stepford Wives’. The feminist aspects feel flat and forced – intersectionality, for example is out the window – in ‘Stepford Wives’ the director managed to find a way to make the creepy suburbia aesthetic gel with two of the main characters are a gay man and a Jewish woman, whereas the only notable character of colour (Margaret) in Wilde’s world is a silent secondary character, whose suffering serves to help aid Alice’s quest for the truth about her situation. Is this necessarily racist ? Perhaps not, but something which really rattled me was the absolute state of Margaret’s (KiKi Layne) hair , which jarred with the otherwise excellent costume and hair design – and which is often due to employing stylists who don’t know how to work with Afro hair. Notable, too, is Wilde’s infamous implication that the film is empowering because we only see female characters orgasm. It rings extremely hollow against the framing of Jack’s cluelessness in the kitchen as adorkably endearing, and is further undermined by Styles’ acting ability restraining these performances to what could best be called ‘performative head’ – which, in turn, doesn’t actually add anything to the film apart from buffing its feminist veneer. This faux-feminist vibe isn’t helped by the choice to have the noise which indicates that you ought to feel that tension is rising (the film is also horribly guilty of using its soundtrack as a baby-rein rather than a prompt) be largely composed of a blur of distorted female panting and moaning – you get the impression that it was intended to be a feminist statement, somehow – but a statement of what, exactly ? 

It’s worth mentioning that the film is visually very beautiful – amazing camera-work and thoughtful production design, but the crisp lushness of the mid century modern aesthetic fails to leaven the damp lump of a plot, much in the same way that the stellar turns given by Pugh, Layne, Pine and Wilde herself fail to negate whatever Styles thought he was doing. His performance in the film has already been throughly eviscerated online, and I see no point in rehashing the same criticisms – but let me add that the climax points of his most serious an-ger-y scenes provoked audible laughter from the cinema I was sat in. 

So overall, it really was a dizzying rollercoaster of highs and lows – perhaps averaging out to a film less bad than its harshest critics would have you think, though the capital-F feminist vibe was rather disappointing. If you want a laugh, feel free to go and see it – but if you’d rather see the suburban gothic done right, go see ‘Stepford Wives’. 

1...200201202...2,486Page 201 of 2,486

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by James Ashley