Oxford's oldest student newspaper

Independent since 1920

Blog Page 2046

Review: Kings of Leon at Leeds Festival

It must be quite daunting being asked to play a slot that has previously been filled by such legendary bands as Nirvana, Oasis, Iron Maiden and Pixies. Having seen the Kings of Leon play two past Leeds Festivals and just missing out on the top spot (in 2005 justly they played under Foo Fighters on the bill and slightly embarrassingly in 2007 under Razorlight) I felt like their time had probably come. Unfortunately they did too and, unfazed by the magnitude of the task in hand, came out on the Reading main stage with unrealistically high expectations from the crowd. Certainly from watching the BBC coverage of the slot the crowd seemed to be enthusiastic and in good voice as they wailed along to recent singles ‘Sex on Fire’ and ‘On Call’, but it didn’t quite meet the demands of frontman Caleb Followill who told the crowd that he was ‘trying to hold back from saying anything negative’ about their reaction. Drummer Nathan Followill also wrote on Twitter the next day ‘Reading? What the fuck?’ and described the fans reception as ‘cold’ (that’s probably because they were cold).

So when Sunday came I was slightly apprehensive as Kings of Leon came on stage at Leeds Festival, hoping that they wouldn’t let any preconceived notions of grandeur affect their set. Fortunately the evening was somewhat milder than it had been two days before at Reading and the crowd were still riding high from the solid slot that had just been played by local heroes Kaiser Chiefs; subsequently they gave the Tennessee band a very warm greeting. Opening with several songs from latest album ‘Only by the night’ the band then proceeded to mix it up a bit with some older tracks, all of which went down a storm. A few songs in and Nathan was telling the crowd that ‘you’ve blown Reading to hell’ and dedicated ‘Red Morning Light’ to ‘all you people who didn’t just come for two songs.’ It seems that this was the major issue the band took with their southern audience; in their eyes they only showed appreciation for their recent best selling singles. Whilst this may have been the case, this is one of the dangers of signing to a major label and marketing yourself commercially: it has to be accepted. Granted that the people who show up to slur along to the chorus of ‘Use Somebody’ before making a quick retreat may not be ‘real’, long term fans but they still contribute to the financial success of the band. And I don’t see them complaining when the paycheque rolls in!

What really got the audience going was the undying love for the UK which Caleb expressed throughout the set, claiming that it was British fans that made them feel like they could ‘take on the world’ and going so far as to say that the band had never written a song with their American audience in mind. It’s true enough that the Kings do owe a lot of their success to Brit popularity; in 2004 debut album ‘Youth and Young Manhood’ came in at number 3 in the UK album chart, whilst reaching the not-so-dizzying-heights of 113 in their native America. Their second album ‘Aha Shake Heartbreak’ continued the trend by charting number 3 (still 22 places above the US) in the UK charts. As Kings of Leon vanished from the stage with ‘Black Thumbnail’ they left behind them the impression that they were every bit the home grown wonders that ‘Kaiser Chiefs’ were; they were a truly ‘British’ band.

Did they deserve the headline slot? I think so, yes. The set was a satisfying two hour long spate of songs spanning all their four albums; they were a great festival band and really rose to the challenge of playing to such a large and diverse audience. The band were in good voice and good spirits and the sound quality was exceptional. After playing the Reading show the band seemed to come to their senses enough to play a good show at Leeds, perhaps realising that, after all, ‘those rainy days they ain’t so bad when you’re the king.’

 

 

Gap Year: Friend or Foe?

The popularity of gap years has reached galactic proportions, with an estimated 230,000 teenagers swapping the cosy entrails of suburbia for a very expensive peek into the third world this year. A large percentage of these adolescents will take part in voluntary projects with large Anglo-American corporations, which give young adults the chance to work in a developing country.

The cynics will tell you that these trips are merely exotic holidays dressed up as quasi-messianic missions to save the poor and oppressed through the construction of wells and corrugated iron shacks. It will not be too long before the noble gapper cures leprosy, counsels a gorilla, caresses a dolphin and buggers off back to Surrey to start his reading list. This familiar portrait begs the question: who are voluntary gap year projects actually helping?

“This modern institution is almost more harmful and divisive in terms of our own society here in the UK”

Many argue that trips of this nature do nothing except propagate a patronising view of developing nations around the globe. However, I believe that this modern institution is almost more harmful and divisive in terms of our own society here in the UK. After all, the gap year is an eminently upper-class and exclusive tradition which finds its roots in the Grand Tour: the obligatory schlep around all the major European art galleries undertaken by nobility throughout the latter half of the last millennium. Since then travel and an ‘awareness’ of other cultures has started to become a necessary part of one’s life experience; “I say Monty, that Sistine Chapel! Smashing ceiling, eh?!” Things have scarcely changed at all.

One of the first things you are certain to hear in any British university is an inane and monotonous description of “that time in Laos/Uganda/Thailand/Namibia/Cambodia when we drank out of bucket/saw a temple/monkey/beggar.” Then come the T-shirts, I counted three on my first day in Oxford, proudly bearing the name of a country in which they spent the equivalent of a local monthly salary each day.

All this could explain why the British gap year has never quite shed its nauseatingly upper-class image. Indeed, members of the royal family have been intimately involved with the Grand Tour march II; Prince Charles famously established Raleigh International, an organisation which saw Prince William helping schoolchildren in Chile. Prince Harry also took a gap year working in an orphanage in Lesotho. One can only imagine what their clumsy grand-father, the Duke of Edinburgh, said on hearing the news; a man who, while on an official visit to Australia in 2002, asked an Aborigine whether he was “still throwing spears”.

“The year abroad is partly responsible for a perverse image of Africa and Asia as playgrounds for the white upper-classes”

What’s more, it is no coincidence that almost half of all pupils from independent schools take gap years, compared with about twenty percent from state schools. The more one examines the facts, the clearer it becomes that the gap year is an exclusive and potentially damaging institution, not just abroad but also at home. The year abroad is partly responsible for a perverse image of Africa and Asia as playgrounds for the white upper-classes; places with a two grand entrance fee where young adults go to get a tokenistic view of ‘real’ life and bolster their CV, before going back to the comfort and safety of a developed nation.

Whilst it would be prurient to suggest that all gappers leave with these egotistical intentions, it is debatable whether their poorly planned projects have any long-term benefit to the wider community at all. Judith Brodie, the director of Voluntary Service Organisation UK, said “While there are many good gap-year providers, we are increasingly concerned about the number of badly planned and supported schemes that are spurious, ultimately benefiting no one apart from the travel companies that organise them.” It would seem that in many cases, “gappers” are simply not getting value for money and are not having a positive impact on the local community. Elizabeth Atkinson, an American university student described her gap year experience at a school in Sri Lanka as “a farce” and bemoaned above all a lack of appropriate training and tools. “It was frustrating not to have the facilities with which to adequately teach the children”, she explained.

Indeed, it would seem that this dubious upsurge of altruism amongst teenagers worldwide is readily exploited by faceless corporations ready to make money, not only out of naive gappers, but more reprehensibly out of the vulnerable local communities.

 

 

 

 

 

Saïd linked to projects accused of human rights abuses

Oxford University’s Saïd Business School has come under fire for its involvement with an Indian urbanization project whose developers have been accused of human rights abuses.

The site, to be called “Lavasa”, is being developed in an area south-east of Mumbai and will consist of four completely new towns constructed in the Warasgaon lake area. The modern-day “hill station” will offer luxury housing, healthcare and entertainment and aims to be “a centre for excellence in education and research”.

The project is being run by Lavasa Corporation, a division of Hindustan Construction Company (HCC). Lavasa Corporation’s website lists Saïd Business School as part of a “tie-up” with the project. The collaboration would “address major business issues affecting India through collaborative research” and would also deliver executive education programmes.

According to a report conducted by the People’s Commission of Inquiry, poor and marginalised communities living in the area have been subject to intimidation by project officials, forcibly evicted from their land and tricked into signing land-exchange documents in return for little or no compensation.

The report also claims that the Lavasa project is supported by state government, which has allegedly contravened existing legislation to give permission to destroy extensive natural forests and habitats. The Commission is headed by a number of eminent Indian professionals and is supported by various environmental and human rights groups.

Medha Patkar, a leading Indian social activist, has also expressed concern over the treatment of the population in the area. Patkar has accused Lavasa Corporation of using illegal means to take land and homes away from local people, adding that the state has reneged on its responsibility to protect downtrodden communities.

She believes around 5,000 people have already been affected, and estimates that a further 5,000 may encounter similar treatment commenting, “This is not the right kind of development paradigm and it needs to be questioned.”

In response to the allegations, Jimmy Mogal, Vice-president of HCC said, “Our own research reveals the Commission has virtually no agenda other than to oppose all development.” He further commented that Lavasa Corporation are considering taking legal action against the Commission.

HCC has called the claims, “baseless allegations made by the so-called People’s Inquiry Commission….their allegations are false and libellous.”

The Corporation has since announced its intention to initiate legal proceedings against media outlets in the UK which have covered the story. A letter of claim issued by Lavasa’s solicitors, and seen by Cherwell, states that “Lavasa has purchased for the project only land that has been voluntarily offered to it at prices agreed with vendors by private negot

iation and after proper verification of title.” The letter also emphasises the requirement under Indian law that sale deeds are registered by the relevant authority by the vendor and buyer, stating that this “rules out any prospect of threats or coercion.”

On the subject of accusations of deforestation, the letter also stresses the lengths to which Lavasa Corporation has gone to care for the area, including additional tree planting, commenting, “as a result of LCL’s environmental initiatives Lavasa is in fact much greener than before.”

Vaibhav Tiwari, Assistant Vice President at Lavasa, has also stressed the company’s commitment to transparency, adding, “The company has invested enormous amounts of time and effort to participate in the State Govt. of Maharashtra’s tourism policy, whilst always remaining fully compliant with all state and federal laws.”

Professor Colin Mayer, Dean of Saïd Business School, was not available for comment. A spokesperson for Oxford University commented, “Allegations about the Lavasa project are a matter for the Lavasa Corporation. Oxford University has only just heard about these allegations and has not yet had a chance to hear Lavasa Corporation’s formal response.”

A representative from Saïd Business School added, “[we are] unable to give specific details about the School’s activities in India. Saïd Business School Limited is still in discussions with Lavasa Corporation.”

Student groups have expressed concern at the continuation of the University’s involvement with the project. Oxford University Amnesty International Vice-President, Ruth Simister said, “Oxford University will demonstrate negligence, if not indifference, for human rights if they proceed with a partnership with the Lavasa developer without carrying out further investigations.”

Executive education programmes are already being delivered by Oxford University on a number of continents. In the past, Saïd Business School has provided tailored programmes for business clients including Telefonica, BMW Group and Standard Chartered.

 

Getting naked at Climate Camp

This week, Climate Camp hit the headlines with their direct action protests in Central London. The protesters courted media attention by chaining themselves to the locked front door of the Royal Bank of Scotland, standing naked in the windows of Edelman PR firm’s office, super gluing themselves to the RBS trading floor and leading flash mobs and protest marches around the capital.

According to one third year Queen’s student who worked for the camp’s media team, a really “good showing” of Oxford students turned up to the Blackheath location, which was kept top secret until the arrival date. The camp was even described by one London newspaper as an Oxford University neighbourhood.

Not all of the Oxford students who took part got quite so involved as Will McCullum, a Wadham finalist, one of seven protesters who stripped off in the glass-fronted lobby of PR company Edelman’s office block on Tuesday morning, shocking passing commuters in Victoria Street.

A keen activist, Will has been involved in the local branch of the organisation, Thames Valley Climate Action, which holds weekly meetings in Princes Street, East Oxford. This was, however, his first naked venture – in the name of protest, that is. “No nakedness or superglue in the past”, he confirmed. “I have done nakedness on stage in performances, but never as part of a protest.”

The group of “naked campers” as they quickly became known, accompanied by other (fully clothed) protesters handing out flyers and liaising with the public, accused Edelman of “greenwashing” the business practices of energy companies like E.ON. The protesters covered themselves in a virulently pink banner displaying the message “Climate Lies Uncovered”, saying that they wanted to “expose the naked truth behind Edelman”.

Whilst Will and his fellow protesters strutted their stuff behind the glass, singing and chanting to the bemusement of watching security guards and police officers, another Oxford student was outside the building engaged in slightly more risky pursuits.

Carl Van Tonder, a second-year Chemist at St Anne’s, was one of several activists who scaled the roof of the Southside building in Victoria Street, using “a really great folding ladder” to climb up onto a ledge and make their point about climate change. “Yeah, it was pretty dangerous, but it felt amazing and no one fell off,” he commented.

Carl was not only on the roof of a global PR company, but he has also been communicating directly with its CEO via Twitter, the social networking site. Using the alias @seeitcoming he has been directly questioning Robert Phillips, CEO of Edelman. Phillips himself seemed willing to engage with the campers and to hold onto his sense of humour throughout the morning. One of his tweets read:

“@climatecamp We’ve offered your guys a conversation & a cup of coffee. We are happy to discuss & address issues. Please come clothed, though”.

Phillips made a statement to Sky News during the protest, dismissing it as a “cheap stunt”. “Despite the presence of naked protesters in our downstairs lobby and a couple of banner-wavers on our roof, it is very much business as usual at Edelman,” he said.

Certainly, whilst there were a few surprised faces on the pavement outside, the majority of people entering the building, including the police officers, seemed calm and unaffected. “The girls weren’t even entirely naked”, said one disappointed onlooker.

Oxford’s own (completely) naked protester was nonetheless enthused by his day’s work, commenting that he was surprised and pleased by the amount of media attention garnered by the campaign. “Yes I would do it again, as long as the target was well-chosen and well thought out. But to do it again we’d have to be very careful that it doesn’t become a stunt that you can just get out at any time. Getting naked isn’t something for every action and every target.”

Review:The Wasp Factory

In a word, this book is vile. There is not a single sympathetic character in this entire parade of wretchedness. The protagonist is beyond redemption, his father is (in equal parts) abusive and distant, and his brother is an almost comically exaggerated arsonist lunatic. The only characters who display even a whisper of human decency are bit-parts, too undeveloped to display any real qualities, whether positive or negative. Half of them end up dead anyway, in a variety of inventive and unpleasant ways.

“It is malicious and degrading and painful. I enjoyed it immensely.”

Yes, The Wasp Factory is probably the most unpleasant novel I have ever read. It is a catalogue of sociopathy, violence, isolation, body-horror and fear. It is malicious and degrading and painful. I enjoyed it immensely. It’s like a road accident – horrible, but you just can’t resist staring.

Summarising the plot is difficult. The narrator, Frank, drags the reader through an account of his bizarre daily routine, revealing snippets of his personal history along the way. His terrifying brother and his appalling father make occasional appearances, leading to several violent and (quite literally) explosive confrontations. It has all the usual elements of a gore-porn thriller, but with two redeeming features – Frank’s complex personal mythology, and his dry, detached narration.

The mythology is fascinating, reminiscent of stereotypical voudon and Salem-style ‘witchcraft’ without falling into cliché. The eponymous Wasp Factory is particularly imaginative, if a bit mechanically implausible. Frank’s detachment is both disturbing and refreshing; disturbing because he is apparently unaffected by the horrible events of the story, refreshing because the reader is spared the rigmarole of angst-ridden self-reflection. Frank is under no moral illusions about what he is – moral considerations don’t occur to him at all. Frank is certainly not a sympathetic character, but it is difficult to think of him as evil. Broken, perhaps, but not evil.

So, should you give The Wasp Factory a try? I suppose it depends on the strength of your stomach. If you enjoyed Trainspotting or Silence of the Lambs, this book will provide a challenging and stimulating experience. If not, then consider this book’s final virtue – it’s quite short. Short enough to read between one essay and the next, and short enough to avoid permanent emotional scarring and/or nightmares.

Three stars.

 

Let the BNP appear on Question Time

If the BNP do receive an invitation from the BBC to appear on Question Time, they should be allowed to participate. By denying them the right to appear on the programme, we simply hand them ammunition by allowing them to portray themselves as victims who have had their democratic rights stripped away from them. You only have to look at You Tube clips of the group Unite Against Fascism (UAF) throwing eggs at Nick Griffin, to see comments by riled BNP supporters arguing that the UAF are hypocritical fascists. The cruel irony of all of this is that the BNP whose rights I defend would take away my rights in under a second if they came into power, merely because I do not fit into their warped and simplistic definition of ‘British’.

Fear seems to be the concern motivating those protesting against the BNP’s participation on Question Time. They are afraid that by allowing the BNP to appear on the esteemed political programme, they will be giving the party the respectable, political legitimacy it craves. They are afraid that by allowing the BNP to publicise their views on mainstream television, the party will gain valuable publicity and may attract more voters.  They’re wrong. A debate between the BNP and other political parties on Question Time would be one of the best ways to help defeat them and reveal to the public their ignorance and their policies which are rooted in racial prejudices.

“We cannot ignore the 6.2% of the electorate that voted for the BNP”

The BBC said it was considering inviting the BNP because the party “demonstrated evidence of electoral support at a national level”, following the election of two BNP candidates to the European Parliament. Whilst some voted for the BNP because they genuinely support their policies, for others it was a protest vote to express their frustration at being ignored by mainstream political parties. We cannot ignore the 6.2% of the electorate that voted for the BNP. There are issues such as immigration, which the public are worried about and which the government has failed to address. The BNP, on the other hand, have been willing to focus on these concerns. They have greedily feasted on the topic of immigration, exploiting and twisting it, while playing on the fears of local communities in order to gain support. It is time the government stopped ignoring these issues and started listening to the disillusioned and isolated sections of the public.

Let the BNP appear on Question Time, let them be questioned and challenged by politicians from other parties, by members of the audience and by no-nonsense David Dimbleby himself. But let other political parties also show the public that there are alternative, feasible solutions to problems such as immigration which aren’t fascist, brutal and unjust. Then let us see if that 6.2% of the electorate still believe that racist, inhumane and simplistic solutions such as sinking boats with illegal immigrants – a measure proposed by Nick Griffin himself in July – are going to solve complex matters such as immigration.

“There are those who have been duped by Mr Griffin’s flash suits and Cambridge university education”

Nick Griffin has managed to a large extent to transform the BNP’s thuggish image into that of a respectable party with a middle-class leadership that is concerned about protecting a white, indigenous Britain from the masses of non-white, non-indigenous pollutants. Whatever that means. Whilst I find it hard to believe that people are unaware of the racism and brutality that lie within BNP ranks, I have to accept that there are those who have been duped by Mr Griffin’s flash suits and Cambridge university education and who genuinely believe the BNP are trying to address Britain’s problems in an efficient and just way.

No one is naive enough to believe that Mr Griffin would waste his big BBC moment with expletives against ethnic minorities, revealing to the public the abhorrent racism of his party. He is clever enough to know that such language is better reserved for a BNP meeting in the local pub. There is the risk that for some viewers Mr Griffin may come across as an attentive man, who is sympathetic to their concerns and is willing to take action. However, I would be willing to take that chance. It is preferable for the BNP to voice their opinions in a debate such as Question Time, where there are members of other political parties and members of the audience to challenge these views, rather than have the BNP continually spread their bigotry in town halls, in pamphlets and on their websites, unopposed and unchallenged. It was with a chill down my spine that I watched the BBC documentary The Secret Agent, in which an undercover journalist infiltrated the BNP and revealed the shocking racism and the violent, racially motivated behaviour of party members. It is by putting the BNP in the spotlight and not allowing them to lurk unmonitored in town halls, in places like Bradford that the public is able to discover what the BNP really stands for.

Nick Griffin’s face on television isn’t something I particularly relish seeing on a Thursday evening as I curl up on the sofa with a mug of hot chocolate. However, the opportunity to see him confronted, challenged and probed on Question Time is something I very much look forward to.

 

The British Airports Authority must die

There is a rising but muted wave of opinion that the BAA, the organisation which runs British Airports, should be dismantled. A lot of people, with a lot of spreadsheets, point to mountains of statistical drudgery in favour of the move, and nobody really cares.

We should split up the BAA, but not for the reasons policy wonks suggest. If they want to figure out how to get the discerning British public onside, all they need to do watch some standup. If it’s bad enough, they should find someone making incredibly passé jokes about airport security nightmares.

There is a reason that these jokes are tired- because airport security nightmares happens all the f*cking time. As I write this, I have just emerged from one of them. I am on board a BA plane on the way to New York, and have just been molested by what can only be described as the airport Gestapo.

People often say that it’s a bad idea to say the word “bomb” in an airport. It may well be. What you don’t know is that there are three more words to add to the list: “This”, “is”, and “ridiculous”. At this point I am unclear as to whether it is the individual words which were verboten, or whether it was their consecutive juxtaposition that was an apparent threat to national security, (I used them one after the other you see…) but at any rate given my experiences I can only advise that you steer well clear.

Allow me to provide a little context. At the point we begin my little story, I had ostensibly cleared security, replaced my moccasins, and mused upon but then opted against spending ridiculous amounts of money on such airport essentials as slightly-nicer-headphones and underwater video cameras. Having reached the gate I was walking down the tunnelly thing onto the plane.

“Regardless of the obvious and unforgivable antisemitism, I was as cooperative as could be”

I was on the cusp of a stress free ingress to this not-quite-jumbo jet, when I was whisked aside for a random bag search. Being Jewish, I naturally made the tenuous assumption that I had been profiled. Still, regardless of the obvious and unforgivable antisemitism, I was as cooperative as could be, even offering my assistance in opening my needlessly compartmentalised backpack. Indeed, I was just warming up to my interrogator when I was struck with a demand that shook me to my core.

“Shoes off.”

Being a careful reader, you will of course remember that I had the pleasure of displaying my endlessly unattractive and mismatched collection of socks at an earlier juncture in the airport experience. However, in the naive hope that someone other than close friends and family has read this far, I can assume your ignorance of the following:

Despite an outward facade of being a competent adult human being, I am freakishly underequipped at tying shoelaces. Not only am I unable do it properly (thanks, Dad), I do it at a pace that makes glacial drift look like Usain Bolt genetically spliced with the Starship Enterprise. As such, I am not a big fan of public shoelace tying incidents, least of all when they are repeated and seemingly pointless. My internal monologue screamed, “For the love of God, not again!”. My external monologue, though more reserved, was infinitely more damaging.

The words bubbled forth, involuntary, almost a whisper: “This is ridiculous…”

Things escalated quickly – before I knew it I was being stood up and frisked angrily, as the until now perfectly amicable airport constabularian pointed, having whipped it out of my pocket, at a thing that was plainly and clearly my wallet, while asking such penetrative questions as: “What is this?!!”

“She had apparently taken considerable offense at my largely inaudible critique of the double shoes-off procedure”

This was where the real trouble began. My unsolicited masseur was accompanied by his supervisor, a stout and abrasive woman who for our purposes we shall call Sharon (Shazza to friends), and who was presently waddling over.

Shazza is that most rare breed of activist, an avid supporter of the precise nature and design of airport security protocols, regardless of the actual detail of whatever they are. As such, she had apparently taken considerable offense at my largely inaudible critique of the double shoes-off procedure. Not only that, but my actions had apparently constituted a personal insult to the gentleman still quizzically pawing at the strange leather foldy thing from my pocket. She wanted an apology.

I’ll supplement this with the fact that Shaz didn’t really like me anyway. I was doing my best pretentious airport wanker impression, and as such had happened upon her in full leather jacket/ray bans regalia. I was also refusing to apologise.

In response to my overall objectionable nature, Shaz decided it would be best to confiscate my passport and boarding pass, and said that unless I apologised I would be removed from the flight. As this was happening, shoes off, luggage out, scene caused, the rest of the passengers were proceeding on to the plane. The less charitable among them guffawed at me as they passed.

I attempted to mount some sort of defence: “I’ve got a right to say…” But Shaz, having spotted my unfortunately American passport, interrupted – “Maybe in America you do.” In my mind I add “bitch!” to the end of of that.

I feebly attempted to point out that I am actually a dual citizen, but she seemed unswayed by my claims of transnational human rights. I was clearly at least partly contaminated, and at any rate a real Brit would surely have shown more respect for airport procedure. I needed to be put in my place, filthy, complaining, semi-American that I was.

I asked to see the manager – there was apparently no one more senior in the entirety of Heathrow. I asked for her name – “You don’t need my name.” It was, fortunately, on her nametag.

“No one can do anything about it, least of all express slight frustration with procedure to the Pol Pot of gate B44”

When I eventually got onto the plane, I attempted to complain. The incredibly helpful and sympathetic staff said that this firstly happened all the time, and secondly was nothing to do with them. This brings me, tortuously, to my point. Though I was flying BA, the security staff were from the BAA, no relation. Of course, BA staff have to be sympathetic and helpful. If they aren’t, you’ll go fly with someone else. But good luck trying to get anywhere without passing through the clutches of the BAA. They run every major airport. As a result, their security procedures can be as annoying as they like, and no one can do anything about it, least of all express slight frustration with procedure to the Pol Pot of gate B44. That is, unless you feel like walking to New York.

It is this kind of monopoly situation that gives rise to a company in which employees, instead of responding to complaints, put down and threaten customers for making them. Can you imagine going to a restaurant, sending back a dish, and being imprisoned by the waiter until you apologised?

Add to the lack of competition the fact that BAA security officials are in a position of power, often have to perform repetitive work, and that people are very

keen not to be booted off of their flight, and you have a recipe for a legion of petty tyrants who can harass anyone that they don’t like the look of.

Thus, my conclusion: The BAA should be dismantled, so that I can make remarks under my breath while being forced to take off my shoes for the nth time, and then proceed onto my flight unhindered by Sharon and her shadowy cabal of Heathrow Hitlers.

Point made, but I hear you cry, “How did you get on to the plane?!”

I would love to say that I about faced and sprinted into the plane, Shazza hanging on to my ankle as I boarded barefoot, finally free of those damn shoes and their embarassing foibles, but no. Of course, being spineless, I gave up and apologised, and walked on with my tail between my legs, resolving to write a pithy article about it on the flight.

Musical Expeditions: Bluegrass in Upstate New York

“Old Forge is a sad end of the road for most of its visitors”

Two hours of driving separate Old Forge, where I was, from North Creek, where I wanted to be. Both places are in the Adirondack Park – a vast area of lakes and wooded mountains in Upstate New York – but apart from that they have nothing in common. Old Forge, though once a spring pad for adventures, is now the crazy golf capital of the universe and sad end of the road for most of its visitors. North Creek, on the other hand, is a remote little hamlet right in the depths of the Adirondack Mountains, which plays host every year to the Upper Hudson Bluegrass Festival. As I had no other way of getting there, I had to try and hitch a lift.

I set up in Old Forge some time in the morning, on the road heading northwards out of town. In my hand I was clasping a bit of cardboard that read BLUE GRASS on one side, and UPPER HUDSON on the other – both sides absolutely useless, I later realised, because Upper Hudson is not a place but a vast area, and no-one down in Old Forge was ever likely to have heard of the bluegrass festival.

Luckily, before long, chance had it that I found myself preparing a new sign, which would be inscribed NORTH CREEK – a name I knew I’d heard in connection with the festival, but I wasn’t sure if it was the actual location, or the nearest place, or a town on the way.

Fifteen minutes or less after I first set up, a little white police car came snaking along. I wasn’t sure if I was breaking the law or not by hitchhiking, and I could have just stood there to find out – to see if it stopped by me or carried on along its way. But it suddenly seemed like the best idea would be to stick the old sign under my arm and casually set out across the road, as if I wasn’t hitchhiking at all. While I was doing so, stepping out onto the zebra crossing which happened to be right in front of me, I noticed that behind the first police car there was another one, a big State Trooper vehicle, creeping along, ominous as can be. Just as I was making it across, they pulled over to my side of the road, and stopped in a lay-by a little further along the road from me. It was pretty clear by now that they had come along with regards to myself, but it seemed too late to go and discuss the situation with them.

Next thing, another of these State Trooper beasts pitched up. I was walking along the pavement by this time, with the other police cars behind me, and just happened to be coming up to a spot where the road cut in for a lay-by or a parking lot or something. This meant that the police car could pull in and give the guys inside a good close look at me. I had made it to this spot just before them, and it was my right of way anyway, so I crossed just as they were turning in, giving myself a nice opportunity to show them how casual I was feeling about the whole thing. I gave a nod of thanks – as if they’d invited me to cross – turned away, and carried on ambling down the street.

The obscurity of my sign, along with my carefree air, seemed to have done the trick, as none of them turned to follow me. I’d have thought that even the slightest glimpse of my sign – which wasn’t by the way well-hidden in the least – would have confirmed I was a hitchhiker and earned me at least a chat with the cops. At any rate, it occurred to me I might go and buy a bottle of water at a nearby ice-cream shop, while the situation calmed down.

Even though it was only just past breakfast-time, the queue for ice-creams was enormous, which was ideal for me, as it gave the cops a good while in which to clear off.

Some time later, water in hand, I headed back to the spot where I’d been before. The cops were nowhere to be seen by now, but I felt somewhat apprehensive anyway, and wasn’t quite ready to start thumbing down a lift again. So I thought I’d slump down on the ground and scribble myself a new sign, just to kill some more time. I happened to decide I’d label this one NORTH CREEK, for a bit of variety.

When it was done, I though it looked pretty good – a good clear sign. So I decided I’d use it, the North Creek one, in combination with the bluegrass one. This time I thought I’d lean them up, rather than hold them, and plant myself down by their side. I also thought I’d pick up the book I was reading, in the first place to stave off boredom; secondly because it was Nineteen Eighty-Four and seemed an apt thing to be reading while being hawked by police; and lastly because I thought it might make me look like an appealing guy to pick up.

 

“I sat there for nearly an hour, the police car never budged”

 

I’d only been there about five minutes when there showed up a police truck again, this one different from the earlier ones. It was semi-disguised, the only thing that gave it away for a police truck being the blue light on its roof. Otherwise it was just a big grey four-by-four with a trailer. It pulled in and parked itself right opposite me, in that same old lay-by/parking lot thing. I decided I’d stay put this time, because I couldn’t be bothered with the whole ice-cream shop business again, and if I kept doing stuff like that, I’d probably end up missing most the festival. I didn’t much look like a hitchhiker by now anyway, what with my book out and being seated and everything.

I sat there for pretty nearly an hour, with the police car never budging an inch. Round about then I decided it probably wasn’t a good spot, so I wandered on in the out-of-town direction, and soon set myself up on a corner where no car could miss me. I was directly visible for a good two hundred yards and there was a place a little way beyond me ideal for cars stop at.

A good half of an hour went by and I was beginning to lose hope, but just then an old lumberjack called Morse came by. He asked me where I wanted to go – North Creek way, I said – and told me to jump in.

At first he seemed somewhat cold, not chatty in the least, as though he regretted stopping for me. After a while, though, he struck up a sort of conversation: ‘You sure lucked out… me comin’ along,’ he said.

‘Yes, sir,’ I told him. ‘I believe I did.’

There was a bit of a pause, and then he said: ‘Almost didn’t come by this way.’ He wanted me to thank him again, I think.

‘Well I’m glad you did – thanks so much,’ I said. ‘I was thinking of giving up and going home.’

After another short while he spoke again: ‘Folks don’t generally like giving lifts these days.’

‘Yeah, why is that?’

‘In case they get mugged, which happens.’ The way he said it, and looked at me when he said ‘happens’, it was like a threat, as if really what he was saying was: ‘I know your game – don’t even think about it.’

Well, after that, bit by bit he lightened up, and it turned out he was pretty good company this sixty-something or so lumberjack.

And so we drove on, and two hours later stopped by a sign at the roadside pointing up a lane to the Upper Hudson Bluegrass Festival. I paid my respects to old Morse, shuffled out the car, and set my course for the music.

 

“You could tell it was a family up there, the way they grinned at each other”

 

When I finally arrived at the festival, it was the Atkinson Family up on stage. They’re a five-piece band, but there was only one microphone to pick up not just the singing but all the instruments as well. So they all had to huddle round it, and each time one of them did a solo, he had to muscle in to the front so that he’d be nearest the microphone.

You could tell it was a family up there, the way they grinned at each other now and then while they played, and then the way they chatted to the audience between songs, finishing each other’s sentences, and correcting each other, and dropping in the occasional family joke and stuff like that. You could also tell that the audience thought this was great. Some of them even joined in the Atkinsons’ conversations.

I understood all this better later on, when Mrs Atkinson explained to me that bluegrass festivals were like huge family reunions – everyone’s family in the bluegrass world – everyone knows everyone else, more or less. Plus, everyone’s welcome, it seemed. As I was new to it all, I had countless people approach me, call me ‘kiddo’ or ‘son’, and strike up some kind of innocent conversation, just to make me feel welcome there.

As for the music, not just the Atkinson Family but all of it, the sound was very traditional, and not because they were all playing covers. There were some covers – ‘bluegrassed’ versions of Johnny Cash songs, Hank Williams songs, Woody Guthrie songs, Jimmie Rodgers songs, and stuff like that – but mostly they played originals, and even these sounded like they could have been written fifty years ago. That’s the particular thing about bluegrass, it doesn’t change much. It prides itself on sticking to its roots, as Mrs Atkinson explained to me later on.

 

“They call it bluegrass etiquette”

 

It’s an American music, she told me, which came about initially by the merger of three different types of music: Irish fiddle music, black gospel, and mountain-people folk. The father of the genre was a man called Bill Munro, the founding member of the Blue Grass Boys, which he formed in 1938, naming them after his home state of Kentucky, also known as the ‘Bluegrass State’ and still the bluegrass capital. Bluegrass is easily mistakable with regular country music, of which it’s a sub-genre, but the two styles are distinct, if you know what to look for, and a lot of bluegrass fans look down on regular country as less authentic. Bluegrass is more up-tempo, and generally has more virtuoso musicianship; it’s meant to be played only on acoustic instruments. Plus, the songs are about different things from country. In country you mostly just get ballads, while in bluegrass there’s a mixture of three main types: Train songs, killing songs, and gospel songs. Gospel is a big part of it.

Another big part of it, which goes along with the gospel-side of the music, is a general American wholesomeness. Everyone’s always jolly, cracking jokes, offering you a seat if you need one, and smiling at you whenever possible – ‘bluegrass etiquette’ they call it.

I wasn’t sure if this wholesomeness sprung from the fact that most the people at the festival were getting on a bit – grandparent-age at least – but a hip-looking guy in a baseball cap called Daryl assured me that at other bluegrass festivals you see more young people, and the etiquette and the whole thing remains just the same.

This same Daryl also told me that people stay up all night at bluegrass festivals, playing bluegrass non-stop, even the elderly ones – because bluegrass is like a drug when you’re playing, he said. And the people who come to watch at bluegrass festivals are mostly accomplished musicians themselves, so everyone keeps on playing together all night long. One reason you get so many old people at bluegrass festivals, Daryl said, was that people who like bluegrass just go on living. As they’ve got bluegrass for a drug, they don’t need to put any harmful stuff into their bodies, so they just keep going.

 

“Listening to the music on CD at home is one thing”

I didn’t stick around to see what Daryl was talking about, because he’d also said that if it rained people wouldn’t stay up anyway, because the instruments can’t stay in tune in the rain. It was raining quite a bit and the sky looked grim; the light was fading, and I didn’t particularly feel like spending the night with a whole bunch of mosquitoes under a sky that wouldn’t even have any stars because of the rain; I also felt like I’d almost seen enough of this festival, and wasn’t particularly minded to stay for day two; so I headed back to the road, leaving just as I had arrived, with the Atkinson Family up on stage again (all bands return to the stage for a second set).

Catching a lift home was a piece of cake compared with my outward journey. I was picked up almost immediately by a young couple coming up to the Adirondacks for the weekend from Albany, the capital of New York State. One of them was an architect, the other an engineer, and getting in the car with them was really like returning to normal life. The folks there couldn’t have been nicer, but it was really quite a culture shock, the bluegrass festival. Listening to the music on CD at home is one thing; bumbling around among the actual people is something else.

 

Review: Inglorious Basterds

I have seen no less than eight people walk out of this film. They ranged from an elderly couple, tottering out as the first scalp is sliced off, to a group of young people who slinked out muttering something about “fucking French”. This is certainly not your average summer blockbuster. It’s talky, wincingly violent, and a little complicated, all of which are qualities which could drive restless audience members to vacate their paid-for seat. They’re also the qualities which make Inglourious Basterds two and three quarter hours of unmitigated cinematic joy. Quentin Tarantino has produced a hilarious, magnificently accomplished masterpiece, tossing around and tearing apart conventions like a playful monkey to craft the funniest, most frightening and thought-provoking film of the year.

The basic idea is a war film with Spaghetti Western elements. Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) is tasked with leading a group of Jewish-American soldiers, the eponymous Basterds, into Nazi-occupied France to, as he so wonderfully puts it, inflict “murder, torture, intimation, and terror” on the men who did the same to the European countries they occupy. Meanwhile, the utterly terrifying Col. Hans Landa (Christopher Waltz) hunts Jews with charming, monstrous precision, whilst Shoshanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent), a girl he let escape for his own amusement, plots to inc

inerate the Nazi high command. Every single performance from this stunning international ensemble cast is a pleasure to watch. All their accents and mannerisms are played up for some truly hysterical moments of comedy – the British characters are especially amusing, along with Pitt’s tight-lipped “Bonjourno” – without ever becoming overly ridiculous.

As well as the ever-flowing comedic moments, Basterds offers some heart-stoppingly tense moments of suspense constructed around the unpredictability of the smooth-talking, subtly aggressive and intense Nazi officers. The film is similarly visually stunning. Brief spurts of action are a treat for the eyes, and all are managed without a hint of CGI, which led to two of the stars nearly becoming cremated during a particularly ambitious scene. The wry, winking iconography Tarantino scatters throughout also deserves special mention. Look out for the looming black poodle sternly criticizing Goebbels’ (Sylvester Groth) guffawing racism, Landa’s emasculating Swiss style horn-pipe, and Major Dieter Hellstrom’s (August Diehl) fantastic cowboy boot shaped pint glass, coming to wreck havoc on the Apache Basterds.

For a film so colourfully ostentatious, Basterds is a film imbued with great amounts of depth and subtlety.  Essentially, this is a film about the audience. We see Hitler laugh hysterically at the Americans being slaughtered in the film-within-a-film Nation’s Pride, and our natural instinct is repulsion – but it quickly dawns upon us that laughing at nasty, painful death is exactly how we’ve spent the last two hours. Having the twentieth century’s ultimate figure of evil indulging in the same edgy delights as our good selves might send a ripple of unease over an audience which laughed heartily at the Bear Jew (a surprisingly accomplished Eli Roth) clobber a Nazi soldier to death whilst yelling baseball conventions. Just like Roth’s own Hostel, we find ourselves forced to question why we find the violence so entertaining.

The phrase ‘kosher porn’ has been tossed around by some reviewers to describe the visceral, vengeful joy the film provides. These certainly aren’t the Jewish characters you tend to see in more conventional war films. Their gleeful, effervescently comic brutality makes the Nazis the victims, inverting preconceptions of the place of Jewish figures in war films by making them figures of absolute power rather than desperate resisters. It’s actually their Nazi victims that seem to elicit glimmers of sympathy rather than our heroes. We’re given very little background on the Basterds themselves, whilst their scalped, carved and shot targets talk of defending their people, hugging their mothers and seeing their children grow up.

I could write about this film for so much longer. There is so much to praise, so much to talk about. It is Tarantino’s unrivalled magnum opus, a film which defies all expectations and the potential to change war films forever. Please, ignore the ignorant negative and lukewarm reviews floating around. If you enjoy cinema, go and see this film.

 

Education: The failure to measure success

This week the British education system delivered yet another record haul. It’s the 27th year in a row that A level results have improved. At the current rate of progress, 100% of school leavers will have an A before the century is out. Celebration meets with cynicism. But apart from scoffing at this specious success, the stats confirm two facts. Firstly, A levels are failing to offer a reliable indication for admissions tutors. And secondly, with 50% of private schools’ grades being A compared with 20% of comprehensives’, education suffers from great disparity.

What is to be done? Firstly, Britain needs to be able to refute accusations of ‘dumming down’ at all levels. It is implausible that every year leaves the one before eating its dust. Even Usain Bolt clocks up some slightly slower times between world records. If twice as many graduates leave with firsts as a decade ago, somehow this must mean firsts are getting easier. Even if genuine improvements are being made, they are being effaced by an obsession to make the numbers look good whatever the cost. Tables beyond our control such as the UN’s education index put Britain in 28th place globally and show falling standards. If you need more convincing that higher scores are being achieved by shifting the goal posts then take a look at the exam regs for your degree from the 50s. Thought it couldn’t be any harder than it is now? Think again.

But even if being more realistic about how well people are doing stems the dubious tide of success, the top grade at A level is still going to be too overcrowded for the most competitive universities to see what’s going on. There is a big shift in ability between someone scraping an A and someone scoring full marks. Next year’s A* (for those scoring 90%) won’t help as it is only awarded for A2 not for AS – i.e. after offers have been made. Besides, it won’t be long till we’ll need to add another star.

There wasn’t always this problem – from 1963-84, A grades were reserved for the top 10% of performers. Grades showed not how much of the syllabus you had mastered, but how well you competed. We shouldn’t return to this since it is useful to know what proportion of the syllabus’ criteria have been met. But we can easily restore the competitive factor by another means. Let’s introduce a percentile score alongside the grade to show where candidates rank in the field. Standards will rise as candidates won’t be able relax, confident they’re on track for the middle of a big cushy grade span but have to push themselves to gain every point on the 100 rung ladder. That way everyone can get an A*** or first for politicians to brag about without making the whole exercise useless for admissions and employers.

But although we’ve worked out how to tell how well people have done in exams, we haven’t ended an admissions tutor’s troubles. Now we bring out our second set of alarming statistics showing that, as a group, people who have their education paid for are at an immense advantage. Not only do they do much better at GCSE and A level, but also, although comprising just 7% of the school population, they make up around half of Oxford’s domestic intake. Later in life the advantages keep rolling in – 75% of judges went to private school.

Now, I am the last to stand up in favour of positive discrimination. It would be divisive and detrimental to the deserving. But top universities should be looking to admit the brightest and the best and that’s not necessarily the same as those scoring the top A levels. If someone’s done well because they’ve had easy access to much better resources, smaller classes and been able to afford additional exam-focused, spoon-feeding tuition then this isn’t as impressive as someone who’s achieved the same without any of that.

What the Russell Group should be looking for are those with the greatest potential. This shouldn’t be measured by the current aptitude tests – it’s too easy to improve through coaching, once more the domain of the privileged. Instead, admissions tutors should have much more access to the context of a candidate’s achievement. The more relevant – and it must be relevant – background information they have, the more accurate this process will be. How well someone has done in relation to others who share their situation is a good indication of how well they are likely to do once the field is levelled.

Once we know what place people have finished in as well as who their real rivals were, then we can find out who the real successes are.