Oxford's oldest student newspaper

Independent since 1920

Blog Page 2067

Brute force makes it for bees

By
Edmund King
-

Scientists at Oxford have discovered how the bumblebee flies contrary to the conventional laws of aerodynamics.

The study reveals that bumblebees rely on brute force to get off the ground. Fuelled by the high-energy nectar they consume, they flap their wings over 200 times a second.

This is a far more inefficient method of flight than that of most insects.

The team trained the insects and used smoke, a wind tunnel and high-speed cameras to observe in detail how real bumblebee wings work in free flight.

 

Civil servant recruits Oxford spies

By
Kate Bowden
-

A newly discovered KGB document has revealed that a distinguished former civil servant masterminded a network of communist spies at Oxford.

Arthur Wynn, also known as “Agent Scott”married an Oxford student in 1938 and began to recruit agents during and after the war. His job was to identify young students who would become part of the British establishment to spy for the Russian government. He recruited dozens of young communists, but the exact number is unknown.

His existence was revealed in 1992 with the approval of the Russian intelligence services, but they refused to divulge his name until now.

The Times have said that the revelation of Wynn’s identity means that “one of the oddest mysteries in espionage history has finally been resolved.”

 

Sienna Miller to play a blind Oxford don

By
Edmund King
-

Actress Sienna Miller is to be offered the role of a blind Oxford University don in an upcoming independent film.

Shamim Sarif, the director of the film and a novelist, said it would be “fantastic” if Miller could play the role in “The Dreaming Spires”. Set in post-war Oxford, the film tells the story of a young student who falls in love with a blind, married English professor in her thirties.

The script is an adaptation of one of Sarif’s short stories. It is the first film by Sarif not to feature a lesbian love story. Filming is due to start later in the year.

 

 

OUSU finances in crisis after new plans abandoned

By
Nicky Henderson
-

The financial future of the Oxford University Students’ Union (OUSU) has been plunged into uncertainty after plans to restructure its funding was roundly rejected.

University officials and student representatives had toiled for months on how to shore up the organisation’s shaky finances, but their proposals were dismissed at a meeting of Oxford bursars this week.

The Working Party on OUSU funding are headed back to the drawing board following the snub from the Estates Bursars Committee (EBC).

The group began their review into OUSU’s financial structure late last year, amid concerns that the institution’s sources of income were inherently unstable.

As things stand, OUSU revenue is generated via a combination of ad hoc University grants, common room affiliation fees and profits from its commercial wing, Oxford Student Services Limited (OSSL).

There are major doubts however over the stability of these funding sources, forcing OUSU to restructure or face cutbacks in key services.

In response to the ongoing financial struggles, the Working Party on OUSU funding was set up by the Joint Committee of Council with Student Members (JCC). They proposed a new funding model, which brought colleges in as a fourth contributor to the OUSU budget.

The proposal was scrutinised by bursars at the EBC last Thursday. Although official feedback has not yet been released, it is believed that the model was strongly condemned, with some bursars labeling the reforms little more than “a sticking plaster.”

While the EBC was asked only to advise upon rather than accept or reject the proposal, it is very unlikely the JCC will be able pass the changes without their support

Asked to reflect on the future of the model, Secretary to the JCCSM, Gary Crocker, refused to comment until a formal statement from the EBC had been released.

“Once comments have been received from the EBC and any other consultative bodies the report will be reviewed and further consultation will take place,” he said.

“Until the consultation and review process is complete it would be unwise to speculate about future funding options and the finances at OUSU.”

OUSU President Lewis Iwu added that the JCCSM had taken great care to absorb feedback from students throughout the process.

“Consultation is important and that is why I have had several meetings with common room representatives to get constructive feedback,” he said.

The row over funding comes at an increasingly uncertain time for the Students’ Union, which is also facing a dramatic reorganisation to comply with the 2006 Charities Act – which comes into effect later this year.

Jason Keen, JCR President of St John’s College, said, “How this funding issue is resolved will be fundamental to the future of OUSU.

“We really are at a crossroads at the moment in terms of what we want our students union be, what it should do and how we should pay for it.”

He added that many of his fellow JCR and MCR colleagues were worried that they would end up having to foot the bill for the suggested contribution from colleges.

“The major concern at the moment is that this additional college rate would be passed straight on to common rooms, which could prompt a wave of disaffiliations,” he said.

The current proposed changes have been strongly criticised, with many fearing it could result in an essential stealth tax on students.

Among its fiercest critics is Ben Britton, MCR co-President of St Catherine’s College, who has created his own proposal as an alternative funding model.

“I, and several others, am pleased that JCCSM WG proposal has been opposed by EBC and hope that Conference of Colleges will follow suit,” he said.

“I remain very critical of the manner in which this model was constructed and that necessary consultation was hastily avoided.”

In light of the episode, some have claimed that to justify its funding model, OUSU needs to rethink its scope, level and purpose.

The OUSU Rep for Magdalen college, Tom Meakin welcomed this re-examination. He said, “I think the one great thing that can come out of this is that OUSU will have to more overtly justify its existence to JCRs. This will force people to go back to the drawing board and think about what they want from their student union. It will enable everyone who has an active role within the organisation be they JCR presidents, sabbatical officers or OUSU reps to take an active role in redefining what should be and what can be an organisation that caters for the needs of Oxford students.”

Walcott driven out of poetry race following sexual smear campaign

By
Kate Bowden
-

Nobel prize-winning poet Derek Walcott has dropped out of the race to become Oxford’s Professor of Poetry after being targeted by a vicious and systematic smear campaign.

The poet blamed his withdrawal on “low tactics” and “low and degrading attempt at character assassination”.

Female college heads and fellows across Oxford received anonymous envelopes containing allegations of sexual harassment made against the poet over twenty years ago. The hand-written envelopes, between 50 and 100 in number, contained a photocopied extract from The Lecherous Professor, a book examining incidents of sexual harassment on college campuses.

In the extract, a female student who Walcott had tutored at Harvard University alleged that the poet had sexually harassed her, asking to her to imagine making love to him, then graded her poorly in the class after she rejected his advances.

Walcott has refused to comment on the allegations, saying, “What happened twenty years ago I have never commented upon and have never given my side of what happened. That will continue to be the case.”

Harvard University officially reprimanded Walcott following the allegations. The Harvard Crimson, the University’s newspaper, reported at the time that Walcott did not deny the student’s testimony. His teaching style was “deliberately personal and intense,” he alleged.

The Crimson published a letter by the student containing an account of the conversation. The student claimed that, after she sent the letter, Walcott was “cold and distant”, showed “no concern for my education” and “did not fully evaluate my work as he did with other students of the class.”

“I do not want to get into a race for a post where it causes embarrassment to those who have chosen to support me for the role or to myself,” Walcott told the Evening Standard. “I already have a great many work commitments and while I was happy to be put forward for the post, if it has degenerated into a low and degrading attempt at character assassination, I do not want to be part of it.”

Professor Hermione Lee, a campaigner for Derek Walcott, has expressed her disgust at the smear campaign. “I am shocked and astonished that someone has been using these sorts of anonymous tactics,” she said. “Why are these tactics being used? It is a conceited campaign, to put things into an envelope with no name.”

“These allegations are from 25 years ago and we should have an argument in a proper manner. It’s a very complicated, ethical question and it should be properly debated.” She added, “You might ask yourself as a student body whether you wanted Byron or Shelley as a professor of poetry, neither of whom had personal lives free from criticism.”

The extract also described how, in 1995, the poet was accused of sexually harassing a student in a class he taught at Boston University. The student claimed that he had propositioned her. After she declined, he threatened to fail her and refused to produce her play. She later pressed for compensation and punitive damages.

Lee expressed concern that the letters may have been sent by Walcott’s competitors. “I can only assume that they were sent by Ruth Padel’s campaigners. I would like to disassociate myself from such behaviour.”
She added, “If it did not emanate from her, she should publicly disassociate herself from it.”

Professor Pedro Ferreira, Ruth Padel’s campaigner, emphasized that the smears had nothing to do with Padel’s campaign. “I haven’t heard anything about this. I know and have heard of the book, but I haven’t heard that the book has been sent out to people.”

He added, “I know there are people who are angry about this but I completely deny Ruth Padel’s involvement with such a campaign. We have nothing to do with this and we condemn it.”

The editors of Cherwell also received the extracts along with hand-written notes. One read, “I really think Hermione Lee is mad to try to bring this guy in. What say you? Sandra + Jane.”

Authors around the world received anonymous notes from a “group of women students at Oxford University” requesting that a letter be written to The Guardian and the University Press Office in objection to Walcott’s nomination.

Walcott’s withdrawal leaves only two poets left in the race for the post, Ruth Padel and Arvind Krishna Mehrotra. Major literary figures had backed Walcott’s application, including poet Jenny Joseph, and professor Hermione Lee, and he was seen as the front-runner for the post.

Rival poet Ruth Padel said that she is “shocked by Walcott’s withdrawal, and very sad”.

Oxford University have refused to postpone the election, due to take place this Saturday, despite claims that voters are now deprived of a meaningful choice. All Oxford graduates are eligible to vote.

Professor Peter MacDonald, of Christ Church College, told the Guardian newspaper that the University should delay the election, arguing, “Several eminent people who would not have stood against someone of Walcott’s stature would certainly have felt up to public comparison with Ruth Padel.”

MacDonald added, “A professor is not needed before the autumn. The University of Oxford should not allow the poetry chair to be cheapened in this way.”

Hermione Lee suggested that “representations might be made to the Oxford Elections Office to postpone the election.”

However, the University said on Wednesday that the election would continue to go ahead on the 16th May. A spokesperson said, “We are disappointed that one of the candidates for this year’s professor of poetry elections has pulled out of the contest at such a late stage. We hope voters will still attend on election day on Saturday.”

 

Healthcare, the Olympics, and the Obama Legacy

By
Nick Coxon
-

I’ve been reading Richard Pious’ Why Presidents Fail. What’s caught my eye is his discussion of the Clinton Healthcare reforms; or rather, why they never materialised. His argument is complex and detailed but the rub is something like this: the effort failed for two reasons. First, they tried to do too much too soon. Second, and most significantly, the process was all wrong. Hillary Clinton was put in charge of a task force of some five-hundred individuals split into roughly a dozen working groups. The task force was, in some respects, quite independent from the administration. It was comprised of a number of different stakeholders, but omitting a few crucial groups. Doctors’ groups, for example, were not fully consulted. And fatally, Congressional staffers weren’t included in the discussions until the last moment, and even then, no Republicans were involved. Deliberations were conducted entirely in private, with the public kept in the dark until too late on. The proposal did not even reach the floor of either house of Congress for debate.

Obama’s team shows signs of having benefited from the knowledge of the Clinton experience, and for that reason I think we have right to be more optimistic about this latest effort. Some of the top Obama aides (Emanuel in particular) were heavily involved in the earlier attempt. You see that reflected in their strategy. Since Monday, the White House has taken agressive control of the news agenda, in an effort to sell their healthcare proposal. They’re also careful to stress not just the benefits of their program but the bipartisanship of their process. The strategy is the same as for the stimulus and the budget – have the President persuade the public directly, and get Congress onside by showing a willingness to work with, not against, the opposition.

That this simple strategy is a good one is why I think this attempt stands a far better chance of success than Clinton’s. It’s important, of course, that healthcare costs are so much higher now than in 1993, and that big business, like never before, feels burdened by the high premiums they pay on their employees’ health plans – both these things lend support to Obama’s policy. But this administration remembers keenly the importance of the hard sell to both the public and to Congress. The way they’re conducting policy-making is streets ahead of the effort of fifteen years ago.

—

Nate Silver had an excellent piece yesterday on the 2016 Olympics. Obama is taking unprecedented steps to support the Chicago bid, recording two specific addresses on the topic, and dispatching top aide and noted fixer Valerie Jarrett to provide hands-on-support. Many have been quick to dismiss the administration’s keenness to back the Chicago bid as a product of the Obamas’ strong association with the city. Silver thinks it’s more than that, and he tries to bring the analytics in support of the idea that US hosting of the olympics helps the incumbent party in the following election.

The argument is clearer, I think, without the polling data. If Obama managed to bring the olympics to Chicago, the public would take to it. In Britain, the gripes are about cost. In the US, sport is not government funded to the same degree it is here; the thought is that, like the Atlanta games, all funds for Chicago 2016 would be found privately. So the most obvious possible objection to the hosting of the games doesn’t apply here. As such, he’d likely get a boost when the award of the games to Chicago was announced. More importantly, a summer games in 2016-which, if Obama wins reelection as we’d expect right now, would be his final full year in office-would contribute to a positive national mood, to the feeling that the Obama presidency had brought great things to the nation. And by the time of the games, the Democratic candidate for President (the smart money still says that person will be Hillary Clinton) would be known. Obama could, in this scenario, use the games as the perfect opportunity to pass the presidential mantle on to his preferred successor.

There are only a few big headline moments in US election campaigns, so far as most of the public is concerned: the nomination, the convention, the debates, the vote. Adding a big, free media circus centred around the President (and by extension, his party) right in the middle of that equation would, the thought goes, greatly enhance both Obama’s reputation and the chances of a democrat being elected as his successor.

And that’s something Presidents want – someone of their own stripe to succeed them. Part of the reason is that it seems like a final seal of approval on your time in office. More than that, it means that the change you brought is less likely to be dissolved, or reversed, or denounced. It’s all about legacy.

—

It seems early to be using the ‘L’ word. But Presidents shape their legacies from day one. Obama knows, I think, that passing healthcare and bringing the Olympics to Chicago are important precisely because they are positive things he could be remembered by.

All’s Well That Ends Well

By
Timothy Newey
-

When Coleridge described All’s Well That Ends Well as “not an agreeable story, but still full of love”, he captured perfectly the generic instability the play presents. The play teeters on a delicate knife-edge between disgust and delight as Shakespeare portrays Helena’s passionate love for Bertram, and the desperate lengths to which she will go to win his heart. When the King of France falls terminally ill, Helena promises to cure him if she can marry any Lord of her choice – she succeeds and chooses the reluctant and unwilling Bertram. After they are married, he leaves for war, preferring the risk of death to an unhappy matrimony. This violent clash of love and hatred has ensured that this black comedy has always remained one of Shakespeare’s lesser known plays.

But the production for the Magdalen Garden Show does not shy away from the challenge. Instead, the characters’ disturbing drive for self-gratification becomes the commanding force behind the play.
Much credit for this achievement must go to Roseanna Frascona, the actress playing Helena. Although small in stature, her performance controls the stage, as she manages to switch from fragile vulnerability to cunning flirtatiousness with apparent ease. As we witness her genuine grief at her unrequited love, we begin not only to understand the reasons for her lies, but also to support and enjoy them.

There are strong performances elsewhere in the cast. Samantha Losey is wonderfully eloquent and astute as the Countess of Roussillon, revelling in the power her position of authority over Helena affords her. The moments of dialogue between these equally dominant and scheming is particularly sharp and incisive. James Kingston, as the King of Paris, is marvellously resigned and retrospect, as he appears to live not in the present, but in his wealth of memories.

Directing All’s Well That Ends Well was always going to be an ambitious task but Rafaella Marcus does a superb job. She manages to capture deftly both the tension and the humour that underlies Shakespeare’s text. The setting of the President’s Garden at Magdalen promises to provide an elegant and extravagant backdrop for a play that so often aims at courtly romance, before deflating any sense of grandeur through its web of lies and deception.

Perhaps, the play has not always received the popularity and acclaim that it deserves but this production is a perfect opportunity for Oxford students to recognise one of the hidden gems lurking within Shakespeare’s cannon. We can only hope that the President of Magdalen is not quite as conniving and duplicitous as the characters that will come to occupy his garden next week.

four stars out of five

 

News Roundup: Week 3

By
Antonia Tam And Katie Bowden
-

Antonia and Katie take you through the major stories of the week and have a cheeky look at the lifestyle section, casting their eyes over Fit Soc and John Evelyn.

Interview: Holy Fuck

By
Nick Corrin
-

Centre stage at the 02 academy stand two metal desks overflowing with cables, effects boards and keyboards. Even an old film editing unit, a relic from Hollywood, makes it into the set up for Holy Fuck, a band that are accurately described on their website as ‘a chaotic live celebration of lo-fi noise and weirdo casio-driven rock’. A room full of fans wait in anticipation with the knowledge that tonight’s set will be a unique performance, a new musical creation of the moment.

The reason for this is that the band has an incredibly flexible model for their performances. Keyboardist Brian Borcherdt tells me that to be a good performer you need to ‘take full advantage of the fact it is live’ and to take opportunities ‘where you can do something random, fun and new’.

With Holy Fuck there are no pre-recorded loops or determined structures that you might find with other electronica bands, and the guys insist that the laptops hanging around are purely for emailing and never make it on stage. This lack of restriction means that you know what they play on the night is going to be original. It will be a synthesis of how they are feeling at the time and the audience’s response, of the things that have worked on the tour so far and some fresh experimentation. The familiar criticism of bands simply recreating their latest album certainly does not apply in this case.

As the band begins to play it is clear how they have managed to carve out such a good reputation as a live act over the past few years. The experimental and volatile mix of effects and synths from Brian Borchedt and Graham Walsh sit on top of a gutsy rhythm section of funky basslines and relentless drumming that give the performance a sense of urgency which is infectious. The band is under no illusion that it might not be to everyone’s taste. Brian admits, ‘its not vocal music, its not really pop music but it still has a dance-ical element to it’. That ‘dance-ical’ element is what makes it accessible to a wider audience than just hardcore electronica fans.

Holy Fuck go to a lot of effort to try to recreate the impression of a live show on their CDs, which comprise entirely of live performances from tours or recorded from single performances in the studio. ‘[Recording is about] trying to get as close to the essence of what we’re doing as we can’ explains Brian. ‘It’s all in relationship to one another’s part so recording together is really the only way to achieve that result and cohesiveness’. Despite their best attempts the recorded tracks never quite seem to capture the true genius of their live show, not because the various elements don’t come together any less well, but because, as with any band, you can never capture the atmosphere and energy of a packed venue.

Perhaps there’s even something deterministic in it. A CD will always be the same, whereas with Holy Fuck’s live show the sense of the unknown makes for the feeling that the audience are not only witnessing artistic creation, but are an active influence on it. With this kind of experiential content it is no wonder that they continue to increase their international reputation – they were hailed by NME as one of the top three performances of Glastonbury last year.

Although a focus on live performance seems to be the way the music industry is moving in face of decreasing CD sales, Holy Fuck don’t seem to notice that they could be a perfect example of a band set up to succeed in this changing environment. ‘There can be a lot of motives for getting out on the road and into the studio’ Brian tells me, ‘but one of the most important ones is that you have to enjoy it and we enjoy it so much that we’re not really focusing too much on the commercial side of it’.
Holy Fuck will be releasing their new album this autumn and it promises not only to be a great record, but also hopefully to provide material for their next tour and another chance to witness an incredible live act responsible for some true artistic innovation.

 

Interview: The Sunshine Underground

By
Beatrice Male
-

I got rather excited at the prospect of interviewing The Sunshine Underground in their dressing room. Optimistically envisioning that it would be a pristine white room covered with light-framed mirrors, I am rather surprised to be ushered into a room at the top of a narrow staircase that could only be described as bearing a striking resemblance to a college’s JCR kitchen. There is a metal sink built into a tabletop surface that is close to falling off the wall with a small fridge underneath it. There is a little table and a couple of frayed sofas on which the band sit.

Nevertheless, the Sunshine Underground are cheery and are making use of the facilities by stockpiling the fridge full of beer. Knowing relatively little about the band, I set out to discover exactly who they are and what they’re about.

Perhaps impertinently, I begin by asking them whether they are aware of a band called Underground Sunshine who hit the US charts in the sixties with a cover of Beatles hit ‘Birthday’; ‘No!’ is the emphatic reply that this is greeted with from singer/guitarist Craig Wellington and drummer Matthew Gwilt. They then explain that their name comes from a Chemical Brothers song. ‘We met Ed from the Chemical Brothers once actually. We asked him if he minded us being named after one of their songs and the only comment that he made was that in the sixties there was a band called Sunshine Underground.’ A mystery solved, it would seem.

We chat about how the band got together (‘We went to college together and started to play; we’re old friends’) and Matt and Craig struggle to remember how long they’ve been focusing all of their efforts on the band: ‘We’ve been seriously doing the band full-time for about five years I suppose. When we started touring… when we got a deal… it’s been about four and a half… Four, no, four and a half? It’s been a while.’

 

I wonder whether, in all that time, the band have carved themselves a niche amongst the throngs of other Indie bands that occupy the charts at the moment. ‘We just do what we want to do; I don’t know if that makes us different’ Matt declares. Craig agrees: ‘Well, we don’t really listen to the stereotypical Indie kind of bands out there at the moment; that jingle jangle guitar. We’re pretty anti-Indie.’

‘I just don’t like those bands that like to think of themselves as The Libertines. I do love The Libertines but it’s not what we do.’ The band’s unique selling point? ‘We’ve got quite a strong dance element to our music that we’ve developed since we first started to tour and I think that sets us apart from the bog standard Indie band. People tend more to dance at our gigs than mosh.’ I can’t say that I picked up this dance aspect in the band’s songs that I have heard and I was left still scratching my head slighting during that evening’s gig.

I ask the guys about the new album. After learning that, although finished, the record is yet to be named, Matt and Craig tell me that they expect the christening of the album to come about in the same way as that of their 2006 release Raise the Alarm. ‘It was only called that because our manager called me up and… it was always a contender and he was like, seriously, it’s got to go out now. We asked him if we had a couple of days to think about it and he said no it’s got to be today and so we said… Raise the Alarm?’ That’ll probably happen again at some point in August.’

With the band disappearing off the radar for a couple of years following their sophomore effort, I wondered how the writing and recording process went for this album. ‘We were writing for so long, for about two years on and off, writing this album and trying to get it right and by the time we were ready to go into the studio and do it, it was like a weight off really.’ Craig tells me. Matt seems to find the whole thing slightly more intense: ‘Kind of,’ he mused, ‘but at the same time we only had three weeks allocated to do it in and so the pressure was on to do it well’.

The band are clearly very proud of how they made use of the demos that they recorded on a four-track when in a cottage in Scotland where they’d gone to write songs. ‘We ended up actually putting quite a lot of the original demo back into the song because they were right, weren’t they!’ Matt exclaimed. He went on to explain that recreating this sound was one of the most difficult parts of the recording process: ‘we ended up co-producing the album in the end because the demos ended up being the sound of the album we were trying quite a lot of the time in the recording and mixing to get back to the original sound of the demo.’

They tell me how they always felt that they were going to go down the route of producing or co-producing the album themselves and talk about how there are still some songs on the first album which they’re not entirely happy with because they took too much advice off other people, thinking that they’d know more than the band themselves. ‘You trust people to do it for you and then you get it back and think… is that any good? You’re just as well to do it yourself.’

Sensing that the band could talk about all of this for some time, I change the topic somewhat by asking the band about why they have a blog rather than a website; I wonder whether they think it important for musicians to have this sort of communication with their fans alongside the music that they produce. ‘I don’t see why there’s a need for a website as such – with a blog you can do an everyday update. Like now we’re adding a tour diary to it, which might be more difficult on a website. It is just easier for us to update it really.’

I ask their thoughts on Twitter which, as far as I am aware, is a condensed and intensified blog of sorts. They seem to be very wary of Twitter, finding it odd enough when fans add them on Facebook: ‘I had fans sending me messages saying how sorry they were when I broke up with my girlfriend!’ Daley Smith, the band’s bassist, laughed.

I’m interested to know whether, alongside the heavy recording and touring schedule, the lads have time for any hobbies. The answers surprise me. They range from dog-owning to jogging to tending to vegetables. Concerned, I ask who looks after the vegetables and the dog when the band are on tour. I’m reassured that both have extended family who tend to them.

The only advice that The Sunshine Underground had for Cherwell readers was to ‘listen to more Sunshine Underground. Apparently it helps you focus’. The band’s (inescapably) Indie offerings are enjoyable in the main, and are indeed worth checking out if you want some music to play when revising that won’t distract you too much. Nice lads, nice music.

1...2,0662,0672,068...2,447Page 2,067 of 2,447

Explore

Follow us

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2024 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy