Friday 11th July 2025
Blog Page 2142

Review: Rodchenko and Popova

0

He was the working-class son of a circus performer; she was a rich man’s daughter from Moscow. The Bolshevik revolution threw them together in one the most dynamic cultural shifts of the twentieth-century.

Alexander Rodchenko and Liubov Popova were the original ‘odd couple’ of modern art, forming a breakaway group of artists who wanted to embody the ideology of the new age. While Bolshevik Communism sought to remodel Russian society and overhaul an outdated economy, Rodchenko and Popova were attempting their own revolution. Soon, Constructivism had succeeded in turning the art world on its head.

The Tate Modern’s celebration of the Constructivist movement commences with an exploration of Popova and Rodchenko’s early paintings. Many of the works have never been exhibited in the West before and are borrowed from museums hidden deep in the Russian hinterland.

Popova’s colored geometric compositions are prophetic in their similarity to the Cubist works which were to soon appear in Europe. Abandoning canvas in favour of industrial plywood, Popova was highly experimental, even mixing sawdust into her paint to give her work a tactile quality.

Meanwhile, Rodchenko had already predicted the death of painting and was producing futuristic sculptures based upon mechanical constructions. Russia’s artistic rebels wanted a new abstract art, free from the repression of Realism to explore the infinite possibilities of geometry.

While the early paintings and sculptures are mesmerizing in their modernity and complexity, they are merely a brief prelude to the commercial designs which embodied the tenets of Constructivism with extreme revolutionary zeal.
Rodchenko and Popova sought to ‘constructivise’ the human world. They transformed the theoretical compositions of their paintings into architecture, photography, typography, fashion, theatre and poetry. Popova even created hammer-and-sickle fabric designs for the state textile works in 1923. It is the very definition of kitsch.

‘All of Moscow was covered with our work,’ Rodchenko wrote. ‘We made about 50 posters, about 100 sign boards, wrappers, containers, illuminated advertisements, advertising columns, illustrations in magazines and newspapers.’ Constructivism became the new definition of high art.
The exhibition traces an astounding stretch of creativity. Rodchenko and Popova had designed the blueprint for a whole new Russia: aircraft hangers, chairs, teacups, chess sets, even workers’ uniforms. The Constructivist trajectory showed little sign of waning. The sheer volume of their output is testament to the misguided optimism of the Constructivist cause.

Political posters with slogans such as ‘Keep up the Revolutionary Pace’ combine letters of the Cyrillic alphabet with cut-out images of revolutionary figures. It brims with naivety. This is the beauty of the exhibition, the advantage of viewing an entire artistic movement in retrospect.

Perhaps an entire cultural shift is a bit too much to take in at one go. ‘Defining Constructivism’ can be a little exhausting. Ultimately, Constructivism became a dead end. Quirky utilitarian chess tables gave way to gulags and Stalinism.

The death of the Constructivist dream leaves us felling cold, rather than imbuing us with revolutionary fire.

4 out of 5 stars

 

Water way to feel better

0

Fifty years ago life was simple. You’d get old, and then you’d start to worry about your health, while the youth danced carefree amongst the roses. Now, anyone over 50 can barely contain their excitement at the coming retirement, whilst pre and post adolescents alike have become gradually obsessed with ‘trendy’ new ways of boosting their health to superhuman levels. Every week a new berry champions a payload of antioxidants and nutrients: There’s an implicit belief that, if we can just drink enough Strawberry and Banana smoothie, we can undo the effects of last nights Smirnoff (or Marlboro) Red. Self proclaimed leaders of the ‘enhanced water category’, Glacéau, have been paying attention. And so, six neon bottles have hit the cafés of Oxford, promising nothing less than freshly bottled magic to the customer. Vitamin Water strips away any pretence of a cute-sy love for organic manufacturing processes, selling itself purely on the strength of what it can do for you. Ever the sceptic, I called Glacéau on this, and put their drinks to the test to see if this flavour of the month is really worth your £1.95. First up is the gorgeous ‘Spark’. ‘Ever wanted to skateboard down a mountain? …Do a handstand on the wings of 747? …Race a greyhound?’ Man! I just wanted to fix my essay crisis! Thanks ‘Spark’!

The science is less than Romantic. ‘Spark’ is a lethal concoction of guarana (naturally occurring stimulant), Taurine (bull sperm) and caffeine, supposedly sending you straight into the ‘zone’ of higher thinking. I like to think it’s the stimulants, combined with the presumed levels of nutritional pixie dust, that give it the enticing, ‘come play with me’ yellow glow. What’s it like in practice? There’s an episode of Futurama where Fry drinks 100 cups of coffee. Over the episode, he gradually descends into a shaking, twitching, fast-talking train wreck. Eventually, the 100th cup pushes him over the edge, into a sort of zen state, so wired that reality moves like treacle in comparison. This is a fairly accurate reflection of the effects of Spark. Of all the drinks tested, this easily does best on fulfilling its promises.

Revive and Essential, or Purple and Orange to their friends, are designed as the ultimate student assistant; a hangover cure. This isn’t made explicit on the bottle itself, but reading between the lines the principle is pretty clear. Both designed to fully hydrate you, they’re loaded with a good dose of generic super-vitamins too. The application is simple. Drink the purple one as you come in from the usual heavy night with the Archers drinking soc. Pass out in a comfortable position, then drink the Orange one the next morning. In theory, sorted. In America, the craze amongst the (clearly money-rich-sense-poor) student population is to mix your drinks with these, giving you guilt free, healthy fun. I, being scientifically minded, decided to settle for merely getting extremely drunk. Interestingly enough, the drinks actually did something. Not what I was promised, but something.

The-Sunday-after. I was, that morning, still extremely drunk. Giggling, I downed my bottle of Essential, and set off to a morning full of merry, Sainsburys related, mistakes. You might think at this point, that this marked a failure for the centre for responsible hydration. In fact, as the day wore on, events took a most unexpected turn. Having been in this situation before, I know that the evening is typically characterised by the kind of headache and nausea that has me rolling around the floor of the JCR, sobbing for a glass of water, and massaging my temples like Magneto. Surprisingly, I felt fine. I’m not entirely convinced that this was direct result of whatever nutritional voodoo Glacéau are playing at, but it’s difficult still to argue with the results.
Last on the list is the exercise booster, Power-C, which is excitingly ‘dragonfruit flavoured’. The comparison given by Glacéau is with Popeye’s spinach, which seems a little bit of a stretch. In terms of scientific vagary, this is far and away the most fantastical. Promised is beating my granny in an arm-wrestling contest. I’ll settle for a quick rowing trial.

So. The goal is 7500 meters on an erg, in as fast a time as possible. We’ll leave it a day apart for recovery, and start at 8am sharp. Go!
First run, V-Water free. 29:55, a time that leaves me absolutely smashed. Red face, heavy breathing, coughing up scoops of tar…not a pretty sight.
Second run, ‘Power-ed’ up. Surprisngly…28:02! Very, very nearly 2 minutes off. What’s more, I could very nearly hold a conversation without throwing up. What crazed magic is this?!
Standard anomaly? Probably. I think it’s fair to claim it impossible that Vitamin water is going to actually, in the real world, make me a better rower. Or indeed a better friend, a better lover, better liked, happier, or whatever they might promise in the reams of preachy promotional material. The little fitness test highlights something interesting, however. In the same way that I probably didn’t have a religious experience because I drank some yellow squash, and that my hangovers was no worse that evening than any other, I could have exercised just as hard first time round.

You look at a bottle of Vitamin Water, and are confronted by an inner monologue something like this; ‘That just looks like brightly coloured water. They couldn’t be selling just brightly coloured water. The brightly coloured water says it will make me happy! It must actually make me happy! I’ll buy the brightly coloured water.’ And suddenly you’re £2 poorer.
On the other hand, at the heart of all this might be an amazing placebo effect. Exhausted on a Thursday morning, I was trying to write this so I could close my eyes without hearing a voice screaming deadline. Left over from my little experimental jaunt, I had a spare bottle of Spark, the ‘gets you high’ favourite. Downed it, and within about 10 minutes my writers block just disappeared.

The easiest way to get through life is just to trick yourself into things. We make little games when we revise to distract from the monotony, we set little goals of ‘just 100 more words’ when writing essays, or ‘one more chapter’ making notes so that we keep making progress. And maybe there are enough buzz words and optimistic images across the packaging here to convince you that ‘yeah, maybe this can do something to help me’. Which is why I currently feel pretty MDM-Azing right now.

So actually, that first intuition you might have isn’t too far from the truth. When you buy this rubbish, you’re physically just buying some neon coloured, 100 calorie-a-bottle water. But really, you’re also buying a dream. If it makes the morning-after that bit easier, so be it.

Review: Little Mermaid

0

Rather than an exposition of catchy songs and animated talking crabs aimed at preteens, the original version of The Little Mermaid, written by Hans Christian Andersen, is a dark and tragic fairytale about division, separation and unrequited love.

In this version, the finned-princess is never reunited with her prince, rather she is forced to make the impossible decision between murdering her true love or succumbing to her own death. To make it even worse, our protagonist suffers constantly from a pain of walking comparable only to stepping on broken glass.

Director Eva Tausig’s adaptation can be described in one word – ambitious. Physical theatre, dance, poetry and a narrating chorus combine in what Tausig calls ‘self-conscious storytelling’, along with the regular ensemble of lighting and sound effects.

If that doesn’t sound challenging enough, this piece of drama also relies on a high level of audience participation throughout (gulp). The audience is divided into two-the ‘human world’ and the ‘sea world’-which are separated by a net. Simple enough so far. However, as the play progresses they are expected to become part of the cast, holding props, ringing bells and waving bits of fabric around to emulate whirlpools. Most people would associate this with slapstick comedy as opposed to romantic tragedy, but it is undeniably effective.

Symbolism and abstract representation are intrinsic throughout Tausig’s creation. Whether she will succeed in creating the intense, dark atmosphere she seems to strive for, or drown spectacularly in a sea of pretentiousness though, remains to be seen. Considering The Little Mermaid is ultimately a fairytale, a certain amount of cheesiness is acceptable, but unless the script’s delivery is perfect, Tausig’s adaptation may well border on the cringe-worthy and lose the poignancy of the original fairytale.

For those theatre-goers wanting a relaxed evening of viewing, this certainly is not a play for you. However, if audience participation is your kind of thing then no doubt an underwater adventure of giant nets, riotous noise-making and embarrassing costumes is sure to provide a entertaining evening.

3 star out of 5

 

Review: Betrayal

0

Betrayal tells the story of Jerry’s illicit, seven-year-long affair with his best friend’s wife. Inspired by Pinter’s own clandestine affair, it is a searing exploration of the consequences of infidelity.
The play begins one evening, in the present, with Jerry and Emma meeting two years after the end of their affair. The plot unfolds in reverse chronology to the moment the affair began nine years before. The pressures of moving backwards in time are handled deftly by the cast, who remain resolutely ‘in the moment,’ never letting their scenes be clouded by what they and the audience know happens in the future.
J. Preston Witt is outstanding as Jerry, particularly since the dialogue and intonation are potentially challenging for an American actor. He flawlessly conveys the depth of Jerry’s love for Emma, and it is a testament both to Pinter’s writing and Witt’s acting that Jerry remains a likeable character.
From the opening moments of the very first scene, Cicely Hadman’s Emma competently conveys the awkwardness of her relationship with Jerry, veering between vulnerable and defensive. Although her expression occasionally teeters on the edge of blandness, she manages to convey Emma’s anguish and unwillingness to reveal her true feelings in a truthful manner. Alex Worsnip is excellent as Robert, infusing his scenes with humour whilst maintaining a hint of cold ruthlessness. His nuanced delivery makes the audience question just how much he really knew of the affair. The entire cast does a fine job of delivering Pinter’s dialogue with the pathos it deserves, filling the lines with layered meanings.
Robert Williams does a superb job in his first outing as a director. To tackle a play as complex as this is an ambitious task and he handles it with aplomb.
His direction is elegant and emotive, deftly capturing the intimacy between Jerry and Emma. The simple lighting lets the dialogue and emotion speak for themselves.
The use of news clips to set the date prevents the time changes from becoming hackneyed and, along with the use of flowers, envelops you in memories. The traverse staging serves the intimate atmosphere of the play well, and helps create the suggestion that Jerry and Emma are trapped by their feelings for each other and for Robert.
Betrayal is an excellent production of a fantastic play. It is surely one of the must-sees for the term.

Four Stars

Alice Salvage

Review: Wolverine

0

Comic book films operate under curious criterion. On the one hand, audiences expect fantastical super powers to amount to gripping action sequences. Simultaneously, these individuals who are able to fly, level buildings, and shoot sticky white goo from their wrists must be vulnerable people who viewers can identify with. X – Men Origins: Wolverine had perfect potential for this, but unfortunately fails to deliver on both accounts.

The film revolves around Logan alias Wolverine (Hugh Jackman), a mutant with superhuman regenerative healing abilities and claws that thrust out of the indents between his knuckles. He seeks revenge for the murder of his girlfriend that was committed by his brother (Liev Schreiber), and as such enlists himself into the ominous Weapon X project to bolster his powers.

The plot progresses with predictability and twists fail to shock at any point. It is hard to care about any of the characters because the roster is so large, none of the important characters are given enough screen time for the audience to empathise with them. Not to belittle the death of one’s lover, but it is genuinely difficult to muster up any sympathy for Logan when his relationships with them seem so artificial.

The trade off between sidelining these main characters is to give screen time for a wide selection of other mutants lifted from the Marvel back catalogue. The scenes where these individuals get to show off their abilities is where the film is at its most enjoyable. Having been unfamiliar with the any of them from the original sources, I found their powers and the way in which they were utilised original and entertaining. Though at times their inclusion does seem forced; several of the characters serve little function other than for entertaining set-pieces that add nothing to the plot. Characters are simply defined by their superpower. There is a mutant called Blob that just gets fatter as the film goes on, made fun of for his size, and used as a human punching bag in a superfluous boxing scene.

This is where the film fails most significantly, the characters are just not engaging. The acting is fine, Hugh Jackman and his brother played by Liev Schreiber do the best out of what little they have to work with, but what they have to work with is very little. The script is woefully wooden: the bulk of the dialogue is used functionally to get from one scene to the next; and when the pace does slow to add emotional weight, the dialogue is painfully contrived.

It could be argued that these criticisms are missing the point; X-Men Origins – Wolverine clearly markets itself as a big, brash summer action blockbuster and to judge it negatively on the basis of lacking character development as being slightly irrelevant. However with the film being a prequel specifically concerning the origins of Wolverine, the feeling of complete indifference to his plight that permeates the film makes for a very hollow viewing experience. Fans of the series will be disappointed, give it a miss and watch the first two again instead.

2 stars out of 5

 

Protesters demand end to Oxford animal testing

0

Animal rights protest group SPEAK this week handed over a 65,000-signature petition to Oxford University, condemning the opening of the Oxford University Biomedical Sciences Centre and calling for an end to all testing on animals.

A spokesman from SPEAK said the 65,000 signatures had been gathered for the cause of stopping animal testing at Oxford specifically and were ‘proof of the strength of feeling against its operations among the local community and tourists alike.’

The petition was accompanied by a march down Cornmarket.
Another activist told the BBC “We’re hoping the University will take notice at the amount of opposition to the experiments they do. We were hoping to either get the building stopped, or get it changed to a cutting edge lab looking at alternatives [to animal testing]. The new lab means we can now concentrate on all animals being tested on at Oxford University, and not just the new building.”

The moves were timed to coincide with the end of the World Month for Laboratory Animals, an international campaign with which SPEAK has been heavily involved. The group has organised demonstrations throughout the UK against animal research and testing. Similar groups overseas have also been involved in the month of protest, with one demonstration in California seeing a dramatic confrontation between pro-testing and anti-testing campaigners.

Toby Holder, a spokesman for the pro-animal research group Pro-Test, questioned the value of the petition. “Over the last five years, SPEAK has gathered this enormous amount of signatures, but I’m not sure what it hopes to achieve by handing it to Oxford University.”

“Even if it was 65000 signatures, they don’t have the right to halt the medical advances for the rest of us.”

The submission of the petition comes shortly after a major victory for the anti-testing movement, when the British Union of Anti-Vivisectionists forced Oxford and other universities to publish figures on primate testing, which they had previously refused to do.

The university have released a statement in response to the petition and protest, saying “Animals are only used when no other research method is possible.” The spokesman said further: “We recognise that people have a range of views on this issue. The university has always said the building (the Biomedical Sciences Centre) is going to be better for animal welfare and is supporting research into disabilities and deadly diseases.”

SPEAK’s spokesman dismissed this statement as ‘meaningless’, saying the public should focus on the animals that are ‘convulsing and dying at the bottom of their cages in the centre.’

The group’s website urges tourists to boycott Oxford, urging students and tourists to “Say no to the city that supports corruption and cruelty. Boycott Oxford and say yes to a science based on compassion that actually works.”

The petition has been met by mixed reactions from University students. Robert Smith, a Biochemist in his first year at St Hilda’s College, believes that one should focus on the rewards that animal testing can reap in the field of medicine, while still ensuring that animals were kept as comfortable as possible. “When we think of animal testing cruelty and exploitation are often the first things that come to mind. It is sometimes easy to lose sight of what it can actually achieve. As soon as one looks at the number of instances where new cures for human diseases have been found thanks to tests on animals it becomes much harder to condemn. That having been said I feel that measures should be taken to improve as much as possible the conditions in which laboratory animals are kept. Consideration for the animals’ welfare is equally important.”

A 2005 Cherwell survey showed that 86% of Oxford students are in favour of the university carrying out research on animals, with just 11% opposed. By a similar margin, 84-10, they also supported the new animal research facility. Many students said that the actions of animal rights campaigners had made them more likely to support testing.

Interview: Fightstar

0

A full hour before doors are due to open, a horde of fans are sat in wait, leaning against the grubby wall of the O2 Academy as they try to catch a glimpse of the band through the windows.

As someone who knows Fightstar as ‘that fit guy who used to be in Busted’s new band,’ I am bemused at this show of loyalty, but it’s no rare occurrence. ‘There are some people outside that have been to every show we’ve ever done’, bassist Dan tells us, himself looking rather incredulous, ‘I just don’t know how they do it.’

Fightstar have come a long way since their formation in 2003, but they still work hard to keep their fan base happy, or even to produce music at all. Their latest release, Be Human, required the bold step of creating their own label Search & Destroy. Even so, they aren’t naive about the increasing business difficulties of the music industry: ‘We’ve created a model which seems to be the way of the future for us smaller bands to be able to generate enough income to survive,’ they explain of their decision to self-fund the record.

I wonder if the band would consider a career change in accountancy as they explain their various money-making ventures, including most creatively their own iPhone application in which fans play ‘catch the milk’ as their album cover (which depicts a woman with the head of a cow next to a glass of milk) is brought to life. With the highest scorer eventually winning a guitar, you have to praise the boys’ originality in persuading fans to part with their cash.

There are also, however, creative advantages to self-releasing. Fightstar gained a lot of freedom by additionally deciding to coproduce Be Human themselves, alongside long-term friend Carl Bown, who plays guitar in support band Laruso. As Bown was able to offer them cheap rates, the group could afford to rack up seventy days in the studio, despite their low budget. ‘It was a shed. So we had creative freedom, but physical freedom…? Living so close to each other for all that time was crazy at times,’ jokes Dan.

But guitarist and vocalist Alex explains that this time spent working closely together was necessary: ‘because everything was done off our own back, there was no one there cracking the whip and it was up to us to self-motivate.’
The time spent perfecting tracks in the studio is audible on their new album, which sees the band diversifying more in their arrangements whilst maintaining their trademark dark atmosphere. ‘I think it’s just better, basically,’ says Dan, clearly proud of their latest achievement. ‘The ideas are more complex, but not just for the sake of complexity.’

This is particularly evident in the use of orchestral and choral layers on Be Human. Enlisting a sixteen piece string orchestra on such a low budget was no easy task, and the band confess to pulling a lot of favours to secure frequent Coldplay arranger Audrey Riley.

Their aim was to create a textured sound which has a cinematic feel, reflecting the four band members’ shared love of film, and they succeed in attaining this effect. It’s easy to imagine songs such as ‘The English Way’ providing the soundtrack to an angsty moment in an indie flick.

Achieving the same outcome live is less successful, despite their use of choral samples throughout the show. Instead they go back to their more conventional rock roots, striking poses and pulling faces as they hammer through an energy-fuelled set which has the crowd forming a mosh pit that fills almost the whole of the smaller Academy room.

While still incorporating the doom and gloom elements now expected from Fightstar, the lyrics on the new tracks performed also reveal a more uplifting tone, particularly in latest hit ‘Mercury Summer’. ‘We’ve all been in a happier situation than we have in the past’, Alex explains the inspiration for his brighter lyrics, ‘there are a few love songs poking about.’

Going by tonight’s show, Fightstar will only go on to get happier. The energy levels are high both on and off stage, and fans are clearly delighted at the band’s choice of an acoustic version of old favourite ‘Amethyst’ as an encore. After a brilliant first night performance, it’s highly probable they’ve added to their loyal fan base. Certainly my appreciation of them as a live band has grown, and not only because Charlie looks cute when his hair gets sweaty.

Students could earn interest on loans

0

Deflation means that students may be given rebates on student loans unless interest rate calculations are changed.

Interest on student loans is calculated with reference to the Retail Prices Index (RPI), which in March showed inflation to have dropped to -0.4%. It is the first time Britain has experienced deflation since 1960.

Interest is calculated in March but applied in September, meaning that current economic changes would not impact on loans until later this year.
The fall in inflation effectively means that students would start to earn interest on their loans, rather than pay it, and could result in rebates for some graduates.

However, this will only be the case if the way that interest is calculated is not changed.

A spokeswoman for the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills, which is in charge of policy making for the Student Loans Company, said that they are in discussions with the Treasury and will ‘consider the options available’.

She added that the department hopes to ‘make an announcement shortly’.
The DIUS has indicated that the situation will have been clarified well in advance of the annual change to interest rates in September.

Interest on ‘mortgage-style’ fixed rate loans taken out before 1998 must track RPI rates, even if they go into deflation. Post-1998 rates, in contrast, are based on the annual March RPI or the highest bank base rate, whichever is the smaller, plus 1%.

The Student Loans Company has also recently announced a new loan recovery system for outstanding loans.

In a news release on its website, the company said that it will be contacting graduates who have consistently defaulted on loan payments. It threatened that those whose salary exceeds the maximum for deferment will be registered with UK Credit Reference Agencies. The changes only apply to those on post-1998 loans which are tied to RPI.

The company emphasised that options are available for those who need to defer or work out a new repayment plan.

Before the fall into deflation last month, students had been paying the highest rate of interest on loans since the early nineties, at 4.8% throughout 2007/08. The SLC has said that interest in 2009/10 will not exceed this year’s rate of 3.8%.

5 Minute Tute: May Day

0

Why do we celebrate May Day at all?

The origins of May Day are pre-Christian, when its position approximately halfway between the spring equinox and the summer solstice led to it being revered as the first day of summer on the pagan calendar. The Celts called the festival ‘Beltane’, Bel being their god of the Sun. On this day, the Roman flower goddess, Flora, was also celebrated. The tradition of a May Day celebration survived the decline of paganism thanks to efforts by the Church to obscure the pagan festival with Roodmas, a rival Christian mass. The festivities associated with May Day were smothered by Puritanism under Oliver Cromwell but revived with the Restoration of Charles II in 1660. May 1st is also celebrated around the world as International Workers’ Day, or Labour Day.

 

What exactly happens in Oxford?

At 6am on May Morning crowds throng The High around Magdalen College to hear the choir sing the Hymnus Eucharisticus from the top of Magdalen Tower. After this, the college bells signal the start of festivities, including Morris Dancing and live music, throughout the city.
Many cafés and restaurants open early to serve the revellers a May Morning breakfast and other college choirs perform their own hymns. It is spuriously reported that there is a tradition of jumping into the Cherwell from Magdalen Bridge; the practice emerged in the 1970s and has had a history of injuries ever since. The police now prevent access to the bridge on May morning – making the jump an even bigger challenge for some.

 

How is May Day changing?

May Day certainly isn’t going anywhere in a hurry, but it may be changing. It has been reported that Oxford Council’s budget cuts will hit the celebration this year and in the future. The costs of decoration, live music, performers and police are all considered too high and will lead to scaling-down of festivities in 2009. Further pressure has been applied in recent years by the cost of closing Magdalen Bridge to prevent ‘jumpers’; the council denies that this is a significant factor. On the bright side, some changes may be for the good. In particular the diversity of the acts to be seen around Oxford is growing every year, including modern dance and martial arts displays.

 

What goes on elsewhere to celebrate?

May Day celebrations around the country offer a glimpse into the eccentricity of rural Britain. Many towns and villages still erect maypoles on their greens for people to dance around; this emerged as a fertility ritual and an opportunity for matchmaking among the young. Barwick in Yorkshire, claims the largest maypole in England, standing some 30 meters in height. There is also typically the crowning of the May Queen who is paired up with the village effigy of the Green Man, both traditions hailing back to Roman and Celtic folklore. In Padstow, townsfolk celebrate with the ‘Obby ‘Oss (Hobby Horse, though it does not resemble a horse). Two horses, the Old Oss and the Blue Ribbon Oss, set out from rival pubs and parade until they meet raucously in the centre of town. Kendal in Cumbria holds a medieval street market with costumes and music. There is also the famous cheese-rolling in Gloucester and the Tetbury Wool Sack Race. In London, the Beltane Bash is recognised as the world’s oldest Pagan Pride Parade, attracting thousands of modern day practitioners of ancient spiritualism.

 

Are there any memorable May Days in history?

On May Day 1517, xenophobic riots in London led to troops entering the capital, mass arrests and a 9pm curfew the night before. 14 rioters were hung, drawn and quartered, 400 more were pardoned by Henry VIII.
On May Day 1707, the Act of Union came into effect, uniting Scotland and England.
In the United States, May Day 1886 saw strike action by hundreds of thousands of Americans in support of an eight-hour day.
On May Day 1997, Tony Blair became PM after Labour won the general election
On May Day 2005, a record 40 people were injured in Oxford after jumping off Magdalen Bridge into the Cherwell – the police have since closed the bridge every year.

The State Debate

0

Antonia Tam

English, St Hilda’s

People who are privately educated only make up about 7% of those in British schools and yet a disproportionate number gain places at the top universities. In 2007, a third of Oxbridge admissions were from just 3% of elite independent schools.
We often hear about access initiatives for those in state education, but the very fact that there is such a divide in the first place is disheartening. If private schools were to be abolished everyone would have a similar starting ground. Not only would state education improve, with pressure on the government to ensure high standards, but society would be better integrated. I wouldn’t suggest that we abolish private education immediately-there is a huge but necessary input from the government into the public sector that would take time. However, in the long run, society would be better off if a child’s education wasn’t determined by its family finances.
From an early age privately educated pupils mix almost exclusively among those 7% of similarly educated people, mostly from the middle classes. This results in a small network of people with favourable connections in the jobs market, who are ignorant of other social groups. How can equal opportunity and an integrated society become a reality with such divisions? Education should be as much about acquiring social awareness and mutual understanding as it should be about academic or vocational work. There should not be an option to pay more for an education that makes it easier for one to secure a place at the more sought after universities. State education is, in many cases, exemplary. I was lucky enough to attend a fantastic state sixth form college which thoroughly looked after all of its pupils. Such schools are an example of what is possible, but the state education system is constantly undermined in its efforts to improve, because private education is supported by vast financial resources. Were there only state schools, the wealthy would invest their energy into ensuring that the standards of state schools were consistently driven up. I object to the unnecessary and misinformed snobbery that sometimes seems to come with having attended a private school. One’s ability to fork out thousands for something everybody should have ready access to does not strike me as something worth being especially proud of. When discrimination hits a child the moment school begins, you know there’s a problem.

 

David Merlin-Jones

History, Exeter

For many, private education is the root of much evil in society, the cause of gross injustice. It is argued that much of the inequality in society can be traced back to it, one way or another. Everyone seems to be in favour of equality, in principle. But what exactly do we want to achieve when we talk about it? Equality of ‘opportunity’ means everyone gets to start from the same scratch line. After that, how things turn out is left up to the individual. Private schools give the rich a head start, their parents already having run half the race. Yet to aim at equality of ‘opportunity’ is totally unrealistic.
Try to overcome the accident of birth and it simply won’t work; some are born rich, some are born poor—the failure of Communism has more than proven that. What really matters for people is equality of ‘outcome’; that at the end of the day, they have as much as anyone else. Private education need not be objectionable to those who believe in equality. This is because equality of outcome aims for equality at the other end of schooling, through the balancing out of eventual material differences in society.
While the type of education you receive in school may have a large impact on your later choice of and access to well-paid careers, the solution to this is government intervention after education ends, not while it is happening. Those who benefit from private education should have to compensate society at large for their hand up in life once they enter the working world. This means taxing the rich to give to the poor—old fashioned redistribution of wealth.
 Private education then benefits everyone, not only those individuals who enjoy its advantages directly, but also society as a whole through greater tax revenue, better public finances and, eventually, better welfare for all. It cannot be a bad thing for the country as a whole to have some who are educated to a superior level, many of whom will take up jobs in public service that benefit all. This is the best way to settle the issue of private education.

 

Phoebe Thompson

Philosophy and Theology, Keble

Private schools benefit from having able staff, superior facilities and motivated pupils who learn in small-sized classes.  They also encourage their pupils to believe that they can achieve places in top universities and that they deserve them.  Little wonder then that Sir Peter Lampl’s recent report for the Sutton Trust discovered that pupils from just 200 (mainly independent) schools make up half of Oxbridge entrants; the remaining 3,500 make up the rest.  It also discovered almost half of those holding the top jobs in law, politics and the media had attended a handful of the most selective, research-led universities. So if the key to life opportunities is attendance at a good university, why don’t state schools just improve?
 The reality is that many lack the motivated students, the teaching expertise, and the parental involvement that are bound up in the private school system.  Because of this divide, parents will continue to pay for the opportunities that private schools offer. However, were private schools abolished, parents would no longer have the choice of the ‘better’ school, and would be forced to put their children into state education.
Over time the state schools would become those ‘better’ schools’ with the introduction of students who would raise the bar among their peers.  Access to the top universities would no longer be skewed towards applicants from the ‘best’ schools but would truly be available to the best and most able candidates.
Since access to the top universities is directly linked to opportunities in the top legal, educational, political and business jobs, this country would at last get the leaders it deserves. For this reason and because, if we truly believe in fairness, we should agree that everyone deserves the same life chances, the private school system should be abolished.  This would give schools the opportunity to combine the best of the current state and private systems and to offer a stronger and fairer state education to all.    

 

Marc Kidson

PPE, St John’s

Any government knows that to abolish private schools would be political suicide. I can see the Daily Mail headline now: ‘The Abolition of Achievement’. Yet this is not because the average Daily Mail readers can afford to privately educate their children, most cannot, but the editors of newspapers, the CEOs of companies, top civil servants and government ministers themselves can, and do.
Admittedly, there would also be a grassroots backlash against closing the 2,500 private schools—the middle-class parents who have opted-out of the state system are not likely to take favourably to being forced into it – but there is grassroots opposition of some size to ID cards, the Iraq war and Trident, all of which went (or are going) ahead.
Rather, what would stay the hand of even the most progressive government is that such a move would kick to the heart of what the sociologist C. Wright Mills branded the ‘power elite’ (he was talking about 1950s USA but the phenomenon translates all too well to modern Britain). It is irrelevant that most of the 600,000 students at private school do not have parents of such lofty influence. It matters far more that the limited network of those who are in positions of power almost all send their children to such schools.
I admit that I went to comprehensive school and an FE college, but I do not have a vicious antipathy to the private sector. In fact, I think that there are plenty of things that are laudable about it and should be emulated in the state sector.
My biggest grumble is that between private schools, grammar schools and the social stratification of state schools by postcode under the New Labour “choice” agenda, all too many state schools are anything but comprehensive. Instead, they have ‘difficult’ intakes concentrated in areas of social deprivation and, as a result, lack the culture of demanding, hectoring middle-class parents able to drive improvements from below. Abolishing the private sector would just bloat the grammar schools and prosperous suburban high schools further; it would not cure the malaise at the heart of the system.
Perhaps we should try making the comically named ‘comprehensives’ actually comprehensive, with proper representation of all sections of the community. Wouldn’t it be fun to see how quickly the state sector improves if the sons and daughters of this country’s media barons and commercial leaders actually had to go to them?