Thursday 31st July 2025
Blog Page 2151

Learning Lines

0

Inevitably in any Oxford student cast, there will be one poor mite who has never set foot on a stage before. Though this isn’t necessarily a problem overall, never is it more of a problem than on the opening night. Whilst other, more weather-beaten actors calmly beat their heads against the wall, confident of their time-honoured techniques of getting into the mad Ophelia mindset, the faces of the newbies blanch with the one fear they’ve never encountered before: the terror of drying up on stage.

However, although it could go either way with an acting virgin, at least they’ll be scared enough to actually bother learning the lines. If there’s one thing I’ve learned during my years of working with arrogant theatrical upstarts, it’s that the better an actor thinks he is, the finer he’ll cut it when it comes to knowing by heart what he’s supposed to be declaiming. I know this because I am one such arrogant upstart myself. When you know you physically can learn it all on the night of the dress rehearsal – because you’ve done it before – you know you surely will. It becomes a sort of game. An Eton scholar once told me how, when taking public exams, he and his friends used have bets with each other about how long each one could hold out before turning over the paper and beginning, simply because they knew they could. One finds the same such tomfoolery with learning lines.

What truly marks the amateur out from the expert, however, is the ability to claw it all back when you’ve literally lost the plot. When putting on a play, no matter how much your cast take the piss, you need to know that if someone does have a mental blank, they’ll be able to cover their tracks. And there’s only one way to do that: improvisation. When starring in Tom Stoppard’s light-hearted, abridged version of a Shakespeare classic in this year’s Cuppers, one befuddled Hamlet came up with: “Dog will mew and cat will have his day… apparently.” However, making light of the situation only works if it’s a comedy. If the play is in earnest, that’s when you really have to think on your feet. As did a certain friend of mine who, having completely forgotten her thirty-line monologue supposedly in response to someone on the other end of a telephone, said “I’m sorry, I can’t really hear you… I think you’re breaking up.” The audience didn’t notice a thing; desperation is sometimes the most fruitful muse.

 

The Just Assassins

0

Four stars

The Just Assassins, by Albert Camus, isn’t a play for our times. Terrorism nowadays really is terrorism: creating fear by targeting ordinary people, a dark opposite of mass peaceful protest, aiming to change people’s views by making them wonder of they’re going to be next. Instead, it tells the story of a group of terrorists in 1905, plotting to assassinate a Grand Duke and unsure if killing innocents is justified if it gets the result they want. For Camus, former editor (just five years before this play was first performed in 1949) of a French Resistance newspaper, at a time when his organisation was passing information on targets to the RAF, this was a real question.

The play is cramped, set in confined spaces and with action happening elsewhere, never going out onto the streets. The dialogue is tortured and often quite pretentious: it could seem unbearably precious in some voices, but the major advantage of this production is a fine ensemble cast, with nuanced, muted acting, without a feeling of exaggeration or sensationalism: that’s left to the content. Especially notable is Sam Buchdahl as the head of the secret police: he has a lot of fun with a ludicrously sinister role, clearly defined as separate from all the other characters: even though this play has relatively little suspense (it reminded me of musical settings of the Passion) the impact of his character’s misdirection and tricksiness is startling, and the decision to dress all the terrorists in different black clothing adds to its muted, incisive atmosphere. Also, though the dates of performance in the listings section are wrong (it starts Tuesday) the information about this play’s origins are true, honest.

At the Burton Taylor Studio from 10th-14th March at 19:30. £4 for students

 

An Independent Mind comes to Oxford

0

Monday March 9th, Phoenix Picture House (Jericho), 6.30pm, with Q&A session with Rex Bloomstein after the screening

‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.’

These are the well-travelled words with which Rex Bloomstein’s latest documentary, An Independent Mind, begins. But as well as offering the film a literal point of departure, these words are also a thematic foundation for the series of well constructed case studies that are to follow.

Significantly all the individuals depicted are allowed to tell their own stories with little directorial intervention. This has a powerful effect on the audience, ensuring that An Independent Mind comes across not as a film about the general concept of ‘freedom of speech’ with a number of case studies offered up as diverting examples, but as a film whose ultimate concern is with what ‘freedom of speech’ actually means in the lives of a whole host of men and women – from the protest singer from the Ivory Coast to the sex blogger from China, the cartoonist from Algeria, the revisionist historian from England (yes, that one), the comedians from Burma. Out of this emerges, not a sense of any bias in what the subjects say, rather a sense of their confessional honesty, of their desire to offer some explanation for the way what they say and do has impacted upon their lives.

Bloomstein’s decision to tell the stories of people whose reasons for defending the right to freedom of speech are arguably less palatable to a British audience (denying the holocaust, support for terrorism), alongside the more traditional figures of the rebel poet and the courageous journalist is laudable, and makes for a fuller understanding of what freedom of speech actually entails.

The opportunity to see a director of such experience and talent screen his own work this Monday is one well worth exploiting – and the prospect of a Q&A session with Bloomstein after the screening is exciting to say the least. With a film that depends so heavily on the rapport between its subjects and the camera, it will be very interesting to hear how Bloomstein approached the individuals involved, and how he got them to talk so frankly about their lives. If you have the time, this is an event well worthy of your Monday evening.

five stars

For the Love of Film 8

The humorous film podcast returns. In this episode Ben and Laurence review Gran Torino, take us throught the latest in film news and Laurence impresses us once again with his one minute review of the Che films.

Morris dancing comes to Oxford

0

An exhibition about Morris dancing in Oxfordshire is to be displayed by the university’s Bate Collection.

The exhibition, entitled “Oxfordshire Morris Dancing: a living tradition”, will run from 3 March – 3 April at the Music faculty buildings next to Christ Church.”

The items and photos in the exhibition, which have been loaned or supplied by Oxfordshire Morris sides, include a striped, painted fiddle, a buzzard mask, and a fool’s costume from the 1950s.

Project manager Alice Little, said: The entire exhibition is intended to show that whilst Oxfordshire hosts some of the oldest Morris sides in the country, there are a host of new sides being formed.

“And contrary to recent press coverage, a lot of young people are involved.”

 

Student pursues notorious petty thief

0

A student led to the arrest of a notorious petty thief after she chased the man on foot when he cycled off with her bike.

Georgina Weetch, a Pembroke undergraduate, found her bicycle had gone missing after she left it unlocked outside St. Edmund Hall. But as she walked back to college she spotted a man cycling the bike down the High Street.

She said, “I chased after him and tried to shout him down but he cycled more quickly down St Aldates.”

“I’d pretty much lost him and then I saw a police car coming out of Pembroke Street so I flagged it down and asked the police officer to chase him!

“She said she was a bit busy – I glance to the back seat and see she’s just arrested two men – so I continued the sprint but to no avail.”

Weetch then reported the bike stolen at St Aldates police station, having given up on capturing the criminal herself.

“As I was doing this the police officer … said that an undercover police officer had caught and arrested him. He claimed he was dropping if off for a friend.

“Apparently he’s quite a notorious criminal and actually had loads of jumpers stuffed up his coat.”

The man initially claimed his innocence but has now pleaded guilty to the theft.

 

Academic tests old cannon

0

A remarkable archaeological find in the English Channel has shown that the Elizabethan navy were “almost 50 years ahead of their time technologically”.

Many sixteenth century cannons were discovered and have been described by marine archaeologist and fellow of St Peter’s, Mensun Bound, as “Britain’s first weapons of mass destruction.”

Although measuring a mere seven feet, a test fire of a replica demonstrated the exceptional power of the cannons.

Mr. Bound proclaimed the find as the “first set of uniform cannons, capable of firing the same size shot in a deadly barrage.”

 

Drinking causes cancer

Oxford research has discovered that even moderate drinking increases the risk of cancer in women.

The study followed 1.3 million women over an average of seven years, and found that a regular tipple increased risk of cancer by 6% relative to the 300,000 teetotallers in the group.

The results were corrected for a variety of factors such as age, weight, smoking, exercise and use of contraceptive pills, and applied regardless of the type of alcohol consumed.

Oxford’s Dr Naomi Allen, the lead researcher, said, “These findings suggest that even relatively low levels of drinking-about one or two alcoholic drinks every day-increase a woman’s risk of developing cancer.”

 

Brown faced with student protests

0

Gordon Brown’s speech in the Sheldonian was marred by protests, as demonstrators chanted audibly outside while the Prime Minister lectured on the importance of scientific research.

The protesters gathered to express anger at government bank bail outs and UK foreign policy. They chanted, “free, free Iraq” and “education for the masses, not just for the ruling classes” throughout the lecture.

Emily Dreyfus, one of the protesters, said, “given that in our very own city 850 auto workers lost their jobs last week at Cowley Mini plant due to the current government’s catastrophic role in and mishandling of the global economic crisis, it was ironic that Gordon Brown felt qualified to give a lecture on the economy.

“BMW Mini’s profits have in fact increased this year, therefore they have no justification for firing these people, but rather were simply acting in an opportunistic manner to cut corners and reduce costs at a time when they could claim it was necessary because of the credit crunch.”

She added, “I’m sure Gordon Brown could hear that we were protesting, and it was important too for the people on the street to be aware that we care about these domestic and international issues. We will take action to protest against war criminals such as Gordon Brown who are responsible and demand they change their policies to reflect the opinions of their electorate.”

Dominic Williams, one of the protesters, said, “we got no response from Brown or officials other than requests to be quieter and a mixed reaction from people passing by.”

But he hailed the demonstration as a success, “we were loud and noisy so a lot of people knew we were there including Gordon Brown, apparently we were audible during his speech. “

Brown’s speech stressed the importance of scientific research as a route out of the current economic crisis. He pledged to make long-term science funding a “national priority” and to increase the status of science in education.

He said, “some say that now is not the time to invest, but the bottom line is that the downturn is no time to slow down our investment in science but to build more vigorously for the future. And so we will not allow science to become a victim of the recession – but rather focus on developing it as a key element of our path to recovery.”

Brown also highlighted the importance of quality science education. He said, “one of the biggest stumbling blocks in science education is that in the comprehensive sector only a minority of schools offer three separate sciences as opposed to combined science qualifications.”

He added that the government’s aim is to double the number of pupils in the state schools taking triple science by 2014.

Krisztina Csortea, an Exeter student, commented, “overall it was an interesting hour, made even more so by the mounted police and the protesters outside. I think it was very appropriate to talk about science, as we were celebrating Darwin just a few weeks ago, and this topic was much less controversial than Gaza. He also made the speech even more relevant by mentioning the credit crunch or animal testing.”

Annabelle Chapman, a first year PPE student said, “I think the lecture showed Gordon Brown in a positive light; he looked better than on television, and though unremarkable, the speech was delivered naturally and sometimes filled the Sheldonian with polite laughter. At the same time, there was a sense of ”don’t mention the Economics-word,” let’s talk about mixing chemicals in a test tube – at least that works.”

She added, “I was a bit disappointed by the choice of topic; it would have been more appropriate for a Nobel Prize winner, who could have shared his insight. A politician, who knows nothing about the reality of being a scientist, was bound to give the standard answer of ‘pride in our scientific heritage,’ followed by a pledge to maintain it via ‘investment’ and ‘innovation’.”

Marcus du Sautoy, Professor of Mathematics and Charles Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford welcomed the Prime Minister’s policies. He added, “I personally was really interested in what he had to say about scientists rising to the challenge of communicating their ideas and discoveries. I know my colleagues at Oxford are already doing an enormous amount of work in this area – something that is crucial if we are to ensure that people are equipped to take part in debates in which the role of science is central.”

Prior to the lecture, the Prime Minister visited Oxford’s new Biochemistry building, where he met scientists from across the University for a roundtable discussion. After the lecture, he joined various members of the University at a reception in the Divinity Schools.

 

Union presidential candidates submit flawed nominations

0

The lead-up to the presidential elections for the Oxford Union has proved controversial after two of the three candidates submitted flawed nomination material.

Tom Hartley, the current librarian, turned in his nomination forms without the mandatory fee of £40, whilst James Dray, a member of the standing committee, failed to mark the office he is running for.

However, Niall Gallagher, the society’s Returning Officer, has declared both candidates’ nominations valid.

He explained that he decided to accept Dray’s nomination because he had submitted the “right amount of money for the President-Elect position.”

Despite the society’s rules that the “nomination shall not be accepted” of a candidate who does not have “sufficient or authorised means of payment.”

Gallagher has since explained that he decided to declare Hartley a valid candidate because he could not “be satisfied that the rules are clear enough to render his nomination unambiguously invalid.”

He added, “on the basis of the evidence I have seen, I feel I must give credence to the Librarian’s declaration (both oral and written) that he had sufficient means of payment on his person at the time of nominating.”

This decision has led to concerns that a tribunal will be called if Hartley wins the election. The Standing Committee already discussed the possibility of such situation and one member has commented, “If Tom wins, there definitely will be a tribunal.”

Another student stated that if a tribunal was called after the election, it would “almost certainly rule his nomination invalid.”

Daniel Johnson, the ex-Returning Officer of the Union stated that such situations “made the Union look bloody stupid and re-polling was necessary.”

However, he commented that “the Union is democratic, and it’s up to the members to decide who becomes President – and I’m glad that we can continue to offer the only properly run cross-campus election in Oxford.”

Members of the Union have criticised failure of Dray and Hartley to submit their applications properly. A member of the Society said, “It was an exceptionally stupid thing to do for someone who wants to be President of the Union.”

Another said, “I’m sure the role of the president involves more difficult things than nomination. How they are going to manage everything else?”