I do not know enough about opera to say whether Isabella Cheevers, lead soprano in Lennox Berkeley’s A Dinner Engagement, is extraordinary or merely excellent. I know enough about theatre, though, to say this of her co-stars: bad acting looks even worse when set to music.
Additionally, I know enough about Oxford venues to wish that director and eminent thesp Max Hoehn had found anywhere – and I do mean anywhere – other than the Moser to stage this one-act comic opera. The technical explanation for such a small venue is that ‘young voices don’t carry’.
Well, if the audience can even hear the singers above Benedict Lewis-Smith’s excellent chamber orchestra, it will only be because countertenor Joe Bolger (who plays comic Cockney Mrs Kneebone with a kind of horrid friskiness) has no conception of the dynamics outlined in Berkeley’s 1950s score. His voice is extraordinary, but his performance much too self-satisfied. Casting the counter-tenor in a female role is the one interesting decision Hoehn has made.
The plot revolves around the visit of Grand Duchess (Cathy Bell) and her son (William Blake) to impoverished aristocrats George Coltart and Taya Smith. Smith, and Coltart in particular, both seem to think that opening eyes and mouth very wide constitutes acting. Blake has the tendency to move like a small, angry penguin, but sings divinely, in nice comic style. As an errand boy, Edmund Hastings gives the funniest performance, but unfortunately has only eight lines.
Isabella Cheevers doesn’t have a lot of voice (there are problems with aspiration and she’s a little weak above high F), but the voice she does have is outstanding. Combined with a welcome naturalness in her acting, she more than redeems the piece. Of the three stars which follow, one is for her, one for Berkeley’s witty, adventurous and allusive score, and one for the ambition of the director-conductor team.
You could do worse than see A Dinner Engagement: it has inspired me to see more opera. Just not this one.
I am currently playing Otto in Through the Leaves, a remarkable play about the relationship between a tripe butcher and a heavy drinking factory worker set in 1970s West Germany, written by that country’s most frequently performed living playwright. It is the most enjoyable, moving and funny play that I’ve been in, and I’m writing this because I want people to come who’ve never heard of Franz Xaver Kroetz.
Kroetz was born in Munich in 1946. In the ‘60s he attended drama school, and worked as a banana cutter, a truck driver, and an orderly in a mental hospital to support himself. In the ‘70s he became an active member of the German Communist Party, and in 1971 attained celebrity when productions of two of his plays were disrupted by neo-fascists, causing the German police to place guards around the theatre. His 1970s plays depict men and women reduced to silence by their social condition, and are remarkable for their unflinching realism.
Approaching Kroetz is difficult; his style might be Beckettian, his silences Pinteresque – but that doesn’t say very much at all. Playwriting is, of course, a literary activity, but being a playwright is also about making, about labour and scaffolding: there’s a lot of grafting involved that isn’t primarily literary, but has more to do with making the play work.
Reading plays comparatively is like assessing houses solely on their HIPS report: does it have cavity wall insulation? Does it have loft insulation? You can ask of a play: does it have meaningful silences?, or, is there a sink on stage? All you will get is a series of ticked boxes – but you can’t tell from them whether you’re dealing with a tower block or the Palace of Versailles.
What attracted me about Kroetz was not the undoubted literary achievement of his plays, but the root cause behind them. Through the Leaves was written at a time when German communism had extended, in a few extreme cases, into terrorism: the Red Army Faction, formerly known as the Baader-Meinhof gang, were at large in Germany and committing violent murders in the name of freedom, and Kroetz, like many of his communist contemporaries, became a target for neo-fascist groups.
He would leave the communist party in 1980, having drawn disapproval for his unheroic characters; but at this time, he was an avowedly political playwright, whose plays depicted the faults and weaknesses of a society he wanted to reform. His work is arresting and fascinating as a result of the passions that motivated it and the ideas behind it. Kroetz’s profile in England should be much higher: his plays deserve wider recognition for their passionate and moving intensity.
The overwhelming majority of Oxford students do not know when the OUSU elections are taking place and don’t even know who the presidential candidates are, a Cherwell survey has revealed.
Voting is due to open between Tuesday and Thursday next week, but only 17.8% of students knew that the elections are in sixth week, with some under the impression that they had already taken place.
Only 36% of those polled said that they intended to vote this year, despite the fact that online voting has been introduced by OUSU.
The poll also revealed that more than two-thirds of Oxford students cannot name any of the presidential candidates.
Luke Tryl, former President of the Oxford Union Society, is the most widely known, with 24% of students aware he is running.
Only 11% could name Stefan Baskerville, former JCR president of University College, whilst less than half that named John Maher, former JCR president of Keble College.
Baskerville appears to have the most backing at this stage, however, with the biggest proportion of those surveyed who intend to vote pledging him their support.
In a sample of almost 200 students, very few seemed fully informed on the upcoming election, with only three able to name all four candidates – a group which includes Aidan Simpson, the anti-tuition fees campaigner from Somerville College.
As further evidence of this, four students quizzed this week about the OUSU elections were under the impression that Lewis Iwu, the current OUSU President, was one of this year’s candidates.
Word of mouth
Many students claimed to only have heard of candidates because they had been invited to their Facebook groups or because they are in the same college as the candidate.
Of students polled at Keble, for example, 50% said they plan to vote for John Maher, their ex-JCR President.
The poll results left plenty of food for thought for the OUSU presidential candidates, with scores of apathetic students condemning the institution as hopeless and irrelevant.
One student even claimed to have no idea what OUSU was. Thomas Crawford, a first year Mathematics student, admitted, “I don’t even know what it is, to be honest.” He was not the only undergraduate to be somewhat oblivious to the current OUSU race.
James Gillard, a fresher from Jesus College, asked, “What relevance does this have to me? Doesn’t my JCR handle all of this? The ramifications of this vote have not been explained to me in any way.”
When asked for his opinion, a Worcesterite asked, “Are the elections even this term?”
Despite general apathy, however, turnout in next week’s OUSU elections is expected to substantially increase on previous years’ thanks to a complete reformation of polling.
Whereas previous polls were conducted by traditional balloting methods over a single day, this year’s poll will be carried out over three days and conducted entirely online.
Madeline Stanley, OUSU Returning Officer, revealed that each student will be sent a unique voter number which they will be able to use only once.
She stressed that she had upmost confidence in the new system, despite fears in some quarters that there could be teething problems.
“To give you some idea of the security this system has, it has been used by Westminster City Council and twenty local authorities,” she said.
“It could have been advertised better”
“Each individual’s vote is secure and moving to another computer won’t get you another vote.”
Many students, however, were unaware that they could now cast their ballots via the web.
“It could have been advertised better,” said one student, while another said that uncertainty about how to vote would probably stop her from bothering.
Others were encouraged by the change. “I don’t really care about OUSU, but if it’s online, why not?” quipped one student.
The vast majority of students, however, were unconvinced that their vote would make a difference to improving OUSU as an institution either way.
“I’ve never seen the effect of OUSU on my life,” said one voter, with another labelling OUSU “a little playground for people who want to put it on their CV.”
“It doesn’t matter who’s president, all the same things go on.”
Tears For Fears’ 1995 album, Everybody Loves A Happy Ending, could have been made for Donnie Darko. Its lilting melodies and bittersweet poetry are no less poignant than Mad World and no less nostalgic than Head Over Heels.
It is clear that Tears For Fears’ music in Donnie Darko had a massive impact on their career. Their previous release had been a best-of in 2001, with the last new work released in 1995. Curt Smith had left the band in 1990 and Roland Orzabal officially retired in 1996.
Basically, TFF was dead, and fans grieved. After Gary Jules released the single of Mad World, however, their old albums began flying off the shelf and they reunited to release an album, following it with a triumphant world tour.
Donnie Darko was riding the tip of the crest of a wave of 1980’s revival. Suddenly, enough time had passed for the 80’s to be cool again and TFF specifically were highlighted. They did not need the film to make them into a success, unlike Jules, they were already a success.
Donnie Darko merely reminded the public of the wonder and beauty of the best of a past era, complete with nostalgic images. Finally, there was more than one TFF song used, ‘Head Over Heels’ featuring in one of the most important sequences of the film.
So, the conclusion is clear. The career of Tears For Fears was thankfullly resurrected by the influence of the film: both are examples of popular culture reachimg the sublime.
It’s not often a kids’ movie makes an interesting point, but this time Pixar wasn’t afraid to step up to the mark and offend. In ninety minutes it cut us down to size, highlighting our selfishness, greed and apathy.
The film begins on earth, wholly deserted save for a little robot garbage collector named Wall-E and a planet-load of rubbish. He spends the first half hour of the film sifting through various relics of humanity which have now been left to rust.
One of the film’s many saving graces is its lack of celebrity; there are no Zach Efron or Lindsay Lohan voice-overs. Instead, the animated AI give themselves personalities through a mixture of cutesy anthropomorphism and endless repetitions of their names, hence ‘Waaaaallll-Eeee’.
The adventure continues, leaving behind the desert landscapes of our post-apocalyptic world for the endless beauty of outer space where WALL-E finds true love, makes a whole host of robot friends (such as BRL-A, a faulty mobile umbrella robot which has trouble keeping itself closed) and encourages the humans to return to earth.
It’s here social satire reaches its height, with the humans having spent so long in their robot-run, luxury spaceship that they have become too fat to move. Instead they lounge around in mobile deck chairs constantly watching television and eating fast food – not much has changed. The scene in which the spaceship tips to one side sending hundreds of obese, ball shaped people rolling across the floor is simply hilarious.
So WALL-E manages to successfully break the mould, simultaneously being visually stunning, a social satire and a heartfelt, funny children’s movie. This is more than just a film for all the family; this is a film for all of humanity. It’s high time we got up off our fat arses and did something with our lives before we reduce our planet to dust and expect someone or something else to pick up the pieces.
George Street Odeon this week should be thick with leather jackets, cult t-shirts and weedy teenagers; Mark Wahlberg’s Max Payne is coming to town. We already know it’ll probably be the worst film you will see this winter: avoid it.
However, this is just one of many game-to-film casualties. Others include the shocking Resident Evil trilogy, the even worse House of the Dead, Alone in the dark and Hitman. Quite why the film industry continues to allow such rubbish to be made is beyond me, but pre-pubescent teenage boys will pay top dollar to see meaningless violence and female nudity.
This trend is inexplicably consistent. Most films have had more than respectable budgets behind them. What’s more, they’ve had the support of some solid talent; Angelina Jolie found success with her turn as Lara; Milla Jovovich nailed the lead role in Resident Evil. Olga Kurylenko came to Quantum of Solace after roles in Hitman and Max Payne. Doom carried that mindless genre of space-horror to its natural conclusion. So why the scepticism?
Films of games are a new challenge compared to adapting books, or even comics, because narrative is not the main principle of a game. It’s not strictly accurate to describe games as interactive movies: the movies they might have been rarely would be good ones. Indeed, Max Payne was effectively a satirical montage of action movie clichés; it’s right there in the title!
The reason we loved it as teenagers was that the experience was fresh and exciting, not because it read like a novel. Max Payne is a movie, based on a game, which was a game based on bad movies. It’s going to get messy.
Resident Evil is the only game adaptation so far to succeed, partially because of its decision to completely trash anything that remained of the original plotline. A couple of telling references were all that was needed to keep the fans happy.
The rest was all about making a damn entertaining zombie movie. Of course, Milla Jovovich completely naked may have boosted sales somewhat. Whereas, a fully clad Mark Wahlberg fighting demons as well as crackheads isn’t going to cut it.
So why will the next video game movie be terrible? I quote Uwe Boll, vilified director of House of the Dead: ‘Let’s be realistic, House of the Dead is a brainless shooter, where you shoot zombies into pieces. So what are you expecting from the movie, Schindler’s List?’. A little extreme?
Probably. But the point stands. Games are good story-telling, not good stories. So save your £6. Buy a book or something.
Why should you be elected OUSU president? Having been my JCR’s OUSU rep for a year I know how it works and its problems. I’ve recently become involved with Education Not for Sale and know about the wider anti-fees movement. I’ve also helped the Living Wage Campaign and campaigned against the abolition of the VP women position.
What relevant experience do you have? Having been my JCR’s OUSU rep for a year I know how it works and its problems. I’ve recently become involved with Education Not for Sale and know about the wider anti-fees movement. I’ve also helped the Living Wage Campaign and campaigned against the abolition of the VP women position.
What would your main priority as president be? My main priority would be that OUSU becomes more active in campaigning in Oxford and nationally. It is wrong to suggest OUSU shouldn’t concern itself with national campaigns such as against fees, or the contempt of many in the University towards access. I’d make sure these campaigns were taken seriously.
What is your position on top-up fees? I support the abolition of fees and reintroduction of grants funded by taxing the rich. The current cap is arbitrary and merely a stepping stone towards unlimited fees, which the University wants. Those who fight merely to retain the current cap are likely to find they cannot even retain this.
What is your position on a central student venue? In principle I support the idea of a Central Student Venue. However every year candidates promise this and every year they find that the funds just aren’t there. It is far more important that we focus on welfare and making OUSU the radical, campaigning student union it should be.
Stephen Baskerville, University
Why should you be elected OUSU president? I have the approach and energy to get OUSU doing more for students on the important issues like quality of teaching, accommodation and welfare. I have the experience to do that in a way that makes common rooms stronger, develops student leadership and leads to change on a wider scale.
What relevant experience do you have? As a JCR President I pioneered a new academic feedback system; negotiated a low rent deal at 3.5%; successfully lobbied for refurbishment of the bar; and established a bold new access scheme with college. I know how to achieve change at the college level and the support Common Rooms need.
What would your main priority as president be? Winning change for students by building strong relationships with common room officers and ensuring they have the required skills. This means more training in how to negotiate rent, represent students, build budgets, and improve teaching. I will campaign for better student representation and a full reform of University disciplinary procedures.
What is your position on top-up fees? Personally I am against raising the cap on fees. Higher Education funding should be fair and should recognise the shortfall in university funding of recent decades. We will consult students in order to get the best result from Government as it makes its decision on fees next year.
What is your position on a central student venue? I am in favour of a central venue at the right price. This year’s OUSU team have prioritised it, and a group has been set up to investigate the options. The plan is to put these to Oxford students in a referendum, and I intend to implement what they choose.
John Maher, Keble
Why should you be elected OUSU president? In a time where OUSU is undergoing comprehensive change, it needs a President that is not divisive; I am not a member of any student political party. Your Student Union should support you and make your life easier. I will deliver this for each and every student at this University.
What relevant experience do you have? As JCR President I reinvigorated Keble students’ interest in their JCR, leading to increased turnout at meetings. I represented students to our Governing Body; I know how to negotiate with authority. I also revitalised and chaired OUSU’s Complaints Board; I can and will make OUSU more responsive to your concerns.
What would your main priority as president be? Aside from top-up fees, I will ensure that students get a better rent deal. The current support given to Common Room officers is inadequate; I would launch OUSU’s rent campaign in Michaelmas and guarantee that OUSU provides them with the relevant information required to negotiate a fairer deal for students.
What is your position on top-up fees? Fighting increased top-up fees will be my main priority. As an international student, I will leave Oxford with $120,000 debt; my mom mortgaged our house to send me here. The best part of England’s university system is that it does not exclude anyone; we must not allow this to change.
What is your position on a central student venue? In principle I fully support a central student venue, which will restore pride in our Student Union and be a tangible symbol as to how OUSU is relevant to its students. In the meantime, OUSU should be expanding its relationship with Pulse and other societies to provide great nights out.
Luke Tryl, Magdalen
Why should you be elected OUSU president? In too many ways this University fails us. Whether it’s the underfunding of the counselling service, the college academic lottery or the draconian attitude towards trashing. I believe I have the ability to take on the authorities. I’ve delivered University wide, fighting for students, which will always be my priority.
What relevant experience do you have? I started attending OUSU council in my first term at Oxford as OUSU rep. As Union President I managed an organisation with a turnover of £900,000, almost three times the budget of OUSU. I worked for long term change: fighting for lower fees, expanding the access scheme and improving accountability.
What would your main priority as president be? When I told someone I was running the first thing that they asked was: what does OUSU do? I’ll ensure that OUSU reaches out. The first steps are more referenda, ensuring that you’re heard, and greater accountability – giving you the power to sack us if we’re doing a bad job.
What is your position on top-up fees? I’m opposed to any move which will make wealth rather than academic merit a criterion for Oxford admissions – I oppose any rise in student fees. I don’t want Oxford to become as inaccessible as US universities, making student life a struggle. I’ll lobby the University and government to stop it.
What is your position on a central student venue? Great efforts have been made to improve clubbing this year. But three popular clubs are going to close costing 2,100 clubbing spaces – leading to longer queues and unsafe trips out of town. We should set aside profits from club nights and reinvest them in a permanent venue for students.
President Bush is lying low these days. So low, in fact, that one might assume he has been whiling away his last months in office tossing balls for his terrier and choking on the occasional pretzel. And why not? With his name poison to any would-be politician’s campaign, America’s lame duck leader has had a lot of time to himself during the election.
But Bush & Co haven’t just been twiddling their thumbs. Never misunderestimate W: in its final weeks, the White House is hard at work dismantling many of the environmental protections still standing after eight years of all-out war. It’s scorched earth a la Bush.
Why the sudden flurry of activity? The current administration knows the deregulatory bacchanalia of the last eight years will end when Obama rolls up in January, so it’s rushing to pass out party favours to its industry guests before the Democratic killjoys arrive.
Now to the contents of the goodie bags. First up are attacks on two main environmental laws. Bush officials intend to weaken the Clean Air Act by loosening checks on industrial pollution while making it easier to place power plants next to national parks. Then there’s one for the polar bears: plans are afoot to gut the Endangered Species Act by removing scientific oversight and ignoring the impact of global warming on wildlife.
In fact, the only animal the current administration has displayed any affection for is the fox that guards the henhouse. Hence plans to let factory farms police the effluent they release into waterways and to hand over responsibility for sustainable fisheries to, you guessed it, the fishing industry!
And for those who think Obama will set all to right come Inauguration Day, your new slogan should be: No, he can’t. The old environmental regulations are no legislative Lazarus; once they’re gone, they’re gone and even Barack the Messiah won’t be able to resurrect them for at least a few years.
Bush certainly isn’t the first President to engage in a last-minute legislative cramming session. Near the end of his term, Bill Clinton tried to push through a number of environmentally-friendly initiatives. Clinton passed many of his laws too late, however, leading the incoming Republican staff free to suspend them.
Don’t count on the same mistake from Bush; George may have been a middling student at Yale, but he’s no slacker when it comes to his industry friends. The perpetual frat boy will be looking out for his business brotherhood until the party is over.
The start of the volleyball season has seen the Oxford men’s 1st team enjoy mixed success; getting the season off to an emphatic start with two convincing 3-0 wins against Brookes and Cranfield, then slipping to equally resounding defeats to Cambridge and Nottingham, 0-3 and 1-3 respectively.
The team’s shaky start to the season had made the game against Loughborough crucial if the team were to turn the season around. Loughborough on the other hand, currently second in the league, were looking to close the gap on Cambridge at the top. Thus both teams had much to gain from the match, making for a tantalising contest.
The Oxford team were coming into the game full of confidence on the back of a great performance at the weekend in the qualification tournament for the EVA student cup, which saw them win all four of their group stage matches and progress to the final tournament, to be held in February.
And so with confidence and determination the Oxford team stepped onto court to face the team currently ranked 2nd in both the BUSA league and the EVA student cup and clear favourites to win the game.
Both teams started the game with intensity and after some good all round play from both sides the scores were level at 7-7. As the set continued the standard of play remained high from both teams, though unfortunately for Oxford, Loughborough were able to carve out a lead, bringing the game to 24-19 in Loughborough’s favour.
Oxford salvaged 3 set points through some excellent serving from Bartek Redlicki before eventually losing the set 25-22. Despite having lost the first set the team still felt that the game was very much there for the taking. So with renewed vigour Oxford stepped out onto the court for the second set.
Carrying forward the momentum that they had begun to build up at the end of the first set, Oxford managed to force their way to an early 4 point lead at 8-4. This they managed to maintain throughout the set hanging on to win it 25-21.
Having clawed their way back into the game Oxford allowed themselves to relax a little going into the 3rd set. Loughborough on the other hand, vented their frustration at having lost the previous set by putting in a very strong defensive performance which paved the way for some excellent offensive play, particularly from hitters Dove and Winter.
Loughborough’s redoubled effort on the court showed as they dominated throughout much of the set eventually finding themselves with a comfortable lead of 9 points late in the game at 22-13. Again some great serving, this time from the other twin Jakub Redlicki, as well as some dogged defensive play saw Oxford pull the score back to 23-20. Unfortunately in the end they couldn’t keep up the pressure and slumped to defeat at 25-20.
Once again, however, the Oxford team refused to concede defeat and on the back of the late push in the 3rd set came out firing in the 4th. Darek Nehrebecki, the captain, led by example, hammering shot after shot past the Loughborough block, to which their back-court players had no answer. In what seemed like no time at all the Oxford team had stormed to a 13-6 lead.
The task appeared to be simple from this point onwards, however, when the Loughborough setter, Tsui, came up to serve he was able to put the already struggling Oxford Libero, Andy White, under pressure by serving ruthlessly and consistently short. As White failed to come up with a solution, Loughborough managed to turn the game around, bringing the score to 19-16 in their favour.
The frustration of the Oxford team was evident and it looked for a moment as though they might throw it all away but they dug deep and were able at last to find their rhythm again, managing to finish strongly closing out the set 25-22.
So after four epic sets, which had seen both teams dominate periods of the game, it had come down to a fifth and final set. This time the set would be shorter, first to 15 only. Oxford knew that they would have to come out firing on all cylinders to have a chance. Loughborough’s hunger to win was equally evident as both teams came out in the final set giving their all.
Unfortunately for Oxford, Loughborough’s hitters were back at their best for the start of the set and Loughborough we able to carve out a 7-3 lead. Oxford pushed hard in an attempt to close the gap but could not manage to do so. After having come so far and come achingly close, the Oxford team fell to a 15-9 defeat in the final set of an extremely hard fought match.
Despite the obvious disappointment at having lost such a hard fought and crucial game it is not all doom and gloom for the Oxford team. The season is just getting started with opportunities for revenge.
There is the student cup in February, as well as the BUSA championships, giving the team the opportunity to prove their credentials as one of the top teams in student volleyball. All this is not to mention the Varsity match, which will be held next term, and promises to be a great event.
On Tuesday night, an Arsenal side with an average age of just 18.6 gave a footballing master-class to an all-but-Emile Heskey strength Wigan side. The game was won 3-0 and could have been easily more, were it not for the heroics of goalkeeper Chris Kirkland. The passing football was sumptuous, the first touch, pace and sheer audacity just breathtaking; a joy to behold for Arsenal fans and neutrals alike. The subsequent press is full of drooling eulogies far longer than this one, declaring this to be the perfect exhibition of ‘The Beautiful Game’.
Beautiful indeed and few, if any, of the reactions to Tuesday’s game were overstated or unjustified. Yet is beauty alone really sufficient? This particular game resulted in victory, but the club as a whole are trophy-less since 2005. Arsenal, and their pioneering manger Arsene Wenger, have been accused countless times of trying to be too pretty, of being unable to match class with consistency, rave reviews with results. The question is, gorgeous as such football proposed by Arsenal often is, is it worth it at the expense of success?
Too often, sides that strive for the ultimate footballing purity are out-done by those favouring pragmatism. One of the greatest victims of such a clash is the Dutch World Cup side of 1974. This side was the ultimate exponent of ‘Total Football’, a philosophy demanding extreme technique, fluidity and talent. Led by the magnificent Johann Cruyff, the Dutch obliterated Argentina, East Germany and Brazil on their way to a final date with the efficient behemoth that was the West Germany side. Typically, the efficiency outdid the excellence, and despite a magnificent Dutch opening goal the Germans showed their steel to win the game 2-1. The Dutch went home with the plaudits, but it was the Germans that took the prize.
Indeed, what is the purpose of playing sport, especially professional sport, if not to win? Ask any Chelsea fan if they would take back Mourinho’s years of pragmatic dominance to be where Arsenal are now, the response is likely to be incredulous. In fact forget the fans, midfielder Michael Essien himself said this week, “Everybody likes to watch beautiful football, but to play beautiful football without points is… I don’t think it’s worth it. Arsenal is one of those teams that just plays beautiful football, but at the end of the day they don’t get the points that they want to”
Crucially sport is about results, results gained by any means necessary. Just look at the record of Italy and Germany; four and three world cup victories respectively, with each won with brutal efficiency, matching clinical finishing with watertight defending. Much as it pains me, I would rather have been one of the delighted Italians partying through the night after victory in 2006 than a dejected Brazilian contemplating a journey home halfway round the globe after a weak quarter final exit. Nothing, not even the most seductive of pretty football, beats the thrill of victory.
Yet in all sports the best praise, the highest platforms of greatness, are reserved for those that can deliver both. Nothing is more satisfying, nor more enjoyable than watching the outrageously talented perform to their optimum. What better than Brazil at their show-boating best, the All Blacks flowing at full speed, or Roger Federer stroking another ball into the far corner? It is here that sport can be so exciting, so thrilling, that its memories live on far past the original game and propel themselves into folklore.
Sure, Liverpool’s recent victory over Chelsea will be rightly regarded as a tactical masterpiece, but it’s that and nothing more. It ticks one box, and so while it might well be crucial in this year’s title race it’s hardly going to be remembered. Yet put one of those classic sides together, the type that mix superb football with great results, and that’s when they can guarantee a place in the record books: think Arsenal’s ‘invincibles’ in 2004, the treble winning Man United side in 1999. Those are the sort of teams which will really be remembered as great; and not just by their own fans. Win dirty, and a side will always be treated begrudgingly; win beautifully and everyone from the fans, to the press, to your own worst enemies will be singing your praises from the rooftops.
The sort of greatness we are here referring to is that achieved consistently over time. Take Gascoigne, or even George Best. These are the individual reflection of what Arsenal seem to have been in the last couple of years. Nearly great, but not quite; have the potential but choke short of success. No amount of audacious flicks and tricks can match up to those which really make the grade. Think Pele, think Maradona, think Zidane. These are the individuals which mix the game at its best with the ability to produce it when it matters time after time.
Still, why bother eh? What are the chances of being able to be both brilliant and brutal? Well, slim maybe but by no means impossible, especially for those at the peak of their sport. Every sportsman wants to go down in history for being both brilliant and successful, and as long as the two can feasibly be achieved side by side I would commend anyone who aims so high. Little in sport gives such satisfaction as victory, but victory in style, victory deserved, feels all the better.
Every time the new set of Wenger’s young starlets emerges, the praise hits the roof. This side they say is his best youth crop yet, and few who watched Tuesday night’s game will argue otherwise. Yet the Beautiful Game is only worth it if it brings beautiful results. Half-baked flair is as pointless as the term suggests. Every single sports fan loves beauty in the game, can sit for hours watching the greats do their stuff, but it must be fulfilled. There is no way that this author would recommend its abandonment, that’s not what sport is about. Yet as far as Arsenal are concerned it’s time to start delivering, or be consigned to the scrap pile of history along with all those who manage either beauty or success, but not both.
