Saturday 13th September 2025
Blog Page 2261

Sex pest harasses Corpus women

0

Two female members of Corpus Christi MCR were aggressively pursued on Friday night by a man demanding sex in the latest of a series of similar incidents in East Oxford.

The incident occurred at 2am on Saturday morning when a man pursued students Courtney Cox and Francesca Richards on their way back to college from the Cowley area. The man, described as black and around 5’4 in a grey hoodie and jeans, demanded a threesome, persistently telling them to get into his car, and followed the students right up to Corpus’ Liddell Gate before being deterred when he realised they were phoning the police.

A police statement on Wednesday revealed that there were two further related incidents over the weekend. On Thursday at 4am and Monday at 11pm other women were similarly accosted by men in the Iffley area, this time on Percy Street.

Another Corpus graduate, Katie Musgrave, described the regularity of the dangers women face around Oxford, describing how she has been accosted on several occasions in her time at the University. “One time on Magdalen Bridge a sketchy man passing me by kicked my bag of groceries, splitting it open, and he walked on.

“Another time, when running on the tow path, I was lunged at by an aggressively drunk vagrant who was harassing people as they passed him. Finally, when passing by the bus shelter on Iffley Road one night, I was screamed at by a couple of drunk teenagers who were hiding in there, behind the adverts, apparently for the purpose of scaring people,” she said.

Detective Sergeant Kevin Elkins has called for students to come forward, saying, “We would like to hear from anyone else who has been approached by a man in the area. It may have seemed like a trivial incident at the time, but you could have important information for us.

“Until we trace the man, or men, involved and speak to him about his motives, we would advise local women to take care late at night or very early in the morning.”

Cox seemed shaken by the incident, describing being pursued and harassed as “frightening – not only at the time it happens, but beyond it as well. “Could it happen again? What if he hadn’t gone away when we called the cops? What if he had followed us into the Liddell Complex? […] What if he had a weapon?

“There’s a sense in which your safety has been violated, and you wake up to the reality that your neighbourhood is not as safe as it seemed.”

Beyond this individual example, the most worrying aspect of the incident is its perceived regularity. Asking other Corpus students about their experiences, Cox described how alarmingly common such harassment seems to be, and how a culture of acceptance has emerged.

“The response to this incident has largely been a variation on the theme of ‘Well, I hate to admit it, but you’re not the first’, instead of ‘What can we do to make it safer?’

“It hasn’t happened to me before, but the impression I have is that it does occur fairly frequently, probably more than is on record, since it would appear through conversations with other students that there’s also a problem of under-reporting.

“So yes, I am worried. I don’t feel as though there really are the resources in place to deal with this sort of occurrence.”

Along with urging vigilance, police have repeated their usual safety advice that students walk home with friends or take a licensed taxi if they are alone. Meanwhile, OUSU have urged students to look after one another, using the Safety Bus and attack alarms to keep safe.
OUSU’s Welfare Rep Louise Randall stated, “We recommend that students never walk home alone, that they use the OUSU/PBSU Safety Bus wherever possible, and they should consider carrying an attack alarm, available from your welfare officers or direct from OUSU for £1.60.

“If you’re heading out clubbing this week and need to get home late at night, remember you can use the OUSU/OBSU Safety Bus. This service, provided in conjunction with Oxford Brookes Students’ Union, is there to make sure you get home safely. It will pick you up from any location within the Oxford Ring road and take you home for a donation of only £1. To call the bus, just ring 07714 445 050 between 9pm and 3am Monday – Saturday and 9pm – 1am on Sunday.”

Yet despite this, Cox does not feel secure against further trouble. “Truth be told, Oxford is not a safe city. The safety schemes in place from the University and Colleges are inadequate (and those that do exist inadequately publicised), particularly when compared to other institutions of like calibre. It’s really disappointing.”

For any students who would like to get in touch with the police concerning this, Det Sgt Elkins can be contacted via the Police Enquiry Centre on 0845 8 505 505. If you don’t want to talk to police and don’t want to leave your name, call the Crimestoppers charity anonymously on 0800 555 111.

Photo: Olivier Lazarus

Students abuse travel grants

0

Colleges are giving away close to £150,000 a year in travel grants but have no way of monitoring how the money is being used.

A Cherwell investigation has revealed that colleges are failing to check how recipients are using the funds, and in many cases, students are not being required to provide ticket receipts or reports on their return. This has lead to many students taking their grants and using them for leisure, rather than for academic purposes.

Some students have admitted to keeping money intended for travel for academic study, or using it to go clubbing, or even to buy drugs.

One student, who wished to remain anonymous, admitted that he’d used money intended for a visit to a Middle Eastern archive to go to the Exit Festival in Serbia.

He said, “I knew college wouldn’t check up so I said I wanted to do some research in Turkey, but really I just went to Exit music festival and then travelled round for a bit.”

The undergraduate also admitted that he used some of the travel grant money to buy drugs. Another student, a graduate, invented a conference in Hawaii and instead used the money to visit the country and go surfing.

Most colleges give out around £5,000 a year in travel grants. Merton distributes £5,000 annually, while Wadham makes almost £7,500 available. In total, almost £150,000 is available every year from Oxford colleges and University travel grants.

A second year from Pembroke said that the system was being abused by some students. She said, “I know of one linguist who applied for funding to travel throughout Europe. They never went, however, and simply kept the money.”

She added that she didn’t see the problem as one that was “widespread” but that whilst there were some students who were honest about their travel grants, “the college has no way of checking to see if people are effectively stealing from them.”
Furthermore, where students have been honest about possible misuses of their grant, college authorities have displayed a lack of concern.

Rosy Gibson, a second year History of Art student at Christ Church, was awarded £150. She was told, “You must write a report or the money will be taken back from you,” but on her return, the college failed to contact her when she did not meet the requirement.

This lack of concern for the use of college money appears to be part of a trend across the University, with multiple students confessing to lying in order to get bankrolled by College to go abroad.

Caitlin O’Keeffe, a student at Wadham, claimed £200 for a trip to Edinburgh in order to perform there with comic group The Oxford Revue. She said, “I expected to get an email from the college the following term, asking for a report or even receipts, but I heard nothing.”

A second year at Exeter identified students studying modern languages as “finding it particularly easy to get small grants of between £100 and £200.” Under the pretext of going to the country which speaks the language they’re studying, the student suggested that they “do whatever they like – there is no suggestion of accountability.”

The same student also spoke about a woman from his college who cancelled a grammar course in Europe after receiving a small travel award. Although she approached the college authorities over the possibility of returning the money, she was told that she could keep it.

However, all the colleges contacted were keen to stress that they did monitor how students spent the money. Jane Nelson, the Censor’s Administrator at Christ Church, said: “On return, [students] must provide receipts to prove how the money has been spent… we always ask for tickets, or ticket receipts at least.”

Yet when Christ Church were confronted with the examples of students who had wasted their travel grant money, they admitted that “it may be that on occasion some applications have not been followed up.” Exeter’s Academic Administrator, Joan Himpson, declined to give details of any requirements that are made of its students, either before or after the grants are made.

At University level, the Oxford Society, the official alumni organisation, is responsible for granting individual travel awards. A spokesperson for the University Press Office said, “To be eligible, students have to prove that they are travelling independently and need to demonstrate that their trip will help their personal development.” They continued, “Applicants have to provide a report after the trip about what they did and what they achieved.”

Yet in a letter from his local branch of the Oxford University Society, one second year historian was simply told that he “may write a report for presentation at the branch’s annual general meeting.” No receipts or tickets were required.
Cathy Spinage, Head of the Benefits and Services department of Oxford University, said, “If students started to abuse [funding] it would undermine the whole system, and the Society might have to consider withdrawing the money from the travel award scheme.”

Nick Davies today

0

Author of Flat Earth News speaks today at 1.30 in the Union.

 

Churnalists beware. 

Rewriting the Mind

Translation is often seen as a mechanical process. Now that it’s easy to get a rough translation of a text over the internet, many view the complex practice as little more than the substitution of a word in a foreign language for its equivalent in their own.

The fact is that it’s not nearly that simple. Some languages express certain concepts much better than others and it is the job of the translator – and particularly of the literary translator – to ensure that the true meaning of a text does not become lost between the two. There are some who would argue that because a translator works from an existing source, he or she can never reach that peak of creative inspiration achieved by the author himself. It is partly for this reason that translation has often been relegated to a lesser order of literary importance than other kinds of writing.

 

Dr John Rutherford, Spanish Fellow at Queen’s and translator of Don Quixote (amongst other things), sees this as unfair. ‘Culture atrophies without influence from outside and the main channel for that is translation’, he says. ‘The imaginative use of language is every bit as intense, and arguably more so. I am a writer in the sense that my translation is my own reading, put into new words by me.’

 

Each translator’s ‘own reading’ differs from the others; Rutherford deliberately included the intrinsic humour of the Quixote in his own translation, where others see it as a serious work. Another difficulty lies in deciding how accessible a translation should be; should it seem almost as though it was originally written in the new language, or should it retain a feeling of alienation, what Rutherford calls ‘marks of otherness’?

 

Rutherford views translation as more of an art than a craft. Stories, he says, are things which we create as we read. A translator uses his personal reading of a source text to create a story which will make sense to its readers in their own language, whilst at the same time keeping its feeling of the alien and remaining faithful to the author’s intentions. An adept translator will find the middle way between the two, allowing the reader a sense of the text’s origins whilst ensuring that they understand it. It is not a mechanical and unoriginal process but a complex skill, requiring subtlety and imagination: the hallmarks, in fact, of the great original writer.

Student Play

0

Bubbling resentments, submerged back-stories, and a mysterious and violent figure returning from a character’s past to disturb his peaceful present- very much a student play. This is a new (and somewhat infuriatingly titled) piece of writing from the award- winning poet and playwright Caroline Bird, and it positively simmers with energy and wry anger.

 

Thomas, about to take his finals, is rudely interrupted by a verbose, aggressive figure from his past. His well-heeled friend Oscar has recently been waxing lyrical about whether or not he should drop out of uni and finally take the plunge, finally immerse himself in the real world. It is not long however before the focus of the play falls firmly on Thomas and his guest, an old, pre-Oxford friend. An old, pre-Oxford friend, moreover, who remembers Thomas in his hedonistic druggy life before Polo shirts and Latin grammars.

 

There is a wealth of moral dilemma, a lot of juicy material to cover. But Oscar soon drops out, and we are left without ignorant about his potentially life changing decision. What matter, the play seems to be saying, if some Classicist toff drops out or not? How could his life be anywhere nearly as valid or interesting as the sordid and druggy world introduced by the hulking and dangerous figure of Ed, Thomas’ link to his former life?

 

Ed, after all, fondles rent boys, does cocaine, and slits his wrists. On stage. His self- destruction is graphically demonstrated, but I was left unsure whether the playwright was really interested in Ed’s character, or whether she was half- fascinated and half- disgusted by his trauma, reveling in the spectacle, creating a sort of suffering- porn.

 

The play offers no answers, and it careers along with real energy, but the questions it asks seem unfocused; it takes delight it what it deems to be the gritty reality of Ed’s world, in all its pain and danger, but in its fascination it cannot hold itself back, to question, and examine.

 

All the characters are excellently and vividly portrayed, and the acting is wonderful, with Charlie Thomson’s Ed especially strong. But the bad guys stay bad, uncomplicated in their desire to destroy Thomas and the well- heeled world he has created for himself. His motives for escaping his past remain unexplored, and it appears that his new life, his Oxford life, is a sham.

 

But in becoming obsessed with the darker recesses of the human soul, the play fails to recognize the one defining connection between its characters- that the very process of living and suffering, regardless of rich and poor, smart or stupid, can bridge divides and make you a human- being.

 

Three stars.

Review: Swing!

0

Middle-class suburban life is mocked in Lauren Bensted’s new musical, which explores anew the peculiarities of this section of culture. In any such satire a wide range of contemporary reference is essential to avoid the production becoming too narrow. Bensted achieves this with ease. Everyone is satirised.

 

Centred around the activities of Shafthead Lawn Tennis Club, the plot moves briskly, incorporating a number of twists. Bensted has gleefully embraced the melodramatic in writing SWING! and its energy makes it a great deal of fun. Willy Straddlebottom (Adam Grant) and Francesca del Lazula (Anna Byrne), who concoct a dark plan involving ‘grape rape’, are hilarious as the scheming villains, while Anna Mrowiec is marvellous as the incredibly neurotic Coaster Constance.

 

The teenage characters’ comic potential is perhaps not exploited to the full, but on the whole the action is well-balanced.
Variety is the key characteristic of this musical, which has a dynamic score and is excellently choreographed, shifting from moments involving the whole company to love-duets and scheming sequences.  These changes in tone are also reflected in the playful use of language: innuendo and wit are combined effectively in the lyrics and dialogue throughout the play, and the audience is left in no doubt that this is a musical for adults.

 

The absence of the sickly-sweet quality often associated with the form is undoubtedly due to the satirical nature of the content. And Bensted renders the hyperbolic nature of suburban existence ‘strangely magic and charming’ is reflected in the fact that while SWING! is consistently funny, it is never aggressive in its portrayal.
   

Four stars.

Review: The Bald Primadonna

0

This play is absurd, and the actors directors and audience are allowed to wallow happily in all that absurdity, to engage with it, and ultimately enjoy it.

Ionesco’s famous play, both ridiculous and rewarding, creates a unique mélange of the downright bizarre and the overtly intellectual; whether you are there to giggle at two smartly dressed English couples hurling nonsensical statements at one another, or to be presented with Wittgenstein’s ideas about the meaning of words and communication, this is the play for you. You can even do both if you like.

The acting is superb all the way through, Fiona McKenzi being particularly good as the noxiously saccharine Mrs. Smith, and Alex Midha puts on a wonderful display as her husband (both pictured right). The pair is balanced by Tom Coates and Arabella Milbank as the Martins. Typical English couples immersed in a pointedly atypical world, they all four capture the brutal human tendency to rationalize desperately, while, verging on panic, they acknowledge the steady crumble of reality around themselves.

An especial treat is Julia Effertz as the nurse, Mary. She cuts a sinister figure, utterly grotesque in the prim and proper parlour of the Smiths, terrifying the stereotypical English couples for whom she works. Hearing Mrs. Smith querulously tell Mary, a barely restrained force of nature, to ‘pop along now’, captures much of the combination of absurdity and humour in which this play excels.

Undercurrents of hatred and sexual violence run through the play, supporting and emphasizing the main themes. Each character is a slave not only to the social constraints in which they are enmeshed, but also to the raw, primitive needs which those constraints attempt feebly to control. This is brought to the fore most strongly when the elemental figure of Mary is on stage, breaking down the walls between the acceptable and the unacceptable.

The production manages to achieve admirable balance between these two absurdities. Indeed it is a finely balanced play throughout, the cast clearly enjoying the opportunity to dive head first into the rich material Ionesco has supplied, and which ensures a first- rate experience for the audience.

Of course, the audience is still no nearer to finding out just who the bald primadonna is, and exactly why mention of her inspires such shock in the Smiths and the Martins. But that’s all part of the sense of fun, and the threat of fear.

Theatrical Thrills

0

Cold, wet, rainy. A world away. Or midway through Trinity. I’m sure everybody told me that my first Trinity would be full of sun, smiles, and Pimm’s. And plays out in the warm summer rays. But just as those unlucky saps who’ve been induced to row by promises of gleaming tans and buffed muscles are beginning to see the error of their ways, so I discovered that the only plays worth seeing are those safely indoors.

 

I cannot stress enough how much I enjoy the experience of going to the theatre, most importantly when the rain is splashing so hard against the roof you are hit by the back-spary. Safely inside, I had the chance to grab some food. Not quite strawberries and cream in a dreamy college garden, I admit. But popcorn, no matter how egregiously overpriced, pushes all the right buttons.

 

All my friends, huddled up together, crammed in a couple of rows back, began the rituals of pre-theatre chit-chat. Subtly commenting on the audience (the obligatory older man giving a leggy usher the meat stare), grabbing handfuls of each others’ food, and trying to decide whether any of us had ever read the play before.

 

Despite one of my friend’s protestations, we decided that in fact none of us had. It was, after all, a new piece of writing. When we told Sarah this she backed down. Eventaully. The play, Spring Quartets, turned out be incredibly good actually. It was beautifully choreographed, and the use of a large muslin guaze was absolutely stunning. There was an almost palpable feeling of excitment in the air too.

I guess it was the fact that this was a new piece of writing, that it was an new showing.  I cannot help but think, hopeless romantic though I may be, that a similar buzz must have been present at the premiers of so many of my favourite plays. I’m not saying this could be the next Shakespeare, but, well, you never know.

 

About half way through though, Sarah began to shove me in the side. Obviously I put my hand over my nearly finished box of popcorn. This didn’t deter her.
‘Bugger off’, I snarled.
She poked me again.
‘What!’
She stopped bugging me eventually, and the rest of the play passed without so much as a whisper from her.

 

By the time we trailed outside, the rain had stopped. Blessedly. We all gathered together, and wandered slowly down the road, until the the prospect of a warm cafe seduced us all inside.

 

Sarah sat down next to me. We began to discuss the play, the pros and cons, the good and the bad.
‘No, guys. really. I’m sure I’ve read it before’ she said.
Oh Sarah.

Living on the edge of a paper model

0

Today I caught a butterfly with my bare hands. Searching for it among scraps of paper, I came across a veritable jungle of origami: lions, roses, dragons, elephants and scorpions tumbled out of Sara Adams’ cardboard box, to crouch on the grass of Wadham gardens.

Sara is head of the Oxford Origami Society, and a student at Exeter College reading Computer Sciences. An origami virgin when she came to Oxford University, Sara quickly learned to love the crease. She now leads paper-folding sessions every Thursday afternoon at Exeter, and really enjoyed displaying the society’s origami at Lincoln college last term. ‘I don’t display the origami in my room, because my room is really small.’

This amiable, auburn-haired graduate is carrying a box spilling over with colourful models. Sara is just the right person to introduce Cherwell’s culture editors to the art of origami. During twenty minutes of painstaking paper folding, Sara taught Michael and myself how to create a butterfly from a single square sheet.

‘Origami helps me relax, it helps me energise,’ she says. After our very relaxing afternoon, spent turning paper features into origami creatures, I would definitely agree. I found origami very soothing and rewarding: a great way to relieve exam stress. Let’s face it, revision would be a lot more fun if my notes were in the form of paper dragons.

Sara Adams agrees that origami is a great way to relax, away from academic work: ‘with research you don’t see results quickly, do you? But when you start folding paper, you can create something really quickly.’

It is this act of creation, of playing God with mini paper creatures, which makes origami so attractive. ‘You can make things which you think are impossible,’ Sara enthuses, showing us a model with three weirdly intertwining rectangles. It looks like something out of Escher.

Origami is not your average, do-it-in-your-bedroom-when-you’re-bored kind of activity, however. It relies heavily on mathematics and its techniques are used in areas of engineering such as satellites and space travel. For example, the airbags in cars are designed using origami methods of folding to fit into a really small space and expand rapidly when necessary.

Origami can also be exceptionally complicated; according to Sara, ‘models can have five hundred or a thousand steps and involve several hours of folding.’ Physicist and origami theorist Robert J. Lang has written a computer program, dubbed TreeProgram, which will design an origami model and its crease pattern to fit a personal specification.

It is this fusion of mathematical foundation and creative spirit which makes origami so unique. Bridging the gap between art and science, and easy to engage in anywhere, origami is one of the most democratic, inoffensive hobbies around. The word origami originally comes from Japanese: ori meaning paper and gami meaning folding. The art is practised around the world, although it was particularly popularised by Japan. As Sara tells me: ‘in Japan they take it really seriously. They have televised competitions of who’s the best at origami.’

Origami is a seriously versatile hobby, and more popular than you might think. Folding paper is a natural instinct in people; think of children making paper boats and hats and students rolling cigarettes and sweet papers.

Origami works with a lot of different materials: wrapping paper, newspaper, special origami paper and even aluminium foil. It can also be tailored to fit individual interests: for example, smokers might enjoy the movable model of a packet with individual cigarettes made from a single sheet of paper.

And let’s face it, everybody has their favourites. I was particularly enthused by a model of a Welsh dragon, whilst Michael liked a piece of origami which rotates, ‘because you can play with it.’ Sara’s favourite model was one of a scorpion, and she prefers to fold complicated models from single sheets of paper.

After admiring the convolute of colourful creations which lay in a heap at Sara’s feet, it was time to get started on our own origami experience. Michael and I try to carefully fold and crease, performing every instruction with a zen-like state of concentration. Even so, I still manage to mess up my model, so that Sara has to adapt her instructions to fit my hybrid creation.

‘Do people swear when they’re doing origami?’ I ask, frustrated. Michael smirks when I lose my way, and I am reduced to biting my tongue as I make mistake after ugly mistake.

It’s not looking pretty. Soon my paper has become a heap of quivering shapes. It does not, by any stretch of the imagination, look like a butterfly. Even the photographer, Hector Durham, smirks: ‘You should stop bossing everyone about and focus on the origami, the true art.’ I pull a face, which he unfortunately catches on camera. I think I’ll stick to writing; folding paper is too much like hard work.

Free trade is dead

0

Although most of the world realised rather earlier, the West has suddenly woken up to the global food crisis. Never mind the extra 20p on a packet of cornflakes.

The price of wheat has more than doubled in the past year, meaning that the world’s poor are simply unable to afford to eat. Food riots have erupted from India to Mexico, leaving dozens dead and hundreds injured.

Reassuringly, the guardians of global free trade have the answer. “Eventually, no doubt, farmers will respond to higher prices by growing more and a new equilibrium will be established,” writes the ever optimistic Economist: liberalise trade, end government subsides, and increased production will drive down prices.

Yet while growing more will help, the real problem is not a lack of grub. It is that the rich can afford to buy food out of the mouths of the poor.

Last year global grain production actually grew 5% to 2.1 billion tons. Astonishingly, less than half will end up on people’s plates. The rest is diverted from empty stomachs towards calamitous biofuels and wasteful meat production.

Next year, the US will turn more than 100 million tonnes of corn into ethanol to be burnt in the engines of its vast fleet of cars. Even more grain – 760 million tonnes last year – is squandered on feeding animals for meat.

Literally trillions of calories are blown by turning grain into flesh because animals burn off most of what we feed them. For every kilo of beef that ends up in hamburgers, eight kilos of grain are needed as feed.

The only reason for this absurd use of food is that the rich can pay to make it happen. A farmer, who may be struggling to survive himself, will sell to whoever gives the highest price.

It doesn’t matter that the buyer will burn grain in her car and waste it to make sausages, rather than someone who actually needs that food to live.

Even if Economist-style free trade does give farmers an incentive to grow more, insatiable demand for biofuels and meat may simply swallow up any gains, especially given record oil prices and the affluent new carnivores of China and India.

 

Breathtaking inequality plus a free market means that the poor can be priced out of life itself by the wasteful whims of the wealthy.
Either the rich should be stopped from hiking up the price, or the poor should be given the means to compete. We accept that the welfare state should step in at a national level when some are given the finger by the invisible hand.

Why should it not be rolled out globally by a world government? As markets around the world are trashed by hungry crowds, the free traders have never looked so bereft of answers.