NEW COLLEGE JCR has been forced to pay for an intercollegiate paintballing trip after Magadalen’s Entz Committee failed to sell enough tickets to the event.
The trip was organised by New College JCR as a post-Freshers’ Week event for 180 students from different colleges.
Magdalen’s Entz team indicated that the JCR wanted 40 places on the trip at £30 each, but after little success in pitching the offer to students, the committee allegedly refused to cover costs for the wasted tickets.
New’s JCR Treasurer Yathesan Gangakumaran complained, “Magdalen wanted a fairly large number of tickets and didn’t bring anyone to my knowledge. They didn’t keep up their end of the bargain. We can pay it back fine, but apparently the day before they had only sold five tickets and said they weren’t going to pay for any of the remaining ones.”
Ben Karlin, New’s JCR President, agreed that his college had been treated unfairly. “It kind of screwed us over a bit,” he said. “We pre-paid for all the tickets and coaches and it was a success in that everyone who came enjoyed it. It was just annoying that allocations were sold to other colleges who then refused to pay us anything. It puts us out of pocket.”
According to one student, 84 people attended the event from New, but only two from other colleges, both from Christ Church.
New’s Entz Rep, Will Cowell De Gruchy, was keen to stress that relations between the JCRs had not been affected. “There’s no ill-feeling because of there not being a turn out from other colleges. It was an informal agreement and nothing was signed,” he said.
A JCR budget surplus of £800 left over from Trinity term meant that New has avoided suffering any substantial financial loss over transport. Additionally, the paintballing company agreed not to charge them the ticket prices for all places not taken up.
Magdalen’s JCR Entz Committee refused to comment.

Dons have rallied behind a Nobel laureate accused of racism after he told reporters that black people were of lower intelligence than white.
James Watson, who shared the Nobel Prize for co-discovering DNA, was forced to cancel a discussion at the Sheldonian Theatre on Wednesday after being suspended from his administrative duties as Chancellor of Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory in the United States.
Watson was due to appear alongside Richard Dawkins, the University’s Professor for the Public Understanding of Science, as part of a tour to promote a new book.
He told the Sunday Times Magazine that he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” since “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours, whereas all the testing says not really”.
In the interview with one of his former students, Charlotte Hunt-Grubbe, Watson also said that he wished everyone could be equal, but that “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true”.
Other institutions had already cancelled visits by Watson in light of his comments. The American biologist had been due to talk at the Science Museum in London, who stated, “The Science Museum feels that Nobel Prize winner James Watson’s recent comments have gone beyond the point of acceptable debate and we are as a result cancelling his talk at the Museum.”  The Bristol Cultural Development Partnership and the University of Edinburgh also cancelled talks by Watson.
Professor Dawkins, due to interview Watson as part of the Oxford event, criticised the London Science Museum’s decision to cancel his appearance.
“What is ethically wrong is the hounding, by what can only be described as an illiberal and intolerant ‘thought police’, of one of the most distinguished scientists of our time, out of the Science Museum, and maybe even out of the laboratory [Cold Springs Harbor] that [he] has devoted much of his life to building up a world-class reputation,” he said.  
Professor Colin Blakemore, former chief executive of the Medical Research Council and a neuroscientist at Oxford, also defended Watson. “It would be a sad world if such a distinguished scientist was silenced because of his more unpalatable views.”
Blakemore also pointed out that measuring intelligence accurately is still an area needing research. “Defining intelligence is complex and there are many forms of intelligence, not all of which are captured by IQ tests,” he said. “In any case, it would be as unethical to organise society around some numerical indicator of difference as it would to do so on the basis of skin colour.”
In a press release, Watson apologised for his remarks. “I cannot understand how I could have said what I am quoted as having said. I can certainly understand why people, reading those words, have reacted in the ways they have. To all those who have drawn the inference from my words that Africa, as a continent, is somehow genetically inferior, I can only apologise unreservedly. This is not what I meant. More importantly from my point of view, there is no scientific basis for such a belief.”
Prominent Oxford neuroscientist Baroness Greenfield, director of the Royal Institution, condemned Watson’s comments. “There was a great uproar quite some time ago with a book called The Bell Curve which suggested that there were racial differences in intelligence,” she said. “If Watson is citing this work, further work has found the findings not to be as simple as they implied and that there was a strong cultural factor involved.”
Oxford University Press suggested that they would have gone ahead with the event at the Sheldonian despite the controversy Watson’s remarks have caused. Kate Farquhar-Thomson, Head of Publicity, said, “We are disappointed that we have had to cancel our book tour.”

Katherine Eve sheds light on Donnelly's multimedia exhibitionDespite Donnelly’s strong reputation within the art community, she is little known in the public domain, so perhaps it is best to introduce her work with a quote from Art Review. “Donnelly’s works exist at the threshold of possible experience or understanding and require, if not optimism, at least suspension of disbelief.” To this end, she is a multi-media artist, taking her own typewritten texts as a starting point for works ranging from meticulously executed, disciplined drawings through to large-scale installation pieces. Together these are combined with organic elements, audio-stimuli and performance pieces, termed ‘demonstrations’, to form a novel reality. Links between the pieces are intangible, but this is by no means a criticism; the great thing about Donnelly’s work is that it makes no attempt to provide a profound metaphor for us to take away without challenge. The work persists, nagging, in one’s mind, demanding time to settle and evolve.

The ephemeral and incidental play an integral role in Donnelly’s work. Her opening-night ‘demonstration’ (recalling WWII planes experiencing a brief uplift before crashing to the ground, and urging observers to experience it through an audio-encapsulation of the phenomenon) was not recorded or documented in any way. In this way, it can only be transmitted to a wider public, if at all, by verbal description or word-of-mouth, subject to inevitable gaps in memory, distortions, exaggerations, and everything else in the space between experience and narration.

This aspect of her exhibitions achieves perfectly her aim that the viewer invests something of themselves in the work, and establishes a dialogue with the audience that places them in an elevated position. The viewer’s thoughts are challenged and become lucid and fragmented. This is not necessarily for us to tap into her own wavelength, but to bring our own history, intuition, experience and culture to the experience. Consequently, the impact of her art is unique and the corpus of her work timeless.

This particular exhibition was reasearched by Donnelly in several advance visits to the space. Those familiar with Modern Art Oxford may appreciate how the configuration of the three adjoining galleries, along with with the movement of acoustics through them, has evoked Donnelly’s interpretation of it as two heads (the front, ‘The Ballroom,’ and rear, ‘L.D.’, galleries) connected by a spine (‘The Arc’). Gallery space evolves with each and every exhibition staged, and Donnelly has exploited this to extremes. She has modified the middle gallery somewhat: windows not usually seen have been unmasked and the side room has been concealed and converted into a corridor to house replacement conifer branches used in the exhibition. These architectural changes not only enhance the light quality, but also, through the minimalist approach, enhance the sound and the dramatic progression as onlookers walk through.

Bunches of fresh roses and a ‘form of the Oxford branch’ (cut conifer) are replaced at regular intervals regardless of their rate of ageing. And 1920/30s big-band music is played on a loop, which serves various artistic purposes. Rhythmic cycles interact so that each viewer’s encounter with the work is shaded differently; the ageing cycle of living elements provides a tension; objects associated with home and familiarity are placed out of context leaving us insecure. Such blurring of boundaries continues.

It isn’t initially clear whether the hum in “The Arc” derives from the exhibition or external noise. (In another interpretation of boundaries, she’s exploring how the cultural and social backgrounds we arrived with inform our viewing). Gallery attendants have been informed they can alter the position of two vertical ‘cross-Arizona plus China’ branches on impulse. Of course we could do the same, but are unaware, so the staff are in a unique and privileged position.

The curation of the exhibition, undoubtedly directed in close collaboration with Donnelly, complements her themes perfectly. Lack of titles, unframed drawings and photographs pinned to walls shows that o single element is unduly important but all regarded as a whole. Our own being is even drawn into the installation as we become a mirror between the two ‘Pressures’ (near mirror-image photographs on opposing walls) in L.D.

In the spirit of her work I haven’t, and nor would I wish to, summarise the exhibition for the reader, but I hope that discussing a few of my personal reflections will whet appetites to embrace this extraordinary reality. Approach it with fresh eyes and no preconceptions.

Oxford City Council has announced plans to extend licensing requirements for rented accommodation in the city, raising concerns that students will no longer be able to afford living out.
In an effort to raise the current standards of rented accommodation, a proposal is being put forward for Houses of Multiple Occupation (HMOs), often rented by students who choose to live out, to have their licences extended.
The University Accommodation Office has warned that greater controls will increase rent and be detrimental to students living out.
Accommodation Officer Sue Jacobs said, “Although the University welcomes legislation which raises standards within the private rental market, imposing too many controls which have a cost to the landlord will ultimately raise rents. This will have a considerable impact on the student market, which is already financially constrained, and may cause students to compete with other tenant groups for properties at rents that are no longer sustainable on student grants.”
Jacobs also explained the University’s concern that increased regulation would reduce the number of houses available to students. “At a time when affordable housing is high on the agenda, properties that have for some time provided valuable affordable accommodation within the city may well disappear as landlords opt for easier management properties within the city or, alternatively, seek a different tenant group to recoup their outlay for improvements required under the extended licensing,” she said.
Oxford City Council believes it necessary to extend licensing as many HMOs are currently sub-standard.
Executive Member for Improving Housing Councillor Patrick Murray, pointed out, “Following a survey in 2004, it revealed that 61% of HMOs were below standard with their fire precaution facilities and 29 per cent of HMOs were found to have below-adequate management, and this is something that will change with this new licensing scheme.”
Murray believes that extending the properties’ licensing will beneficial to tenants living in currently unlicensed HMOs. “The additional licensing scheme will bring about improvements in the management of the houses which will be fantastic for people living there,” he said.
Under the 2004 Housing Act, only HMOs with three or more storeys which are occupied by five or more unrelated individuals have to be licensed. This covers only 15% of Oxford’s HMOs.

by James Stafford

Any mention of ‘folk and traditional music’ that’s casually tossed out in conversation invariably results in a few raised eyebrows. The beardy ale stereotype is a tough one to shake off, but that doesn’t stop a substantial number of twenty-somethings on the circuit from doing their level best to alert a wider audience to the power of traditional music. As the man at the head of folk’s assault on the mainstream Lakeman clearly has cause for celebration tonight. The nigh-on 1000 capacity Academy is packed to the rafters with what for a folk gig is a respectable mix of old and young, with a relaxed and confident performance from Seth, his brother Sean, bassist Ben Nicols and percussionists Andy Tween and Cormac Byrne receiving a rapturous reception.

There were those of us who, following a difficult summer of embarrassing tight T-shirt music videos and shouty vocal performances from the group, had begun to fear that Lakeman’s contract with Relentless was turning him into the aspiring pop-rock star nobody really wants him to be. Standard opener ‘Rifleman of War’ does much to dispel these doubts, a gleeful military stomp rendered still more danceable by the group’s dual percussive assault. Last year’s Freedom Fields album is heavily represented here, and as such Cormac Byrne’s presence in the band is all the more welcome.  His frenetic bodhran playing really shines on two numbers he plays as a duo with Seth, last year’s single ‘Lady of the Sea’ and fan favourite ‘The Bold Knight,’ from 2004’s Mercury nominated Kitty Jay.

The band in full-on stomp mode is arguably just as impressive. Live stalwart ‘How Much,’ a trip-hop wimp-out on Seth’s overlooked 2002 debut The Punch Bowl, is here pumped full of mashed guitar chords and thumping double bass, leaving it easily the evening’s most joyous moment. Meanwhile, sensitive treatments of recent singles ‘The White Hare’ and ‘King and Country’ show the group as a whole to be capable of more than tenor guitar riffery, the latter in particular gaining an emotional resonance lacking from either of its recorded incarnations. More’s the pity, then, that the title track showcased from upcoming EP Poor Man’s Heaven displays none of its predecessors’ subtlety, succumbing all too easily to a welter of cringe-inducing ‘Yeah!’s and ‘Come on now!’s. Hopefully, the Spinal Tap influence will not be discernable for long, and as soon as the singer banishes his bandmates and launches into an incendiary solo rendition of his greatest songwriting achievement, the terrifying ‘Kitty Jay,’ all is swiftly forgiven. The versatility and power of this group leaves them a force to be reckoned with, in the folk world and beyond.

Oxford's infested, claims an Oxford Academic, amid fears that the number of rats are on the rise in Oxford.The investigation comes after Dr Frances Kennett claimed that rats had infested her house in Jericho. The Oxford Academic claimed that the reduction of waste-removal services in the area had brought the issue about:"I have lived in this house for a very long time and have never had rats until three months after the new collection was introduced. The whole thing is turning into a farce."Local council claimed that it wasn't the fortnightly collections that were causing the problem, but the significant damage to the sewage pipes until Dr Kennett's house. City Councillor Jean Fooks added: "We do know the sewer under Dr Kennett's house has got a lot of damage.It needs to be fixed – the question is who pays for it because it is high time it was done.As I keep saying until I am blue in the face, there is no evidence of an increased rat population in Oxford or tat fortnightly waste collections have anything to do with it."Thames Water will carry out surveys of the sewers under the houses on Great Clarendon Street next week. A 2-foot long torpedo-shaped probe, complete with a camera and lights, will be sent underground to see whether or not the sewers under the houses in Jericho are infested with rats. Experts hope to ascertain whether or not the reports are valid and how to deal with the issue if it is.

by Rees Arnott-Davies

 
Somebody once told me that if you want to give a play a bad review, simply describe what happens in it.  King John begins with the promise of a war of sovereignty between England and France, with the French disputing John’s right to the English throne, arguing that his cousin, Arthur, holds a legitimate claim to the crown. Meanwhile, Philip the Bastard is made aware that he is the illegitimate son (hence bastard) of Richard the Lion Heart, after having been knighted, and given the opportunity to fight for John in France. In France, a number of strangely unconvincing noblemen, including the Archduke of Austria, the Dauphin Lewis and King Philip of France convene outside of Angiers with the aim of deciding how to win the crown for Arthur. They are soon met by the English army, led by John, and battle ensues, without any sign of victory for either side. So the kings decide (with the help of an impartial bystander) that perhaps it might be a better idea to resolve everything with a marriage, as was the way back then. So there’s a marriage, making some people happy and some people sad, at which point the Pope’s legate comes along and breaks it to everyone that John’s been a bit sacrilegious and will have to be excommunicated. This unravels everything, causing France to go to war with England all over again, a war in which John is victorious, capturing Arthur with the intention of killing him. I think you get the idea. One of the foremost problems with this production, besides the fact that it seemed a little under-rehearsed, was that it focused on presenting this story of blood loyalties and power-games in the style of Eastenders. The scenes between Queen Eleanor and Constance were bizarrely similar to a shouting match in the Queen Vic. The moments of intrigue and surprise were positively begging to be interrupted by an aerial shot of London and the tune that invariably denotes another cliff-hanger. This is not to say that the production was without merit.  Both Alex Bowles and Chloe Sharrocks as King John and Constance gave generally good performances, but as the performance wore on it seemed as if words took longer and longer to come, and when they did they were often stumbled over. Of course I understand that a cast of post-grads and finalists may have more important things to worry about than learning lines, but the general lack of any directorial impulse (it seems characters spent most of their time, when not speaking, standing with passive and aimless looks upon their faces) coupled with the farcically over-directed battle scenes (soundtracks of an indecent amount of grunting) left the audience feeling that perhaps they had stumbled upon a revamped Beyond the Fringe. However, despite Helen McCabe’s portrayal of the royal court as an East-End pub, despite performances that put the amateur in dramatic, despite somewhat rusty stagecraft, despite all these things and more, it may be worth going to see King John, if only because until the RSC performed it in 2006, the last recorded professional performance of King John was in 1944.

by Elena Lynch
 

The message of this thoughtfully directed and excellently acted production is that life is only about love and jazz. Adapted from Boris Vian’s L’Ecume des Jours, Crescendos in Blue is a whimsical mixture of fantasy and realism.

One of the more unusual aspects of this production is its inventive staging. The audience is seated around a central acting space on the floor, but the actors are far from confined to this space. The action takes place directly in front and around you, on the balcony behind and the small platform at the front. Every available space is used. Actors crawl past your feet, shout down from above, sit amongst you and glide behind your backs. The disadvantage of this ambitious staging is that the audience’s view is sometimes blocked, and you have to strain to peer round at things behind and above you.

However, it immediately involves you in the lives of the characters, the “six teenagers and a mouse” as the introductory talk tells you. They fall in love but ultimately lose that love. It’s poignant and sad in several places, as well as being amusing. The painful moments of being a teenager, such as having that first dance together, are briefly but vividly brought to life by the actors. Particularly notable is Barthélémy Meridjen (Colin), who gets a lot of laughs when he gets carried away passionately kissing his own hand whilst pretending it is Chloe, the girl he’s in love with.

This realistic presentation of teenage life is balanced with more surreal scenes. The bizarre puppet scene featuring a conversation between a mouse and a cat completely confused me. In other scenes, characters confide in the mouse and show you what they are imagining. They immerse you in their fantasies and their whirlwind world of parties, friendship and love as soon as the play begins, helped by the fantastic playing of Les Alcolytes, an up-and-coming French Jazz band. They give the play passion and atmosphere. Unfortunately, sometimes they were too loud and it was a strain to hear the actors’ voices. Crescendos in Blue is not a conventional play, and it is worth paying attention to the talk before the start. Although this talk is a bit too long, it does provide some useful insight into the play’s peculiarities. The heart of the play does overcome these, and what you really remember afterwards is the bittersweet story beautifully brought to life. A lot of care and thought has gone into every aspect of this piece, from set and costumes to the musicians who join in the dancing. If you fancy a break this week and want to try something a bit different, then go and experience it.
 
Crescendos in Blue runs at the Maison Francaise through Saturday, October 27th at 7:30 pm. On Saturday, there is a 4 pm matinee.

by Frankie Parham
 

For something with an exclamation mark in its title, you’d expect Roussos! to be loud, bizarre and confrontational. For all the promise of ‘Extra Special Guest Appearances from Sir Elton John and Dame Shirley Bassey’, writers Sam Caird and Jack Chedburn immediately throw their audience into one of the most mundane and uneventful scenarios imaginable. Two inept bodyguards wait backstage for a washed-out rock star on his final tour, ‘Forever and Ever’.

Demis Roussos is past his sell-by date; in fact he was barely even famous, much as it pains Jack (Jack Chedburn), his faithful bodyguard and obsessive admirer. Pacing back and forth, fiddling with his walkie-talkie and nervously pulling on his trousers, Chedburn infuses Jack with mild traits of OCD that do well to fuel the trivial conversations he has with his colleague, Sam. Sam is similarly played brilliantly by an effortlessly lethargic Laura Hanna, she merely nods along to Jack’s neurotic rants, more concerned with her crossword puzzles. The scenes between the two are impressively engrossing. Neither looks at the other, they only speak at one another and when they do come into physical contact (while Jack is trying to revive one of Roussos’ hits backstage) the chemistry is suddenly awkward, as if they barely know each other. Much of the humour comes through in their continuous petty discussions, which range from ball-point pens to the reasons why dogs pant to what eagles eat (Is it rabbit or rabbits? Do you pluralise?). Reminiscing about Roussos’ one-hit wonder and incidents with Dame Shirley Bassey expose the meaningless of celebrity, treated with such indifference as it is by these two numb characters.

 
These cringing scenes would lose their edge if they weren’t contrasted with something different, and this comes stumbling in (literally) in the form of Will Cudmore, convincingly doubling as both Franz Kafka and Samuel Beckett – yes, two of the previous century’s heavy-weight authors who are in fact dead. Sam and Jack are confronted backstage by these two characters (first by the befuddled Kafka and then the more intense and aggressive Beckett) and one assumes that surely their humdrum existence should somehow be altered by such supernatural events. On the contrary, the circumstances are merely treated as chance events (Jack does not even know who either author is by name) and so we enter the realm of the obscure. However, Roussos! does not alienate so much as it draws in its audience.  Its seemingly unexciting, but realistic opening scenario is followed by something so extraordinary that they buy into it. There seem to be parallels (between the waiting of Jack and Sam for Roussos, and Beckett’s Waiting for Godot) but the action moves so quickly that these could just as well be coincidences – futile attempts of the audience to figure out the play’s meaning. It is competently acted and unmistakably original, and problems would only arise from an audience that refuses to succumb to the play’s juxtaposition between the tedious and the wacky. Fans of Spinal Tap will be easily entertained, but be prepared to feel amused and confused. 
Roussos! runs in the BT late slot (9:30) until Saturday, 27th October. 

Three members of Oxford University staff have been named as 'Oxfordshire Women of the Year 2007'. Mrs Elizabeth Crawford, Professor Helen Mardon, and Professor Irene Tracey were selected along with five others by the 'Oxfordshire Women of the Year' Lunch and Assembly committee, for an award designed to bring outstanding women in Oxfordshire together from all ages and backgrounds.Mrs Elizabeth Crawford is the Domestic Bursar of University College, and the chairman of the Domestic Bursar’s Committee for all 39 Oxford colleges. Professor Helen Mardon is a Tutor in Medical Sciences at St Catherine’s College and Professor of Reproductive Science. She runs a research group at the Nuffield Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology investigating technologies for stem-cell micro-monitoring and expansion, in particular the interaction of extra cellular signalling molecules with their receptors in the womb lining. Professor Irene Tracey is Director the of Oxford Centre for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain (FMRIB) Centre, Nuffield Professor of Anaesthetic Science, and a Fellow of Medicine at Pembroke College. Her team is researching on using FMRI and electroencephalography to study pain processing in the brain and spinal cord of chronic pain patients.Sister Frances Dominica was announced as the overall ‘Woman of the Year 2007’, whose achievements include the founding of the world’s first children’s hospice, Helen House, in Oxford in 1982.