Cherwell notes with relief the return to form of those two bastions of political potty-training, OULC and OUCA, just when things seemed to be getting a bit boring.That’s not to say that the OUCA types haven’t been happily ensconced in the Union drinking port and talking about how Europe is a bad thing or “compassionate conservatism” (whatever that may be), or that the OULC haven’t been smartening up after the odd drunken rendition of Things Can Only Get Better. But in recent weeks they seem to have recovered from their respective hangovers to indulge in that most political of pursuits, the art of mud-throwing.No longer so concerned with Cameron vs Davis, or the latest (will he ever stop?!) ignominious departure of David Blunkett, the respective sides have got down to the really serious business at hand.For once, the charade was prompted by a rather over-the-top letter from the Presidents of OULC on the back of the now unlikely-to-actually-take-place visit of the infamous (if only he were in-famous) George Galloway, in which they tactfully implied that OUCA has fascist sympathies.A thinly veiled attempt at points scoring which hardly covers them in roses, however righteously Red they may consider themselves to be.On the other hand, the response from the not-entirely-whiter-than-white OUCA which accused OULC of Communism has added a touch of Blue bathos to the whole incident. While OUCA is right to argue that there was a degree of provocation to the original letter, from the point of view of OULC one might argue that OUCA is an obvious, if cleverly chosen, target.All in all Cherwell rejoices at OUCA’s formal complaint to the University Proctors which must surely, at least at first, be received with a combination of confusion and amusement in Wellington Square. While it is unclear where this particular saga will end, there is clearly no love lost between the two sides. Cherwell sits firmly on the fence in these things, but is sure to outstretch a hand of congratulation to all concerned for creating a nice little disturbance to wake us from a mid-term slumber.We imagine that, to quote The Big Chill, you’re “just trying to keep the conversation lively”, and for that, we thank you.ARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005

A friend of mine was recently told by his economics tutor that “you used to be able to get a First in PPE if you were clever. Now, it’s more about how much you work”And this is not just whimsical nostalgia. Higher education is very different to how it was forty years ago. Very small and socially stratified institutions have given way to an enormous enterprise employing millions of people.This was partly on the back of government and partly the organic growth of voluntary education. It is propelled by the now almost universal idea of education as a social mobiliser. This mobility business is global, and relentlessly competitive for students, teachers and knowledge.This phenomenal growth has caused ever greater specialisation in modern academia. Chair in Byzantine Studies at the University of Indiana has become a realistic possibility. And with every extra post, the corpus of work in any particular subject ‘to be understood’ grows.So specialisation becomes more and more necessary. It is self-propelling. Despite the merging of many disciplines, combinations have become solidified very quickly. The result: The Journal of Historical Anthropology.Especially in the arts and the social sciences, we are constantly reminded of our academic niche. ‘Recent scholarship states’, ‘the latest paper’ and the Harvard reference system litter our work. They are the new rhetoric, the marks of learning.The quantity of knowledge needed within this self-referential system keeps disciplines contained. They are enshrined by the PhD qualification. By far the majority of interpretive work has been done in the last forty years, corresponding exactly with the expansion of higher education. “That’s not my period” syndrome is getting worse and worse.This specialisation is compounded by greater careerism in academia than ever before. This is the inevitable result of its enormous expansion. Career ladders are mapped out. Undergraduateshave to be ‘experts’ in a particular field to get onto a graduate program, which will, in turn, lead to the next stage, be it a doctorate or tenure.This careerism is confirmed by the lack of interaction between academia and the wider world. And the culture of specialisation grows. What’s wrong with this division of labour? It’s Adam Smith’s pin factory meets the University.We are more productive, and furthermore, people want to specialise. The division does not alienate us from our labour. On the contrary, I believe that unwieldy specialization and careeristindustriousness of bloated higher education threatens free thinking and a constructive atmosphere of general learning.It is impossible to stop specialization at higher levels of education, but it is important to maintain undergraduate study as unfettered as possible. You must be in constant dialogue with new ideas – it is the only way to achieve great thinking in young people.Their ideas can be honed later. Undergraduate education was traditionally seen as the antidote to more focused research as the rigid mores of academia did not apply. However, the tide of specialisation has seeped into undergraduate educational culture.Undergraduates are just inferior graduates – we cannot escape the enormous weight of established scholarship and we are drawn into the cult of specialisation as the foundation of the academic process. Most undergraduate degrees now include some sort of compulsory thesis. This specialisation must inevitably come at the expense of exploring wider fields.Undergraduate generalism must be shored up against the scale of mass academic specialization.I cannot help thinking that this academic specialisation and careerism is directly linked to the idea of meritocratic education. Implicit in confining academic disciplines is the possibility of testing ability.Undergraduate education is increasingly seen in functional terms, both within the academic sphere and outside. University activities, from a thesis on cultural imperialism to debating at the Union, are just a step towards greater things. Oxford was a sheltered and exclusive place before mass higher education.Greats covered everything from history to logic, and it was common to change subjects. Sure, we are no longer all gentlemen of means who can indulge in leisurely study but we have lost the benefits of the old intellectual breadth. The current system does not encourage us to follow general interests outside our academic remit.We work harder within specialisms that are increasingly dictated by the confines of professional academia. Especially in this age of overpowering mediocre specialisation, we must recover something of that generalism if we are to maintain our superiority.Anthony Cardona is a former President of European Affairs SocietyARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005

Mary Bennett, the former Principal of St. Hilda’s College, has died in her home at the age of 92. Mary Bennett was Principal of St. Hilda’s from 1965-1980. She was University Pro-Vice-Chancellor from 1979-1980 and served on the University Council from 1973-1979. Mrs Bennett begun her Oxford association when she took a First in Classics at Somerville before work­ing for the BBC during the Second World War and at the Colonial Office from 1945-1956. She was at the forefront of the skirmishes which accompanied the introduction of mixed-gender colleges at Oxford in the late 1960s and vigorously contested the opening of men’s col­leges to women, arguing in a letter to the Principal of LMH that the older, male establishments would “skim the cream” of female candidates, motivated by the “stupid men out, clever girls in” argument. Sally Mapstone, a Tutor and Fel­low at St Hilda’s said: “Mrs Bennett represented everything that is best about St Hilda’s. She came from a background of academic distinction, and she believed in academic excel­lence. She had formidable presence, but she was also famously fair-mind­ed. She was a vintage Principal.” Mary Bennett’s family are holding a private funeral but St Hilda’s is to announce a public memorial service in due
course. ARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005

The
Old Fire Station nightclub on George
Street cut short a produc­tion of the rocky Horror
Show on Monday night following rowdiness and complaints from audience members. The show, held on the night of Hal­loween,
was a one-off theatrical club night organised by Carte Blanche, the production
company behind Burlesk. Billed as a “kinky, camp musical club night,” the
production consisted of a film screening, music and a live floor show. Midway through the evening members of the
audience began to heckle the onstage performers. Some approached OFS staff
complaining about the content of the production. The show was not permitted to
per­form the third act, and was pulled off the stage before the second act had
been completed, on the insist­ence of the Old Fire Station staff. One member of the audience, Holly Ware, a
student at St Hilda’s, said that “the crowd got very rowdy and quite violent.
The show was extremely good but it was clear that a lot of people in the
audience didn’t know that the rocky Horror Show was going on and just thought
it was a regular club night.” Following the termination of the rocky
Horror Show perform­ance, the evening continued as an ordinary club night with
music and dancing. The director of the show, Laurie Penny,
said, “We were on the stage when the music cut out, this cheese cut in and we
were told to get off. This was right in the middle a show for which we’d all
worked really hard.” The entry for the special night was five
pounds, and a large majority of the audience had come dressed in the
traditional rocky Horror attire of fishnets and suspender belts. Aspectator
said that “in the end projectiles were being thrown at the stage and the
projector had to be taken down.” Julie Sturgess, speaking on behalf of the
Old Fire Station said, “It wasn’t particularly rowdy. It was a decision on the
behalf or the promoters to pull the show because the majority of customers
seemed to prefer to dance rather than watch the show. The show had been on for
quite a long time already, and it was just cut a little short.” Joey Clark, who played a Transyl­vanian in
the show, said that “it was a shame that a few drunkards spoilt it.” Neil Tarrant, also involved in the
production, explained his feelings saying, “I was just rather upset that the
OFS were responding more to an aggressive minority than to a ma­jority who were
seemingly enjoying the show.” Carte Blanche have experienced a degree of
unfortunate Oxford
scandal in the past over their show Burlesk, which began at Jongleurs during
Hilary term. On the night that a Daily Mail reviewer was present, one
cast member’s nipples were inadvertantly exposed during a striptease. ARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005

Comedy writer Armando Iannucci has
been appointed as the next news International Visiting Professor of Broadcast
Media. Iannuchi, who wrote and directed I’m Alan Partridge with Steve Coogan, will
hold a lecture series beginning in January entitled ‘British TV Comedy: dead or
alive?’ Iannuchi graduated from University
College in 1982 and
worked for the BBC in the eighties.His past projects include On The Hour,
The day Today, the Friday and Saturday night armistice and the Armando Iannucci
Show. His satirical political comedy series The Thick Of It is currently being
aired on BBC4 and will be shown on BBC2 in the beginning of 2006.There has been much critical acclaim
for Iannucci’s work and he has won two Sony radio awards and three British
Comedy awards, one of which was a special award for his contribution to
television comedy.He and Chris Morris were jointly awarded
a 1992 Writers’ Guild award for the programme On the Hour. Together they
produced the critically acclaimed show The Day Today.Speaking about the theme of his
lecture series, Iannucci said: ‘If British TV has a heritage, then comedy is
its most precious commodity.’ ‘Today, though, British Television Comedy is at a
crossroads. Just as it gets more daring and varied in format and technique, and
just as audiences get more and more sophisticated in the breadth of comedy they’re
willing to watch, viewing figures for comedy shows are in decline.’‘Over the next five years, TV comedy
has the chance either to reclaim the mass-appeal, large viewing-figure slots
that were previously theirs by right, or become a fragmented web of innovative,
interesting but niche programmes. These lectures will outline precisely
how British TV comedy arrived at this crossroads, and the possible routes it
can take.’ARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005

An Oxford councillor has claimed that students
in rented accommodation are pricing out local families from the Cowley Road
area. Sid Phelps, Green Party
councillor for St Mary’s ward said in an article in the Oxford Mail that
University accommodation had not expanded enough to house the increasing number
of students in Oxford,
resulting in students pushing other local people out of privately rented houses
in the area. Phelps told Cherwell this week that he was "not
anti-student" but that "the amount of student accommodation is
causing a problem and it’s not neccessarily that healthy: we need a
balance." He said that he feels there is a divide between students and
local residents because "students are quite inwardly focused because they
are only temporarily in Oxford."
He added "it’s starting to be a problem because families can hardly afford
to live in the area." Phelps pointed out that student
numbers have nearly reached the maximum limit set by the Oxford Local Plan for
2016 and that "The community has been tolerant but the increase in numbers
of late licenses to cater for students is starting to cause problems." He
also pointed out that demographics show that there are dwindling numbers of
pupils at schools because families cannot afford to live in the local area.
Phelps said that the solution would be to provide more purpose built University
accommodation. He added: “It’s time for universities to look at their intake
and at what is sustainable for local communities. The government target of 50%
of young people at university doesn’t help." Craig Simmons, a fellow Green
Party councillor for the St Mary’s ward area said that Mr Phelps’ original
comments to the Oxford Mail were made in response to concerns from local
residents. He said, “it’s all about striking a balance: some streets in my ward
contain 80% students.” He also stressed that a Housing Standards survey last
year found that “90% of rented accommodation was substandard.” Student numbers have been
gradually increasing with 18,113 students at Oxford between 2004-5 compared to just 16,576
students in 2001-2. A spokesperson for Oxford University
said that “undergraduate numbers have remained relatively stable, whereas
postgraduate numbers have increased in recent years,” and that many
postgraduates live outside of college. She pointed out that the total number of
students living outside of University accommodation is only “around 3,500 which
is the figure that has been discussed by the University and Council and agreed
on as acceptable.” Ailbhe Menton, JCR President for
St Hilda’s College said that “providing accommodation for all students is
something a college should strive towards,” and that “with the recent number of
attacks on students in the Cowley Road
area living on site would provide more safety measures for students.” She added
“It would be advantageous to all if renting accommodation in Oxford was generally cheaper.” Aidan Randle-Conde, OUSU VP (Welfare) and Hannah Stoddart,
OUSU VP (Charities and Community) said “We are aware that rent and property
prices in the Cowley area continue to increase, and this is … partly due to
the high demand from students … [but] inflated rent prices are as big a
problem for students as they are for local residents”. 2004 survey by the Accommodation for Students website found that whilst
the average weekly rent for a student was £52.44, Oxford had the fourth highest rent in the
country at £77 a week, which was 47% higher than the national average.ARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005

The Oxford University Conservative Association has made a formal complaint to the proctors
about an open letter from the Oxford University Labour Club to Respect MP George Galloway published in The Oxford
Student last Thursday. In the letter Jack Graves and Martin McCluskey,
co-chairs of the Labour club, stated that they are “currently boycotting OUCA”
after it “failed to take adequate disciplinary measures against members making
anti-Semitic jokes”. They also said that Galloway speaking to the society
would “undermine our struggle to make Oxford
free of those who tolerate fascist sympathies”.OUCA have also released a press
statement stating their “outrage at the Labour Club’s unprovoked letter”, which
they describe as a “cheap and offensive attack”, and one that is “insulting” to
its members. The complaint to the proctors says that “OUCA is the largest
student political body in the UK,
with a membership of some 700 members; it is frankly offensive to the many
undergraduates who are members to suggest Association the has any thing to do
with fascism”. It criticises the OULC for their “extreme left wing views, which
can only be described as verging on Communism”, and describes the letter as “libellous”.The Labour Club responded to the
OUCA press statement with one justifying their criticisms of the society. It
quotes reports of racist jokes made by members of the society in the years
1999-2001, as well as quotinga story published by Cherwell earlier this year about a member
who cracked a Holocaust joke to a Jewish student. They describe the society as “a
reactionary political organisation” and “feel they have strong grounds for
suggesting OUCA harbour fascist tendencies and refute any suggestions to the
contrary”. Speaking to Cherwell, OUCA President Christopher Ware
said of the Association, “it goes without
saying that we condemn any form of fascism or racism”. While acknowledging that
“unacceptable” attitudes had existed in the society in the past, he says, “No-one currently involved with OUCA has anything to do
with those accusations. They belong in a completely different era, and we have
move on. I challenge the Labour Club to come forward if they have any evidence
of fascism”. Christopher Ware also suggested the Labour Club “concentrate their
efforts on an underserved membership” rather then “dig up the past”, and asks
them to “publically apologise to the hundreds of students who by their
accusations have been associated with fascism”. In the case of the Holocaust joke
he says that the offending person immediately offered an apology to the Jewish
student, who said he was satisfied. A spokesman for the Respect Party
states that George Galloway is now “busy on tour, and unable to speak to the
Conservative Association this term”. However he also said Mr Galloway’s Westminster office has “not
received a letter protesting against the visit, or heard anything about one”.ARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005

A student dressed as an Egyptian mummy was set alight at an LMH Halloween bop
on Saturday night. Teddy Hall postgraduate student Hamish Stewart was set
alight outside the LMH bar in which the bop was taking place. Helene Wilde, a
finalist at LHM who was at the bop said that “at about 12.15 the Head Porter
turned on the lights and announced that a boy had been set on fire outside.” The Porter demanded that the
culprit own up and when no-one did, he declared that “there would be no more
bops for the rest of term.” Wilde added “There was a real atmosphere of shock. Attempts were made to restart the bop but the Porters
shut it down.” One LMH finalist who wished not to be named said “These guys
came to the bop and they just wouldn’t leave.”Thames Valley Police received a
call at five to one on Sunday morning, but the incident was dealt with by the
Head Porter and no police assistance was requested. Hamish Stewart refused to
speculate on the nature of the incident but says he sustained no serious
injuries. He described the injury as “a bit like sunburn, but it was alright in
a day or so” and that now he is “absolutely fine.” JCR president Joe Collenette said
“The Dean has asked me not to comment until
a further investigation has been conducted.” Junior James Panton said that
there is currently “internal discussion” concerning the incident and that the
college “can’t give any comment” until the investigation is complete.ARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005

A group of Oxford University
academ­ics have recently composed a flysheet criticising the reforms proposed
by the Green Paper, and circulated it among academics across the University.Dr.
Nicholas Bamforth, Law fellow at Queen’s College, was part of the group of
academics that put together the flysheet, as well as the first signa­tory.However,
he referred to matters dis­cussed in the flysheet as "an alternative set
of proposals (to those of the Chan­cellor)." The flysheet highlighted
"The Discussion Paper" which is a response by some of the
University’s academics to the reforms proposed by the Chancel­lor, Chris
Patten. The flysheet proposes that a "Board of Scrutiny be created to
exercise on Congregation’s behalf independent oversight over decisions made by
Council and the executive, as well as monitoring the effectiveness of
University governance". The
flysheet goes on to add that a Board of Scrutiny has been in place in Cambridge since 1995. It
also highlights a proposal in the discus­sion Paper, of "an end to
Council’s policy of complete confidentiality for all Council business".The
reader is promptly reminded of the system in place in Cambridge where "the unreserved agendas
and minutes of Council and major committees should be published on the
web".Such
references to the systems of governance in place in Cambridge
indicated a criticism of the Chancel­lor’s recent statements encouraging Cambridge to follow in the footsteps of Oxford. The flysheet’s numerous refer­ences
to systems that it argued should be in place in Oxford,
as they are in Cambridge,
implied a contradiction to the views of the Chancellor.Dr
Bamforth said, "It is only the second time [the congregation has] met in
the last two years. The idea of the flysheet is to raise people’s interest in
the debate, and give an outline of the proposals that will be discussed at the
congregation."He
added that he thinks "the flysheet was received rather well, as indicated
by the discussions at the congregation." "There were a total of
thirty signatories on the flysheet from many colleges including Merton, Wadham
and Worcester."ARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005

A finalist at St John’s has been tem­porarily
rusticated for vandalising the college squash courts. Peter
Rogers, a Human Scien­tist, will be excluded from college for the last 3 weeks
of term, dur­ing which he can attend lectures as normal, but cannot step foot
on college land. Rogers has decided to take the
rest of this academic year off be­cause of the negative impact he thinks the
exclusion will have on his degree.Rogers has no recollection of
the vandalism he is accused of. He said, “That night I got pretty much more
drunk than I’ve ever been in my life.” He only became aware of his involvement
when college authorities revealed that his electronic key, or “fob”, was used
to enter the squash courts at 2.53am on the night that the dam­age was done.In
a meeting with Dr Carolyne Larrington, the Senior dean, Rog­ers was told that
he had strewn a croquet set around the squash courts, ripped electrical equip­ment
off the wall and torn the cover from a fusebox.Rogers has questioned the
disci­plinary actions taken against him. He said he felt that the decision to
exclude him from college was made too quickly and with little consultation.He
said “I’ve had two meetings with the Senior Dean and both have lasted from five
to ten min­utes. I felt that she didn’t spend enough time talking to me about
this, and that she was unwilling to negotiate with me about the pun­ishment.”Harry
Kretchmer, JCR Presi­dent, met the dean recently to discuss the disciplinary
actions to be taken against rogers.
He said, “We encouraged her not to rush into any decisions and to use all the
information very carefully. As no information about the case has been released,
we can only hope that this is what has been done.” The
Senior declined to comment on internal disciplinary matters. Kretchmer said
that the Decanal team was “being very cagey about [the case].”Some
members of St John’s said they think Rogers is being made a
scapegoat for several other inci­dents of vandalism that have oc­curred over
the last month. Faeces and urine were found in the table tennis room, while both
the games room and the toilets in the Bee­hive accommodation block were
vandalised. Those responsible for these incidents have not been caught.A
third year at St Johns
said, “Exclusion is a slightly ridiculous punishment for the damage to the
squash court. The college poo bandit is still out there, as is the games room
vandal: it seems like the college’s failure to catch those guys has made them
come down very harshly on Peter.”Rogers
said, “They’re trying to make an example so that those involved in the other
stuff are less likely to reoffend and anyone else is deterred from doing so in
the future.”Rogers is not appealing his
exclu­sion to the President of St John’s. He said, “I don’t believe there’s any
chance that the President would overrule Larrington in her first major
disciplinary decision as Sen­ior dean.” Instead,
he has decided to take the rest of this year off and to return to college in
Michaelmas 2006. “I’m not in the right frame of mind to work, and there are fi­nancial
factors too, like having to pay an extra three weeks rent liv­ing out,” he
said. He added that he had to make the decision quickly because he will be able
to reclaim his tuition fees if he leaves now.ARCHIVE: 4th week MT 2005