The Dandy Warhols are a band emblematic of student cynic chic: their we-take-drugs lyrics on Thirteen Tales of Urban Bohemia evoked a supremely stylish laziness. The Dandy Warhols, like everyone else, ooze don’t-give-af**k style, their ludicrously named front man Courtney Taylor-Taylor permanently sporting a sneer that could sour milk (and stunning cheek bones, if you will allow me to digress).However, it seems the band have woken up from their lethargy, rather like Placebo’s embrace of electronica after Without You I’m Nothing, winning back the fans lulled into melancholia by their self-indulgent misery. Likewise there is an enjoyable range of energetic 80s beats on Welcome to the Monkey House, as well as a number of intriguing motifs, from the orgasmic panting on synth-pop singalong ‘The Dope’ to the funky ‘I Am Sound’, which is hugely reminiscent of David Bowie’s ‘Ashes to Ashes’. The Warholsbeing well-known for their sense of faux-irony and the kitsch. One can’t help but feel that times Taylor-Taylor (who co-produced the album with Duran Duran’s Nick Rhodes) is over-sexing his performance; his husky drawl is perhaps too provocative for comfort.
The Warhols keep up a steady stream of toe-tappers, although the album occasionally loses its energy: it sometimes diminishes into characteristic apathy. However, there are enough lush layers of sound for the album serve as ambient background music for any student gathering involving tie-dyed blankets and incense sticks (‘The Dandy Warhols Love Almost Everyone’ being a prime example), as well there being adequately danceable tracks, such as the bass-driven ‘You Were the Last High’. They even come close to rocking out on ‘Heavenly’, although that kind unbridled enthusiasm is curtailed soon enough. Unabashed indulgence would be the death of the Warhols’ endearingly chilled-out sound, but Welcome to the Monkey House shows them pulling their socks up just enough to save them from camp-pop obscurity. Out Monday.
ARCHIVE: 2nd Week TT 2003

The New Noakes International, fronted by Pete Oxley, played the Wheatsheaf to promote their latest album Blue In Black and White. New Noakes comprise bass, drums, keyboards and Oxley on electric jazz guitar and electro-acoustic. Playing a style rich and varied, the band seem to be well-acquainted with the Wheatsheaf crowd, which helped in creating a laid-back yet engaging atmosphere. It was a crowd that was a little older than one generally finds in Oxford bars, but they were not all jazz aficionados. Perhaps this is where the real skill of New Noakes becomes apparent. Alternating between the recognisable structures of jazz, and more mellow blues-infused songs, the band give the audience a real sense of the diverse sounds and moods that a four piece instrumental band can conjure up. Luckily they never completely abandon their jazz roots. A whole spectrum of genres are touched upon – from acoustic pop to straight jazz and avant-garde – but there’s no self indulgence or clever ‘intellectual’ aspirations. The solos, while clearly demonstrating proficiency and accomplishment on the various instruments, were not outlandishly virtuoustic (as one often finds with emerging jazz groups trying to consolidate their place on the scene). They nonetheless quickened the heart-beat. Worth checking out.
ARCHIVE: 2nd Week TT 2003

The successor to the Another Late Night series, Late Night Tales continues the tradition of getting artists to choose and mix the music that has shaped their own sound. This time round, the team has collared the legendary N.O.W. a.k.a. George Evelyn. What follows are a series of funky, tasteful selections with hip-hop leanings, all adequately displaying N.O.W.’s eclectic tastes and influences. Included with each song is a narrative based on the original song lyrics. These narratives are written by Whitbread Award winner Patrick Neate and read by Brian Blessed. Of course it’s absolute garbage, but at least N.O.W. is on top form. Out Monday.
ARCHIVE: 2nd Week TT 2003

As a self-confessed art philistine, I look Georges Seurat’s nineteenth century pointillist painting Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte and see only a group prim and proper Victorians relaxing in a park on a gloriously sunny Sunday afternoon. Stephen Sondheim and James Lapine, however, saw in it the potential for the musical Sunday the Park with George, turning the figures of the painting into vivacious and engaging characters. As soon as I heard the word musical’ I seriously considered not turning up to the preview, convinced that I wouldn’t able to fight the urge to giggle whenever the actors broke out song. But to my surprise, within few seconds Sunday In the Park with George managed to convert me into a fully-fledged musical addict. The play focuses upon the relationship between the title character and his mistress, Dot. George, a brilliant if self absorbed painter, might possess the artistic vision to transform a group of hooligans into a band of angels with a single sweep of his brush. Yet by an ironic twist of fate he is blind to the world around him, losing Dot, who is expecting his child, to a pastry maker. With masterful choreography, the entire cast join together in the central episode to recreate their positions in the painting and reveal the angst behind Seurat’s image of Victorian bliss. Doomed to relive this never-ending summer’s day, spending a Sunday in the park with George becomes an existential nightmare for the figures in the picture. This metaphor resonates throughout the entire play, harrowingly symbolic of Dot and George’s feelings of stultification.Sondheim’s material is top notch but the actors also deserve some credit for the play’s success. Thomas Eyre- Maunsell delivers a fine performance as George, but it is Chantelle Staynings who is the real star of the show, her childlike pouting encapsulating Dot’s desperate attempt to capture her lover’s attention. The trip to the theatre would be made worthwhile if only to hear her impressive vocal range during Dot’s mesmerising solo. So if you’re like me and the word ‘musical’ makes you want to run a mile, my advice is to give Sunday in the Park with George chance. It might just change your mind, pushing the boundaries of the musical to new limits. With its darkly comic undertones, the experience resembles The Picture of Dorian Gray more than any performance of Annie or the shockingly awful Moulin Rouge. The keen psychological insight demonstrated in this play proves that musical theatre is capable of engaging the intellect of its audience, while also making them smile. Perhaps the most impressive proof of this production’s lingering impact is that I walked home grinning, as its unforgettable lyrics flowed in and out of my head.
ARCHIVE: 2nd Week TT 2003

With just six actors and a five-person crew, the idea of staging any Shakespearean drama with so few people can only be described as ambitious, and it would require something a little different to separate this performance from the insipid surplus of banal Shakespeare plays circulating in Oxford. The latest of the BT’s rare forays into Shakespeare seemed a menacing prospect, what with the cast’s suggestion that the title be amended to The Tragedy of Richard Duke of York: It’s Not For Girls. And menacing it certainly was. The cast exudes an edgy verve which lends disturbing realism to an already violent plot. Rob Crowe is commanding as the imperious Duke, combining arrogance with dependence upon Raj Gathani’s sepulchral psychopath, Jack Cade, and George Norton’s Machiavellian pantomime-villain, Warwick. Their coup d’état for the throne the pathetically ineffectual Henry VI, played by director Tom Richards, culminates in the decisive Battle of St Albans. The audience is subjected to a sensory onslaught as a percussive beat and low lighting create a dark, sordid battle scene infused with genuine poignancy, as Dave Opperman’s Clifford mourns his dead father. Richards had envisaged “a naturalistic presentation of violence”, and the choice modern dress, rather than period costume, allows the stunning fight choreography to express raw emotion which transcends its historical setting. Yet in terms of sheer malevolence, Becky Hug’s brutal portrayal of Henry’s wife, Margaret, puts the Battle of St Albans shame. The sneering disdain the she-wolf of France’ for her well-meaning husband combines with a vicious desire for vengeance against York, and unsettling performance by thirteen- year-old James Utechin York’s young son makes his murder even more shocking. Despite a consistently high standard of acting and presentation, however, his death heralds sort of ‘pity fatigue’. Whether the fault of the play or the players, so many people die within such a short space of time that the audience are left teetering on the brink of apathy. York’s frenzied death scene is more disturbing than tragic, but Crowe’s stage presence remains powerful and sustains the poignancy of the dénouement. This is the sort of play that can into one of two traps, through being either hopelessly over-played or distorted by modern theatre’s mania for innovation. Instead, it skims the edge of both pitfalls without succumbing to either. A well-staged production with a decidedly professional sheen, its eclectic blend originality and conventional performance are sure to overcome the shortcomings of an emotionally draining plot.
ARCHIVE: 2nd Week TT 2003

With a musical as popular as My Fair Lady, audiences invariably go to see it with fixed preconceptions as to how it should be performed. In this production, directors Hannah Croft and Benedict Morrison have chosen not to stray too far from the direction and setting as they were intended, out of respect for the play in its original form and a desire not to put on another one of those hypermodern, edgy Oxford shows that seem to dominate the student drama scene. Based on the Pygmalion myth, the story of My Fair Lady is one with which most of us are familiar. The attempts of Henry Higgins (Gabriel Vick) to teach cockney flower-seller Eliza Doolittle (Rachel Parris) correct diction and etiquette and then to pass her off as a member of the upper classes are central to the politically–charged story of class aspirations and divisions and personal snobbery. The fact that Henry falls in love with the Eliza he creates adds poignancy that is well exploited by the cast. This production could easily have fallen into the temptation to play up the camp value of the genre, but the low key approach that the directors have chosen allows the writing and songs freedom from cliché that they deserve. The main cast play exceptionally well together and their acting shows a level of enthusiasm and enjoyment that anything but forced. The self assurance in Gabriel Vick’s and Ferdinand Koenig’s performances is well complemented by the perfect comic foil of Benjamin Smyth. Parris is no Audrey Hepburn, but she brings her own fragile beauty and stubborn melancholy to Eliza, which proves utterly captivating. The chorus are well-choreographed enough not to descend into a chaotic fracas of cockney stereotypes, but their appearances can at times seem a little cluttered, the lack of enthusiasm in some of the cast jarring a little in comparison to the professionalism of the main players. A slight modification to the final scene adds the only major concession to modern values to the play with nod to post-feminist ideals, but works pleasingly well. All in all, a refreshingly organic performance with a self-assured style.
ARC HIVE: 2nd Week TT 2003

This year’s local elections brought excellent results for the Liberal Democrats. With 30% of the vote, this was our strongest ever performance a nationwide election, helping take control of a further eleven councils, from both Labour and the Conservatives. Good news for the Lib Dems? Certainly! Less good news, however, is the very low proportion of people who chose to go the polling station to exercise their democratic right to cast a ballot. The consensus among the psephologists seems to be that two thirds of people who could have voted stayed at home. In some parts the country, only one in ten those entitled to vote actually did so. This should be of concern to those who care about participatory democracy – whether you’re Lib Dem, Labour, Tory or anything else. Among those least likely to have gone out and voted were – you guessed it – the young. Politicians across the spectrum have been throwing up their hands in recent years and wondering why. People of student age today are generally better educated, better informed and more well travelled than those of previous generations. While students in the 1960s were famed for their radicalism, students of today are labelled as apathetic. Some of this, of course, is crude stereotyping. There were many people in the 1960s who never protested against the Vietnam War – or indeed against anything at all. Similarly, the run up to the Iraq War showed that many of today’s young people care passionately about such issues. At the same time, it is all too easy to lump everyone together with the catch all phrase “young people” as if everyone aged 16 to 25 had homogenous thoughts and actions. This is clearly absurd. Nevertheless, it is true that those under 25 are voting less often today than ever before. Part of the problem undoubtedly lies with those of us who are elected to public office – whether that’s in the House of Commons, the local council or something else. Politics is still seen largely as the preserve of white, middle class, middle aged men. Our political institutions simply do not reflect the society in which we now live – a society which is more cosmopolitan and more ethnically and culturally diverse than at any time in our history: and for this the Liberal Democrats must take our share of the blame. Among our 53 MPs, only 5 are women and none are from an ethnic minority community. I am working hard to change this, and under no illusions that we must do better. Politicians have also been too lazy in actually reaching out to young people to bring them into the electoral process; having taken the rather easier option of writing them off as apathetic. In this regard hope that the Liberal Democrats can take more credit. Lib Dem Youth and Students are, I know, very active in trying to engage young people with politics – and not just with Lib Dem politics. Every year LDYS organise ‘Westminster Day’ when they invite thousands of Sixth Formers from across the country to meet and question politicians from all parties as well as members of media. The Liberal Democrats would also lower the voting age 16. Our political opponents have argued that 16 is too young to able to cast an informed vote. I disagree. If the State feels that 16 is appropriate age for you to join armed forces, get married and have children, then why shouldn’t you allowed to vote? If, at 16, you pay taxes then why on earth should you not have the right to elect Government that will spend those taxes? Someone once said that the public get the politicians they deserve. I’m not sure whether I’m the best person to argue the truth of this. But it is true to say that politics two-way street. We politicians must do more – much more – to try engage with voters. But the answer to having politicians the people don’t like, or a political system people find remote, should not be refuse to participate. Casting your vote is a much more powerful tool. The more you do, the more politicians will have to listen.
ARCHIVE: 2nd Week TT 2003