Thursday 7th May 2026
Blog Page 276

“A fantastic story of love and liberation”: An interview with the cast and director of ‘An American In Paris’

Anuj Mishra
-
0
“A fantastic story of love and liberation”: An interview with the cast and director of ‘An American In Paris’

Anuj Mishra: For our readers who aren’t so familiar with the show, could you give us an outline of where we find ourselves in An American in Paris?

Ollie: The scene is set in the chaotic and vibrant world of post-War Paris: American soldiers and Parisians are trying to build their lives. We meet Jerry Mulligan, a young GI soldier, who falls in love with a French ballerina, but there are many more complications along the way… The show portrays a world trying to understand what it means to be liberated, and moves towards the future after so much conflict.

How did you respond to the challenge of attempting to reinvent such a well-known and well-loved musical production?

Ollie: An American in Paris is a huge show, and it is such a spectacle, but there is also a fantastic story of love and liberation at the centre of it, which has been fantastic to re-explore. At the same time, the show also presents these massive choreographic challenges, which are something that Oxford student drama doesn’t always necessarily have to deal with – so it has been such an exciting challenge as well as being a great opportunity to showcase the dance talent we have here.

The score is so unlike other musicals in that it is so whimsical and fantastical. Jake Sternberg, our musical director, has done a fantastic job with our band – a 20-piece orchestra which will be on stage alongside the dancers, which should really allow us to showcase this union of dance, music, and story.

Cormac: I’d say that my original conception of the show was very ballet-heavy, and some people may have this image of An American in Paris as being like a static series of beautiful images. But I think at the core of this production lies the humanity of all the characters, which is really brought to life by the acting and song and dance.

Is there anything that you would say drew you to directing this show?

Ollie: I saw a West End production of the show and it screamed spectacle – but revisiting the show has, personally, been a really fun chance to explore the story and understand what it means to perform it now. It’s been a process of figuring out how we can tease out those themes of love and liberation: fighting for love and for self-expression, how do you love other people in the million meanings that ‘love’ has. We’re not just restaging the show, but reviving it. Even with the choreography we’re trying to shake it up a bit, with some tap, some jazz, some ballroom as well!

How has learning so much choreography, alongside the script, been for you both?

Molly: Terrifying! I’ve always described myself as an actor-singer, not a dancer, so it has been very daunting to rise to the challenge. Cam Tweed is fantastic as a choreographer and he brings so much joy to the show, it’s been fabulous to work with him and all the other dancers as well. I saw a West End production of An American in Paris in 2017 and don’t remember much from it – apart from the dance. It’s been great to revisit the show and realise that there is such a rich narrative at the centre of it.

Are there any cast-favourite lines or scenes?

Cormac: We’ve been enjoying our scenes as the central trio of mischievous young men out on the Paris town, the writing is very funny and light, as well as dramatic when it needs to be. There are so many jazz standards and favourites, so its been really fun to sing as a trio, “They Can’t Take That Away From Me” has probably been my favourite song.

What can audiences expect from this production of An American in Paris?

Cormac: I think audiences can expect to be surprised by how much relevance they find with it. It’s not a cold product of ‘40s beauty, but, as tiring as a pandemic comparison is, I find the idea of a story following many confused people trying to shape their own identity relatable. I know that, even from my experience from first year of having come to Oxford just after lockdown, there is a commonality in this idea of people working on how to love, and express themselves between the post-War period and now.

Any final thoughts you would like to add?

Molly: Performing in The Oxford Playhouse is always so exciting because for a week, or two, you get to feel like a professional, which is really exciting. The Playhouse offers so many possibilities with light and sound in such a large space. An American in Paris is very much like an ensemble piece, there are lots of different stories and ideas of love which are weaved into and explored by the story.

Cormac: The Playhouse has also offered us the possibility of representing Paris on such a large scale. Take, for example, the band, which is huge, and potentially bigger than what you would see on the West End.

Ollie: The crew have also been fantastic, we have over a hundred people working on the show and it’s been wonderful to be supported by such a huge crew, a huge band, and a huge cast as well.

00Productions’ An American in Paris will run at The Oxford Playhouse between the 15th and 18th of February. Tickets are now on sale.

HT23 Week 1 Solutions

Ifan Rogers
-
0
HT23 Week 1 Solutions

The answers for the week 1 issue of Hilary term 2023:

Cryptic Crossword
Sudoku
Sudoku
College Confines

Trinity Chemistry Professor Wins Prestigious Research Award

Rahul Jakati
-
0
Trinity Chemistry Professor Wins Prestigious Research Award

Susan Perkin, a professor of physical chemistry and fellow of Trinity College at Oxford University, has won the 2023 Blavatnik Award for Young Scientists in the United Kingdom. The award, whose winners receive 100,000 pounds in unrestricted funds, is designed to promote the efforts of the fresh faces in academia within the “Life Sciences, Physical Sciences & Engineering, and Chemistry.” Perkin’s research, which falls into the lattermost category, concerns the study of ionic fluids—that is electrolytes. In an interview with Cherwell, Perkin admitted that:

“Most people, when they think of electrolytes, they think Lucozade, energy drinks, things like that, and they are not wrong—that is certainly an electrolyte,” Perkin said.

However, Perkin would go on to make the important addendum of the presence of electrolytes in not only food and drinks, but in our bodies and industrial tools—electrolytes are all around us. As Perkin would go on to explain, our world is chockful of electrolytes, with just a few examples being the electronic devices and tools we take for granted in our everyday lives.

“Our cells’ physiological environment is largely made up of electrolytes as well. It is well known among scientists that more than 60% of your body is water, but it would be more accurate to say that it is water and salts, which are electrolytes. The ocean is also a massive reservoir of electrolytes,” Perkin’s said.

“These are all natural electrolytes, and they make up a large fraction of earth. There are also synthetic electrolytes, which we make when we try to design energy storage devices, such as in your phones and devices, but also in cars, where you need a large battery, which involves electrolytes as well. What they mostly have in common is that they contain a large number and concentration of ions.”

The current focus of Perkin’s research is describing the physical chemistry behind the high concentrations of electrolytes present in the many avenues of our life today. Although Perkin acknowledged that the scientific community has a number of good theories for solutions with a very low concentrations of electrolytes, the theories do not explain the behavior of electrolytic solutions as they exist in many real-life situations, such as in our bodies and batteries, which has implications for the understanding of any field that lies among electrolytes.

“And so the focus of our work is to understand the physics and chemistry of electrolytes which are at high concentrations. And it turns out, the properties of those electrolytes, are very different from the dilute ones. It’s really very different,” Perkin said.

“But why does it matter? If I go to my colleagues in biochemistry, they might be very focused on understanding how proteins interact with one another, or how they sit in a membrane, and sit in other molecules in a cell membrane, and all of this is happening within a sea of electrolytes, and so the nature of those interactions depends upon [electrolytes]. And the scientific assumptions that we have been making until now with these biochemical interactions have been mainly with the dilute concentrations of electrolytes. And understanding how these interactions really work in the real world with the actual concentrations of these electrolytes, helps inform these other fields like biology.”

Perkin was not always interested in the finer details of chemistry, of electrolytes and their machinations. As Perkin would explain, she began as a lover of mathematics due to its neat resolutions and elegance, which appealed to Perkin’s sense of rigorous patterns and solutions to problems. However, it was after attending Oxford University, that Perkin attended Oxford University for her bachelor’s and master’s degree, where she discovered a love for uncovering the basal details of the sciences, where Perkin was able to find the root truths of a science that were often mathematically based:

“In my school, it was not very cool to be interested in what you were learning. […] When I arrived at Johns, suddenly it was like arriving in a another world where I was surrounded by people who were really interested and talking about [their subject], and I loved that environment where you could sit down in the dining hall surrounded by people and find out they’re studying many different things, but they all have something interesting to say about what they just learnt. It was just electrifying fun,” Perkin said.

Indeed, Perkin acknowledged her academic debts to not only her education but to the scientists who came before. Many  scientists are not as well known now, but were integral (such as David Tabor) in establishing the research methodology that Perkin employs: that of the Surface Force Balance. The Surface Force Balance, which was one of the main components behind Perkin’s winning of the Blavatnik Award, helps to measure “shear forces between surfaces.” Looking to the future, Perkin hopes to build off the base of knowledge of her lineage and her own research towards researching the environment, and understanding the chemical mechanisms behind the various effects of pollution on marine biology.

“In the coming years, I really expect my research to look more towards natural electrolytes and mineralization processes and other natural processes that happen in electrolytes. I am interested in the way in which CO2 from the atmosphere, which to a large extent is dissolved in the ocean into carbonates, forms large interfacial regions near rock surfaces which organisms then take in and process. Understanding how all these ions interact with one another, at very high concentrations, is very important towards understanding the CO2 cycle,” Perkin said.

Perkin ended with a bit of advice towards those looking to follow in her footsteps, the next generation of young scholars looking to make an impact in academia, but in a world where there the job outlooks for fresh DPhils is increasingly grim, Perkin also acknowledges the harsh reality of looking for a job in an oversaturated, albeit growing market.

“My advice is just to do what you really enjoy,” Perkin said. “I just followed my nose and saw what I was interested in, and I did it to the best of my ability that I could, and opportunities just sort of arose. But I did not expect that these opportunities would arise. I was always ready to go do something else. There are a lot of great things to do in life, it’s a bit like children wanting to be a premier league footballer, but when it often does not work out, you can do something else, and that can also be great.”

Oxford named second-most ‘radical progressive’ university in the UK

Bintia Dennog
-
0
Oxford named second-most ‘radical progressive’ university in the UK

A right-leaning think tank has described Oxford as the second-most “radical progressive” university in the UK, following Cambridge.

However, a Cherwell poll of around 200 students suggests that Oxford students disagree with this – 42% of respondents voted that the students in Oxford are not progressive enough and 51% voted that the teaching staff are not progressive enough. 

The college voted most ‘woke’ by a large majority was Wadham, receiving 33 votes out of 50.

Civitas, a think tank described as right-wing by the Guardian, published their Radical Progressive University Guide as part of a series on new academic realism. According to their findings, the “best and most prestigious” universities tend to be the most progressive, exemplified by Cambridge and Oxford who, respectively, topped the rankings. 

Their results are based on universities’ endorsement of “trigger warnings, white privilege, and anti-racism” along with other factors, such as free speech controversies. Universities which have definitions of ‘white privilege’ on their website, or conduct anti-racism training are considered to be more radically progressive. 

Civitas allege that this newfound ‘hyper-morality’ stems from the “mutation and splicing of past radicalism that include Marxism, postmodernism, feminism, Freudianism, and Maoism”. 

However, Oxford students are seemingly not in agreement with these findings. According to a Cherwell study, only 18% of respondents believed that Oxford students are too progressive. 40% voted that the students were “just the right amount” of progressive, and 42% voted that they are not progressive enough. 

The results for teaching staff are similar, yet more pronounced – only 12% thought that teaching staff was too progressive. 37% considered them to be the right amount of progressive and 51% of respondents voted that Oxford teaching staff are not progressive enough. 

When asked for thoughts, one student said that Oxford is “probably too woke in the sense of language policing / perspective exclusion but not woke enough in terms of keeping out and holding accountable people who do actual harm”.

Another said: “New [C]ollege isn’t accessible enough to have problems relating to class or race”. 

On Russian History

James Cullis
-
0
On Russian History

In his new book The Story of Russia, Orlando Figes narrates an account of Russian history which at its zenith demonstrates the way in which historiographical debate about its own past is central to Russia’s political and cultural identity. Set against the backdrop of the ongoing Ukrainian War, Figes’ book is an easy and thought-provoking read offering stimulation without demanding high academic retention. Well-known for his Liberal historiographical standpoint, Figes identifies tension to be at the heart of Russia’s complex history. Indeed, the idea of a ‘story’ is central to his argument for what Russian history bequeaths: a tale of tension between reactionaries and modernisers; conservatives and liberals. And yet, for Figes, all this stuffy intellectual debate overlooks the idea that Russia has a profound history of missed opportunities.

Beginning with the establishment of Kiev in the ninth century, Figes demonstrates that the early   history of Russia was beset with invasion and resettlement – at first by the Vikings, and then the Mongols. Indeed, part of Figes’ point is to show that the primordial vision of the Kievian Rus is a myth, and one that has potent appeal to those who seek to establish a narrative of  Great Russia and a Pan-Slavic identity. Pan-Slavism does play a significant role in Russian cultural history, but in reading this one feels that Figes wants to shift focus away from a  view  of Russian past as  bound up with Orthodox Christianity and cultural isolationism, and instead offer a ‘normal’ account of a ‘normal’ state experiencing an emergence into modernity. Yet, in reading this, there is a moment when it becomes apparent that this is an impossible task simply because Russia is exceptional on most accounts. 

Russia’s story is further complicated by the unique role played by the Orthodox Church. Downplayed by Figes as a factor in Russia’s historical development, it may be the one weakness of his general argument. For if religion was not a crucial factor in Russia’s story, then the subsequent tension, the rise of Tsarism and its autocratic political structures, cannot be readerly explained. Indeed, one of the main claims of the book – namely the modernising force of Peter the Great, and the backlash against his regime – can surely only be understood with reference to the role played by religion in generating the necessity of an autocratic style of governance.

In the latter half of the book, attention is turned to the causes and consequences of 1917. This may be a curious remark to make, but there is a sense that for Figes, outcome of the Revolution, the emergence of the Soviet Union, and the current structure of Russian politics all stem from the failure of the political reforms of the nineteenth century. Indeed, there is a sense when reading it that the period from 1850 until 1925 should have consisted of one chapter in lieu of the lack of substantial political reforms, apart from the weak Duma experiment of the early twentieth Century.  That the current regime in Moscow is a product of missed opportunities for political reform in the nineteenth century is not the point. Moreover, it was the inertia within the nineteenth century slogan:  ‘Autocracy Orthodoxy and Nationalism’ which enshrined a sense of conservatism within the political and cultural identity of  Russia, a legacy which is still present today.

At the centre of this book is a claim about history, or rather about what history can become. For Figes, again, the nineteenth century proves a significant moment as the development of Pan-Slavism was  based on a particular vision of Russia and its cultural identity.  In a long and nuanced conclusion, he suggests that this myth-making process is central to Putin’s current political project. It is not that Putin is the new Stalin, or that we are entering a new era of autocratic leadership, but that the current leadership is living day-to-day on a historic myth, and they know it is a myth.

The concern with history as a way of understanding the past purveys much of this book. The Story of Russia is not so much a grand narrative of Russian history as it is an examination of the conjectural nature of that history itself. Taking it right up to the aftermath of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Figes not only shows the precise diplomatic context in which the invasion took place, but also shows how such an act stemmed from the wholesale acceptance of the Kievian Rus historiographic reading of Russian history, coupled with an embrace of a fictional account of what actually occurred.  In this sense, Putin is seen as updating the Pan-Slavic view of what Russian history is, albeit with Peter the Great as a ‘Great Russian’ hero. Yet for Figes, along with Putin’s misreading of Ukraine, this is a fabrication based on a nineteenth Century misreading of Russian history. Putin’s own understanding of Russian history is in effect a modern twenty-first century European populist one which takes its cue not from the Slavic culture of Great Russia, but from the national-populist chauvinism of the European conservative right. Setting Russian history straight is a vital task, and this is what Orlando Figes precisely does.

Union votes against “sacramental sodomy” speaker in controversial gay marriage debate

Maggie Wilcox
-
0
Union votes against “sacramental sodomy” speaker in controversial gay marriage debate

The Oxford Union debated the question of gay marriage in the Church this Thursday, with Anglican bishops, Christian theologians, and students taking part. In an otherwise balanced debate, two speakers’ views stood out as “very bigoted”, according to some members. The debate also featured an impromptu floor speech in favour of gay marriage from the visiting former Health Secretary Matt Hancock.

Significant online controversy surrounded the announcement of this debate motion, which Union President Charlie Mackintosh addressed, reminding attendees that a purpose of debate was to offer freedom of speech to all religious. With this in mind, Mackintosh told the chamber he was “baffled” that anyone could contest the running of the motion.

Speakers from the opposition nonetheless caused controversy, with Dr Ian Paul comparing pro-LGBTQ+ rulings from secular authorities to the control of religion in “Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union”. However, a member from New College told Cherwell that he was “disgusted” with this argument.

Dr Paul went on to argue against a “new colonialism”, speaking against the growing number of liberal representatives in Western churches who have urged religious communities in former colonies to widen inclusivity for all sexualities in marriage. Another member attending the debate told Cherwell that some of the views expressed “unbelievably bigoted” and the opposition was “intolerant” of the LGBTQ+ community.

On the other side of the debate, speaking in proposition of the motion, the Bishop of Buckingham urged all to support same-sex marriage in the Church, claiming that “God is love”. 

The second Anglican bishop to speak was in agreement with this, telling the chamber, “Sisters and brothers tonight choose mercy, choose love, choose life”.

Matt Hancock MP, who was present at the Union, said he felt moved to speak on the motion during floor speeches. He told the chamber: “If we don’t provide leadership in what is right, what is debating for?” Despite an at-times awkward address on PPE contracts and lockdown guidelines earlier in the day, Hancock spoke strongly in favour of universal gay marriage.

The debate shifted tone again with the next opposition speech. Calvin Robinson, Deacon of the Free Church of England, stressed that it is “the sin that is the problem, not the sinner”. Robinson’s real qualm is with those in the Church who promote gay marriage, as they do not have “the authority to bless sin”. In response to those advancing same-sex marriage in the Church, Robisnon stated that he heard “the Devil at work”. If passed, this change would amount to “sacremental sodomy”.

At the end of the debate the members voted overwhelmingly to accept this motion by a margin of 186-41.

Matt Hancock warns of “next pandemic” at Union address

Freya Jones
-
0
Matt Hancock warns of “next pandemic” at Union address

The former Health Secretary Matt Hancock warned of the “next pandemic” in an address at the Oxford Union this afternoon. Voicing his concerns about the spread of new viruses such as bird flu, he took questions from the student body on decisions made in during COVID-19 and his views on healthcare going forward.

In a packed chamber, Hancock claimed that investment in new technology is key to reversing the current crisis in the NHS. When asked by members how he expects this to be funded amid national cost-of-living concerns and workers’ strikes for higher wages, he argued that initial expenditure on scientific advancement would ultimately enable the most cost-effective advances.

Hancock appeared well-informed of current problems in the NHS, admitting “people go in for test after test, but all the information isn’t connected by technology.” He said this is one of his main reasons for backing an overhaul of NHS computer systems as a way of counteracting “hours of wasted time.”

“There’s going to be another pandemic,” Hancock told Cherwell News after the event, expressing his sincere concern that the country isn’t prepared for new diseases. However, when asked if he thinks the current government is equipped to handle any such challenges, he said budgetary cuts would be a problem.

In terms of post-pandemic difficulties facing the social care sector, which has a knock on effect with “bed-blocking” in hospitals, Hancock said he was against care being nationalised. However, he stated, “the system needs a rethink” and called the NHS itself “enormously valuable national asset”. He also disclosed that he does not use private healthcare in quick fire questions with Union President Charlie Mackintosh.

In the main address, Hancock’s management of PPE contracts during the pandemic was also challenged. While he said “the UK never actually ran out of PPE”, it was established that the government’s approach of “throwing everything at deals” had led to uneven distribution of vital medial equipment across the country. Hancock denied that the Tory donor status of many parties to PPE contracts had ever been a consideration for him, but described the Track and Trace app, his department’s other key project, as a “total fiasco”.

On social distancing guidelines, Hancock told the Union that he followed them “assiduously” until the beginning of his affair with Gina Coladangelo. When members asked how he could justify breaking COVID rules, Hancock replied “it is what it is”, before adding “I let myself down” and that he could only be upfront about it. A student then mentioned cases where members of the public were unable to comfort grieving relatives at funerals during lockdown and was met with applause. Hancock replied that the rules had been interpreted “more firmly on the ground than we intended”, but encouraged the younger generation not to become disillusioned about politics.

Speaking about his recent appearance I’m a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here, Hancock believes the chance to be on reality TV enabled him to show more of his personality. He called it a “totally bonkers experience” and an “irony” that he felt freer to express his feelings to the British public from Australian than in the UK. This leads into what Cherwell News understands will be next for Hancock.

After stepping down as an MP, the former minister hopes to go into “politics outside parliament” by using his new social media following and documentaries to provide information on significant issues, starting with dyslexia among the prison population.

Recalling his time at Oxford University, Hancock told the Union, “I relied on everything I learnt here while making decisions during the pandemic”. He said he was also a strong advocate for “Oxford” appearing in the name of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine.

“It’s a Tory finishing school”: university staff speak out against Oxford on strike day

Freya Jones
-
0
“It’s a Tory finishing school”: university staff speak out against Oxford on strike day

Oxford University teaching staff took to the streets today, to protest against “shameful” working conditions in the first of many UCU strikes planned for the coming weeks. In a march through the town centre, many of Oxford’s lecturers, administrators, and security staff were joined by teachers from Oxford Brookes University, local schools, and rail workers, as part of the biggest strike action seen in the UK for over a decade.

One lecturer addressing the protest outside the Bodleian Libraries said, “we don’t get paid for the full time it takes to do the job”, claiming that lecture preparation and the time needed to mark students’ work is often “effectively unpaid”. For every one-hour lecture given, he stated that only an extra half-hour’s pay is received for preparation in the majority of cases, which “is simply not enough time to prepare teaching materials of the calibre expected at Oxford University”. 

Attesting to this, a lecturer on strike from the Department of Anthropolgy told Cherwell that she often works “late into the evening and at weekends” for no extra pay, in order to meaningfully mark student assignments. She added that this compromises her ability to carry out the personal research which Oxford academics are also expected to undertake.

Support for strike action is widespread in the Department of Anthropology, as a result of high UCU membership and “personal motivation”. Another Anthropology lecturer told Cherwell they were striking in solidarity with those on the lowest salaries, such as department administrators and teacher’s on temporary contracts. “It’s incredibly difficult for young people coming into education to reach a permanent teaching position” she explained, giving the example of two Mst. Creative Writing lecturers who are currently suing the university over “gig economy contracts”. A third lecturer at the protest added that “the commodification of education is getting worse every year”. 

Gerard Ward, an associate lecturer in Law at Oxford Brookes University, believes that this ongoing decline in working conditions has occurred in parallel with the “rinsing of the student loan system” by universities. Despite increases in undergraduate tuition fees and accommodation costs, Ward told Cherwell that the money often hasn’t been directed in the right ways, with funding being poured into “prestigious research projects” as opposed to workers’ salaries. Like those at Oxford University, Ward said many members of teaching staff at Brookes have precarious short-term contracts, adding that, alongside the decline in working conditions,  “general insecurity of staff employment is ultimately not good for students.” Having worked at three educational institutions across England in the last decade, Ward says that conditions “worsened noticeably” under a succession of Conserative governments.

John Wadesdon, a member of security staff at the Bodleian Libraries, said it was important that strikes are taking place here in Oxford. “It’s a Tory finishing school,” he told Cherwell, saying that the government officials who he believes are responsible for the deterioration of university administration “all came here and were taught corruption”.

Primary school teachers from around Oxford also took part in the mega-strike, in coordination with mass action by the National Education Union, accompanied by some parents. Local resident Mr Gomez, whose six-year-old daughter was unable to attend school because of the strike, told Cherwell: “our children are the future of society, and their teachers need decent pay”, adding that he completely supported the union’s action.

Oxford remains one of the most expensive cities in Europe to live in, with another speaker at the protest calling it “shameful” that teaching staff on “most likely illegal” contracts are struggling to find affordable housing despite being employed by such a prestigious university.

Along with strikes by rail workers, nurses, and teachers, UCU strikes are set to continue throughout February and March.

Broken Jumbotrons and Blurred Lines: Victor Wembanyama’s Roanne Rematch

Eoin Hanlon
-
0
<strong data-src=Broken Jumbotrons and Blurred Lines: Victor Wembanyama’s Roanne Rematch" title="Broken Jumbotrons and Blurred Lines: Victor Wembanyama’s Roanne Rematch" />

PARIS, France – Before Christmas, Metropolitans 92 had suffered a 102-77 away loss versus Chorale Roanne Basket. And, before last year was out, they had lost twice more at the hands of AC Monaco and Strasbourg. On the 13th of December, they signed former NBA player Justin James and, in the New Year, the team had regained composure, winning three straight, including two on the road. Last Friday, 27th of January, Roanne arrived at the Palais Marcel Cerdan for a rematch.

This Week in Wemby Watch: more skills continue to appear in Victor Wembyanyama’s repertoire as the season progresses. In the second quarter, Victor finds himself double marked, he goes up for a three and finds Bandja Sy with a pass instead. In the third quarter, he does the same again: he drives into the paint, gets held up and finds Sy with a shot fake pass. Victor’s incredible 8-foot wingspan makes him almost always available for high and wide passes and early in the third quarter, he gets a pass with his right arm out wide as he is in the left of the paint. Victor turns and shoots, but airballs to the right. A timeout is called. The game restarts and the crowd is chanting: “MET-RO”. Wemby is marked but he holds his hand high for a pass. The pass comes to him far too low and it is swatted away by a jumping Stefan Moody on defense. Stefan is 5’10”. 

Wemby gets the ball in a switch from Bandja Sy outside the arc. He drives and goes for a one-armed, one-legged jumpshot but overshoots it and comes crashing to the court; 52-69 to Roanne. Sy later dribbles, slips and also hits the floor. He decides to hook the ball blindly into the crowd from the ground. No one is sure why. Still 52-69.

The tricolour prodigy sinks a three in the third quarter and then proceeds to put on a clinic. Soon comes another incredible three: he’s on the left corner outside the arc, gets a primed pass from Jones and scores a beautiful floater. The mascot Buzzy the Bee strides across the stands. He follows it up by blocking former NCAA star Silvio De Sousa immediately after. Victor claims a rebound and takes it to the other end, switches with Jones who slips a pass back to him as he is inside the arc. He drives, shoots, it’s bouncing out but Wemby tips it back in. Score: Metro – 60; Roanne – 72 (Wemby – 29). 

Now, the screen in the centre of the court at the Palais Marcel Cerdan, even at the best of times, isn’t great. It’s a small stadium, it’s not exactly a jumbotron. I’ve watched though as, over the course of this season, animations have been added with each of the Metropolitans players; for example, a video of Victor with the caption “CONTRE” to celebrate a block. Right now, the large screen has gone out. There are small scoreboards around the Palais that show 44.7 seconds to go in the quarter. 35 seconds to go and Victor blocks. He gets the ball on the other end and decides to take a three. Pulling it outside the arc. He misses but then the young gun Coulibaly ascends for a monster put back. The Palais erupts. Wemby goes “ohhh”. There is something to be said for the lack of screen, as we are all forced to concentrate. 

Wemby is posterised by Roanne’s no. 7 Ross who hammers it down. The score is 68-76 Roanne —at this point an unassailable lead, but not quite a blowout. The current of Wemby’s thought is visible in his play on the other end: he is fired up. He takes the ball behind his back with his right arm but misses when he goes up. Once again, 7:18 to go and he gets a shot off but it rattles in the rim and out.

A bounce pass from Wemby to James who draws the foul and gets the layup, the ball rolling twice around the rim. 72-88 to Roanne. Another One Bites the Dust plays after James has missed the free, a bizarre song choice that makes it seem like the Metropolitans DJ is heckling his own team. There has been a series of questionable song choices tonight: Party Up by DMX played earlier in a timeout, including the fairly explicit verse, a poor decision that is exacerbated by the fact that the North Stand is majority primary school children; later, we received a cover rendition of “Islands in the Stream”; then, after Wemby has fouled De Sousa in the paint, THEY PLAY BLURRED LINES.

Wemby absolutely hammers it down in a face-saving showcase of skill. He’s got 31 points. Somebody’s Watching Me plays. Metro’s win streak is ended and Roanne have started one of their own. Wembanyama completes the game with 31 PTS 14 REB 2 AST 5 BLK and 1 STL.  A double-double with healthy figures in three other categories, it’s what we expect by now and that’s what’s remarkable. I catch him as he walks directly to the changing room, his head’s down, but at 7-foot-3-inches, it’s still held high. 

Image: Eoin Hanlon

The Mankad, sporting etiquette and the so-called “Spirit of Cricket”

Oliver Thomas
-
0
The Mankad, sporting etiquette and the so-called “Spirit of Cricket”

Culture wars are fought over social issues, where polarized groups compete for the acceptance of their respective belief systems. Debates over the idiosyncrasies of cricket don’t often fit this definition. Yet, the U19s Women’s Cricket World Cup fixture between Pakistan and Rwanda has seemingly done it.

On the 15th January, the Pakistan bowler Zaib-un-Nisa dismissed the Rwandan batter Shakila Niyomuhoza by a run out at the non-striker’s end, commonly known as a ‘Mankad’. According to the game’s lawmakers, the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), the run out was legal: “If the non-striker is out of his/her ground at any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the non-striker is liable to be run out.”

The rule is in place to ensure that non-striking batters don’t receive an unfair advantage by leaving their crease before the ball has been bowled. However, what followed has been a polarized social media examination into the sporting merits of Zaib-un-Nisa’s decision to enact this form of dismissal.

So, if the dismissal is legal, why all the controversy?

Historically, the sport has followed a form of ‘etiquette’, coined by the London-based MCC, as the ‘Spirit of Cricket’. This is the expectation that players will follow certain traditions and forms of behaviour when playing cricket. The ‘etiquette’ for the ‘Mankad’ is for the bowler to hold the ball over the stumps, warning the non-striking batter of their intention to enact the dismissal the next time around. Still, even with this warning, many consider it to be an ‘ugly’ dismissal.

Stuart Broad, fast bowler for the England men’s test team, has stated how he believes the ‘Mankad’ to be ‘unfair’ and that it ‘requires zero skill.’ While England’s One-Day International captain, Jos Butler, says that he would ‘call the batsman back’ if a teammate used the ‘Mankad’, as ‘no one wants to see it’ in the game.

Yet, with all the eccentric rules that cricket has (watch the 2019 Men’s Cricket World Cup final to learn a few), who decides which are ‘sporting’? Who judges whether something is skillful or not? And who polices this ‘Spirit of Cricket’?

While the level of skill required is up for debate, it doesn’t explain the centrality of ‘sportsmanship’ in this conversation. Harsha Bhogle, Indian cricket commentator and journalist, believes that there are colonial undertones in the cricketing world’s moral reflections on the ‘Mankad’: “The English thought it was wrong to do so (the Mankad) and because they ruled over a large part of the cricket world, they told everyone it was wrong. The colonial domination was so powerful that few questioned it.”

This suggests a continuation of an imperial mindset, where the ex-colonisers still have the moral authority to decide the values and beliefs in the global cricketing community. An argument particularly pertinent when considering how cricket was used as part of the British empire’s ‘civilising mission’.

Anthony Bateman, an honorary visiting research fellow at the De Montfort University, wrote in his book Cricket, Literature and Culture: “Not only was cricket coming to represent what were believed to be the ‘higher’, ‘civilised’ values of the coloniser over the colonised, but its discourses endowed it with the ability to transform the colonised into English gentlemen.”

Intriguingly, the first ‘Mankad’ was enacted by Indian cricketer Mulvantrai Himmatlal Mankad in a test match against Australia, only a few months after the Partition of India in 1947. It’s difficult to argue with certainty that Mankad’s use of this dismissal was consciously part of a wider rejection of British ‘civil’ values from Indian life. Or, to an even greater degree of uncertainty, that the use of the ‘Mankad’ today is an act of agency against lingering colonial power structures in cricket.

However, the polarity in conversations over something as mundane as a cricketing dismissal should force some reflections on the origins of these ‘sporting morals’ and whether they are still applicable today.

Image Credit: CC2:0//Getty Images/David Munden.

1...275276277...2,583Page 276 of 2,583

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by Jamie Ashley