A new policy briefing by a team of researchers at King’s College London and Oxford University has revealed the profound impact of the Covid-19 pandemic of the mental health of children and young people, as well as setting out various steps which can be taken to address this growing crisis.
The briefing suggests that challenges around social isolation, academic pressures, adjusting to online learning and coping with reopening of schools are but a few of the many factors which have led to the number of children’s NHS mental health referrals doubling since the beginning of the pandemic, as well as highlighting the ‘severe’ disruption to mental health services which has left many without access to proper support.
In order to address these problems, the research team has outlined 14 steps which they say should be implemented by schools, mental health services and within the wider policy and practice environment. These include: equipping school staff to normalise conversations about mental health to identify who needs help, maintaining or increasing financial support of families facing hardship caused or exacerbated by the pandemic, strengthening the provision of early interventions and providing Covid-19-related mental health resources for those who have experience trauma and loss.
The briefing also suggests that reforming the benefit and universal credit systems, as well as exploring the feasibility of implementing a guaranteed income scheme, would also be beneficial; analysis of data from the Millennium Cohort Study in 2012 found that children in the lowest income quintile are 4.5 times more likely to experience severe mental health problems than those in the highest, with the pandemic only exacerbating this growing disparity.
Of the proposals, Professor Cathy Creswell, Director, UKRI Emerging Minds Network and Professor of Developmental Clinical Psychology, University of Oxford said: “In seeking to limit the impacts of the pandemic on young people and provide much needed supports, we need a multi-pronged approach that incorporates actions in each of these settings. This is so that we can foster the environments in which young people can thrive – in communities, in schools, and at home – and provide the mental health care that an increasing number of young people need.”
The proposals, which are set out in a new policy briefing jointly produced by the ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health, Emerging Minds, and The Policy Institute, were developed out of a policy lab held in early 2021 which included participants from policy, academia, wider society and schools, as well as young people with lived experience of mental health issues.
Dr Helen Fisher, Reader in Developmental Psychopathology at ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health, King’s College London said: “It is imperative that we understand, quickly, the impacts of the pandemic and related social restrictions and school closures on the mental health of young people, particularly young people in marginalised and vulnerable groups. This is so we can develop and implement, again quickly, measures to mitigate these impacts, to ensure – as we emerge from the pandemic – that all young people are enabled to flourish.”
Oxford University will ask students to fill out the COVID-19 Vaccination Survey during the third and fourth weeks of Michaelmas term. Students will receive an email with a link to the survey on Tuesday October 26th.
According to an email sent to students on October 25th, the survey will be voluntary, and the University will protect the anonymity of students who take part. Colleges and departments will not be able to find out whether an individual student will have been vaccinated from this survey.
Cherwell has already reported that St Edmund Hall and Lincoln College had asked their students to tell them their vaccination status in order to see what proportion of their population were vaccinated against COVID-19. Students who have already completed surveys within their college are asked to participate in the University-wide survey as well, because surveys used within colleges were not designed to be shared with the Office for Students.
The Office for Students, the independent regulator of higher education institutions in England, has asked all universities to run these surveys. The University said that “high levels of vaccine uptake recorded through the survey is likely to provide assurance to the wider community”.
The regulator did not ask for university staff to be surveyed.
Experimental statistics from the Office for National Statistics show that 90% of students in England had received a COVID-19 vaccine, and that 78% had received two doses. However, these statistics are based on a small sample size with a low response rate, so the ONS recommends interpreting this statistic cautiously.
Responses to the survey will be used by the University to understand what percentage of students are fully or partially vaccinated across the University, its departments and colleges. Once this has been calculated, students’ responses will be deleted and will not be shared with anyone, nor connected to their student record.
Oxford University says that they consulted staff and students about the survey via the University’s COVID-19 planning groups. Oxford University Student Union is supportive of the survey.
The deadline for completing the survey is 5pm on Friday November 5th. Further information can be found here.
“If you could talk, old building, what would you tell us, what would you say of the things you have seen?’ reads the opening quote for the Covered Market’s new website addition in which visitors can access a short history of the market.
The Oxford City council commissioned the Oxford-based multimedia artist Charlie Henry to create an interactive installation which voices stories from both visitors of the market and those who work there. The installation was in place on the 16 and 17 October.
Last weekend was the un-covered market launch weekend; a pop-up recording booth was set up in which members of the public could offer their own memories and personal stories of experiences in the market. These audio recordings are being collated into a new Covered Market oral history archive which will be accessible for future generations. A drop-in poetry workshop was also put on for the public. Poetry formed an important part of the audio with poetry from local artists, including Barney Norris, Naomi Poole and Carl Tomlinson.
The audio tour combines a mixture of sound recordings, poetry snippets, and a series of overheard conversations. The audio tour describes itself in the intro as “a process of mindfulness” which gives people permission to notice ‘unseen details’ of the market, often pausing for moments of listening and encouragements to look up to notice the ceiling.
The voiceovers for the tour are provided by Charlie Henry, the creator of the audio installation, and Dexter Woodley, who works at Bonners, a family run business which supplies locally sourced fruit and vegetables.
The tour highlights historical moments experienced in the Covered Market; it notes that the market remained open during World War Two and was a ‘vital resource for the community’, providing food, clothing and other essentials. The audio likens the vitality of the market during the war to the recent times of the Covid Pandemic in which the market was able to provide food to locals when supermarket shelves were bare.
Most of the permanent stalls are independent, family run businesses which trace back for generations. The market dates back to the 1770s and has provided Oxford locals with fresh produce, clothing and crafts since. It was originally established after the Oxford Improvement Act of 1771 to better the ‘untidy, messy and unsavoury stalls’ located on the main streets in central Oxford. It is considered by town and gown alike as part of the heart of the city centre and has also been visited by Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall in May 2017 receiving “the Royal seal of approval.”
Leader of the Oxford City Council, councillor Susan Brown, said: “Charlie Henry’s audio art installation brings our beloved covered market alive. This is a fantastic opportunity to hear more about the market and for members of the public and market traders to contribute their own accounts of using the market.”
Funding for the audio tour was supported by the Oxford City Council and The Museum of Oxford.
When I think of stage classics, productions like Les Miserables, The Lion King, and Wicked come to mind. These are all shows which hold great weight in the theatre world, and for me they bring a sense of nostalgia; I remember being ten years old and being completely bowled over by seeing The Lion King after growing up on the Disney adaptation.
Yet, recently, there’s been a trend of seeing classical literature brought to life on stage. At the Oxford Playhouse this term, Emma Hawkins has directed a version of the Greek myth Persephone with musical director Carrie Penn, which places the themes of the myth in contemporary society. The Keble O’Reilly theatre will also be staging a production titled Murder in Argos in conjunction with Votive Theatre which seeks to reflect on the mythical past through the context of the author’s experience in the 1960s. In 2020, the Oxford Playhouse also staged an adaptation of two Classical Greek tragedies by Euripides and Sophocles, titled Shadows of Troy. Outside of Oxford, Hadestown has seen great success in the United States, with previews beginning in 2019, and the show subsequently receiving numerous awards and nominations.
This trend certainly finds a parallel in the re-emergence of the classics in our cultural mindset; authors like Madeline Miller (think Circe, and The Song of Achilles), Stephen Fry (Mythos), Pat Barker (The Silence of the Girls), and Natalie Haynes (A Thousand Ships) all take the enduring myths of the classical period and frame them for a modern audience. Yet, for me at least, the stage does a better job of conjuring up these legends of eras gone – but why is that?
In part, at least for me, this stems from the prominence of theatre in the life of classical Athens. The ‘Dionysia’, which was a large festival in celebration of Dionysus, was largely based around the performance of tragedies, and later comedies, with theatre being intensely linked to the religious and cultural life of many Athenians. The idea of theatre as something devotional continued into the Middle Ages, with play cycles based around the life of Christ being written and performed on feast days, such as that of Corpus Christi, all around the United Kingdom, such as in York and Chester. The revival of these festivals, with many ancient theatres in Greece still holding performances of plays old and new, connects us with theatre as a force of contemplation and teaching.
In Shadows of Troy, which was written by Jamie Murphy and commissioned by Stupid and Brave productions, the use of the chorus, as it was used in classical Greek plays, attested to the sheer power of theatre, with drumming and chanting by the chorus adding a ritualistic tone to the performance. For me, seeing these Greek plays staged in a way similar to the way in which they first might have been staged added so much more to the story than if I was simply reading the script. That might sound obvious – after all, scripts are always going to be less engaging than the plays which come from them – but the fact that so much of classical theatre is taught in classrooms all over the world, rather than watched, minimises the real power of so much of it, especially the devotional aspect, which would have been so important to those who first wrote these plays.
The classical revival is certainly an exciting thing and making classical literature more accessible can only be a positive.
In basketball, the game clock stops when the ball goes out of play. But the game clock’s been stopped for a while now, and the players are sitting down, and the coach is pointing at a little whiteboard. We’re 3 minutes and 28 seconds in to the first quarter of the first game of the season, and I’m confused. It’s been three minutes, and the Blues have called a timeout. And yes, they are 7-0 down, and yes, they’ve messed up a couple of times, but what on earth is there to talk about?
This is not the only time I am a bit lost over the course of the next hour and a half. In fact, I watch the game in a fairly permanent state of dissociation. The game ebbs and flows, at least according to the scoreboard, but I can’t really work out how or why.
Basketball is a heavily choreographed sport, but to the novice viewer, the alternating 20-second flurries of activity are just that—flurries. The ball is bounced and passed and the players are moving and the eyes are widening and eventually someone shoots from far, or shoots from near, or gets fouled, and it’s all over in the 24 seconds it takes for the shot clock to count down. And then there’s that moment where the ball flies towards the hoop and hits the rim, and hovers in the air, and, for that brief second, I fully understand what’s going on—will it go in? And then it does, or it doesn’t, and the ball’s already halfway up the court and the next flurry is swirling and I’m lost again.
Yet despite my disconnection, I’m right that this timeout is noteworthy. The players look dejected and the coach looks shaken, and it’s not in a dramatic way, but also… it’s been three minutes. I’m told later that the message of all the intense conversation and gesticulation at this point was basically just ‘calm down’. Understandably, when a team needs to win pretty much every match this season, they must feel a sense of impenetrability. Without that, the improbable becomes impossible. And this sense of impenetrability has been penetrated within three minutes. The timeout was to note that and to pledge to repair it.
As I say, what happened next is fairly lost on me. But after some reflection and discussion, I have cobbled together some kind of narrative. The Blues started slow. They haven’t played a team of the same low age profile for a while. Their transitions weren’t fast enough, and they kept allowing the De Montfort defence to get set. This meant they began by relying on what I call ‘explosive runs into the box’, which I soon learn to be known as ‘drives into the paint’. Basically, when everyone’s got back and is in position, the most effective way of breaking through the stasis is for one player to forcefully weave their way through to the hoop. These sequences—in the way they combine guile and power—are some of, for the two or three seconds they last, the most awesome and friendly-to-slow-motion-replay moments in this sport. And I will be sure to return to that in future weeks.
For now, though, all you need to know is that drives on a fast transition are quite straightforward, but these drives after the defence is set, though useful in that position, are not an efficient tactic to depend on. Fortunately, as the game went on, the Blues sped up, and the De Montfort players tired. The number of forced drives decreased and the number of swiftly concluded counters increased. The Blues got into their flow and, as the game wound down, Bill, the club president, shouted across the court to me (in a callback to last week’s article) ‘we’re hitting our threes now!’ To be honest, I had slightly zoned out, but as I refocused, I could see he was right. The 10-point lead that the Blues had opened up and maintained for the last 15 minutes was widening, and three-point shots were flying in from all angles.
The game ended 75-52, and the story I’ve outlined is nice and neat and reassuring. In reality, the game was not a steady arc, and there were periods of stasis and there were periods of change. Parts of this were not as clean as simply ‘they warmed up and got into their flow’. For example, in basketball, there is a limit on how many fouls a player can commit before they get kicked out of the game. When you get close to this limit, you’re in ‘foul trouble’, and the coach might sub you off for a bit to prevent suspension. Oxford started getting into foul trouble, good players came off, and their lead plateaued for a bit. Then De Montfort got into a bit of foul trouble, and the lead started growing again.
Moreover, the team depended on big performances. They depended on captain Orin Varley, clearly the best player, hitting 29 points. And they depended on Varley along with Josh Soifer (‘power forward’ by name, ‘power forward’ by nature) getting 10 rebounds each, which, I’m told, is a lot.
But of course they depended on big performances. They won by 23 points and there’s only 5 guys on the court at one time. My point is really that there’s a lot of moving parts and it’s hard to put your finger on what ensured a victory instead of a loss. But whatever confluence of factors delivers these Ws, the delivery is expected each and every time this season, and it’s an interesting question why this team is now so confident in that fact.
The change that the team has undergone from fairly dire straits to renewed hope has to be greatly attributed to one guy: the coach, Jamie Smith. He’s been at the club since last year, and he’s brought changes in all aspects. There’s of course the tactical and talent-enhancing parts of being a coach. What Jamie says about tactics sound like truisms: that it’s easiest to score when the defence hasn’t got back yet, that the good shooters should go for threes whenever they get a good opportunity, that play should be quick, and plays should be in sync. However, truisms stop being truisms when they have to be respected in every thing you do. I get the impression from players’ exhausted but appreciative look on recalling this year’s pre-term training camp, and from the way Jamie talks about these concepts, that, in recent years, drills and preparation have not been close to as purposeful and intense at OUBbC as they are now.
Jamie Smith, OUBbC Coach. Credit: Mansoor Ahmed
Nevertheless, Jamie downplays this stuff. He says “I’m not an innovator” when it comes to tactics and game state. He learnt these principles from the greats he’s worked under like Roy Williams at the University of North Carolina and Billy Donovan at the University of Florida. What he likes to attribute success to more, and what he seems more energised and excited discussing, is how the team and the club are changing as institutions, or, more prosaically, as groups of people. He’s keen to highlight changes in culture. Turning up late to training now means harsher consequences. Team socials after every match are mandatory. Like Bill, his eyes light up when talking about the team’s newly increased social media presence, and new kits. It all contributes to a feeling that this is more than a uni team playing a fairly unpopular sport, that it’s part of a story, that people care, and that they should be proud to wear the dark blue jersey.
But I’m not sure that’s all it is—for Jamie. From a very young age, he was obsessed with America. Basketball was partly a cause and partly a result of that obsession. He played for multiple teams at once, and organised a local league, and even did some coaching. By the age of 18, his future was uncertain in his own mind, and he saw a flyer for a year abroad studying in the US. His family didn’t have that much money. He took a year out, earning what he could, and applying for this programme. He made it to Idaho, and despite loving the chance to live in this country he’d dreamed about, he realised he was not good enough for the basketball team. So instead, he went early every day to their state-of-the-art court, and practised alone. And eventually, someone on the coaching team noticed this abnormally committed guy and decided they wanted him on their staff.
Supported by almost perfect grades every step of the way, Jamie kept studying, which allowed him to stay in the US, while coaching basketball. He went all over the place: Idaho, North Carolina, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Massachusetts, Hawaii. This was all punctuated by returns to the UK to earn some money to keep the party going. He worked for two NBA teams as a video coordinator—Cleveland Cavaliers and the Boston Celtics—being one of the only Brits working on any coaching staff in the NBA. And a key reason for that is that it’s very difficult to get a US visa to coach. Eventually, circumstances, including visa circumstances, deemed it fit to return to the UK, where Jamie worked with, and continues to work with, the GB national team.
It’s a story full of coincidence and contingency. He’s only ended up at Oxford because he shot the club an email and, by chance, at that very time, they had a vacancy. He only continued coaching when he got to North Carolina because they were impressed by his work in a summer camp in the summer of his first year. His life path was not clear or planned out.
But now we’re at this point, where I sit across from this 41 year-old guy with lightly greying hair and, forgive the schmaltz, an eminently good heart. He’s had a wandering social life transported from state to state, and spends his time either coaching basketball or reading about basketball for his PhD in the sport’s history or editing Wikipedia pages, correcting their historical basketball errors. And he seems quite happy. He is essentially married to this sport, and what started as staying up watching the Chicago Bulls instead of working on his GCSEs has basically spiralled, and I mean that in a value-neutral way.
The talk about the social media, and the team’s history, and the new kits, and the culture, and the story—it’s partly self-justifying. It’s contextualising Jamie in a tale of great import. It makes his life not just internally meaningful, but externally. This is not to say it is a charade, or a farce. Of course, I do believe that this club has a special story, and of course, it is undeniably true that it has great history. And it’s not to say that Jamie’s obsession with basketball is not ultimately genuine. But it doesn’t seem like genuine interest and self-justification can really be disentangled. Perhaps everything is path-dependent on what we find ourselves drawn to at the age of 18, and the coincidences that lead us on require us to reconceptualise what we care about so that the path remains, in some sense, the right path in our minds.
Jamie’s been given a 4-year contract at Oxford, so the path ahead, at least for now, is attached to the fate of this team. The next game is against Brookes: the biggest rivals in this division. A loss would be hugely significant for the Blues’ hopes this year. Whatever happens, I’m sure we can assimilate it in some way into the narrative, because, yes, narratives are loose and easily modified and retooled. Perhaps a loss is a spark for a fresh revival. But I’d really rather not—let’s just keep the train rolling, lads. See you next week.
It’s safe to say that No Time to Die has had a difficult journey to the big screen. The film has undergone a change of director (Danny Boyle out, True Detective’s Cary Joji Fukunaga in), an injury to its leading man (though he has at least made it through another Bond alive), rewrites (from Phoebe Waller-Bridge, no less), a global pandemic, and five delays to its release date overall. And yet, the final product has emerged from all of this chaos triumphant – a stylish and exhilarating thriller, dusting itself off and adjusting its shirt cuffs with all the effortless sophistication of its protagonist. No Time to Die could easily have felt stale, considering that we first saw footage of it nearly two years ago. Instead, it’s a breath of fresh air. It already looks set to bring audiences into cinemas in swathes – and deservedly so.
Fukunaga opens with a horror-infused home invasion markedly different from other Bond pre-credits sequences. It’s a brilliant introduction to Rami Malek’s masked and menacing villain, Lyutsifer Safin. The plot then picks up five years after the events of Spectre, with Craig’s beefcake Bond enjoying retirement in Jamaica (rather like Ian Fleming himself).The set-up feels a little hackneyed: this is the third successive film where Craig has had to do the ‘Bond-past-his-prime’ thing. But this is, of course, just the prelude to the plot’s main action, which doesn’t take long to kick in. Bond’s retirement is interrupted by a plea for help from his old friend, CIA agent Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright), which embroils him once again in planet-saving mayhem.
Broadly speaking, the story is far from original. Malek’s villain, of course, has a bio-weapon and a plan to kill millions of people with it. But the plot is, as usual, secondary to the spectacle – and, as has often been the case for Daniel Craig’s time in the role, to the emotional arcs of the main characters. Craig gives a bravura performance, running the gamut from fury to humour to heartbreak. Léa Seydoux is excellent as Madeleine Swann, a woman desperate to remain happy with Bond, but just as haunted by the past as he is. The strength of the performances heightens the effectiveness of the story’s emotional beats. And despite the broadly conventional nature of the plot, there are still some genuinely surprising moments.
The prospect of a Danny Boyle Bond will always be a tantalising one, but Fukunaga does an excellent job. He knows how to move a camera with real panache – as anyone who has seen that six-minute single take from True Detective will know. There is nothing here to match that (or Spectre’s opening shot), but the action scenes are all breathlessly entertaining, and there is an effectively claustrophobic single-take stairwell fight. It’s a very good-looking film, with each location vividly shot by Fukunaga and cinematographer Linus Sandgren – from the historic beauty of Matera to a murky Norwegian forest.
It’s good to see some stronger roles for women in this entry. Lashana Lynch gives an entertaining turn as new 007 Nomi, with some enjoyably spiky bickering with Bond. Ana de Armas is a lot of fun as the Cuban agent Paloma, and her appearance is the most enjoyable sequence in the film. It’s just a shame we don’t see more of her – and of Naomie Harris’ Moneypenny, for that matter. It would be interesting to know exactly how significant Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s rewrites were, and where they fall in the film; but this is a script which is sharper and funnier than I expected.
The film isn’t perfect. Malek’s Safin never quite lives up to the promise of that creepy pre-credits introduction. The exact motivations behind his plot to kill millions of people are never entirely clear, either. And it’s depressing to see another Bond villain who has facial scarring and a vaguely “European” accent, as if these characteristics are somehow outward indicators of inward evil. These dated tropes are even more noticeable because No Time to Die breaks away from problematic past Bond films in other areas. It would be nice to see a less predictable take on a Bond villain for the next entry in the series. As it stands, we’re on a dark and dangerous road towards having the meerkat from the Compare the Market ads as the main antagonist next time (only if the producers have poked out one of his eyeballs first, of course).
Overall, though, No Time to Die delivers all the exhilarating action, exotic locales and emotional moments you could want from a Bond film – as well as a theme song and opening credits sequence to die for. It’s a bold blend of old and new, and a suitably moving swansong for Daniel Craig. Inevitably, the rumours on who will be his replacement have already kicked into overdrive again. We should take a moment to appreciate, though, just how much he has made this role his own, giving us a 007 as emotionally vulnerable as he is ruthless. I saw the film at a packed screening. Seeing a blockbuster in an environment like that felt like a welcome slice of pre-Covid normality. The producers made the right move in holding out for a theatrical release, however long it took. If you can, see it in cinemas. There may be no time to die, but after a box office opening weekend like that, there’s no doubt you’ll have plenty of time to catch this one on the big screen.
After over a year off theatres around the country being forced to close their doors, curtains finally rose again over the summer. To start off the term, the Cherwell Stage team and friends reflect on their favourite shows from over the summer…
Joseph and the Amazing Technicolour Dreamcoat, London Palladium
The musical spectacular returns to the West End in a colourful blur of tap dance, belting and glitter. In this new staging from director Laurence Connor, a talented child cast joins Alexandra Burke as the Narrator, recent grad Jac Yarrow as Joseph, and Jason Donovan as the Pharaoh. With impressive set design and choreography, I found it to be a joyful celebration of musical theatre as a genre.
Is God Is, Royal Court Theatre
Is God Is is a genre bending exploration of the impact of domestic abuse. It was half revenge tragedy, half Western thriller – it was one of the most gripping pieces of theatre I’ve ever seen. I was also lucky enough to sit in the front row, and the intense heat of the real life flames onstage made me feel like I was genuinely part of the play landscape itself. Royal Court do fab £12 tickets for Under 26, which I very much recommend!
The Last 5 Years, Garrick Theatre
In this production, Jason Robert Brown’s emotional two-hander musical is reimagined around a revolving grand piano. The show tells the story of the same relationship from two perspectives moving in opposite directions – this show sees the parts of Cathy and Jamie taken on by actor-musicians Molly Lynch and Oli Higginson, bringing something new to the characters.
Carousel, Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre
This extraordinary revival gave the Rogers and Hammerstein classic new life. The breathtaking reorchestration by Tom Deering gave a new and surprising impact to the well-known score. Relocated in a northern English fishing town, the production lent into the heavy, dark and bleak elements of the show. The juxtaposition of the grim and heartbreaking with that soaring elegant score made the show work in a way I never expected. Part of me has always felt the musical can veer a little close to romanticising its abusive relationships, but with overwhelming music and some stunning performances, this production resonated with a defiant, emotional message (one of solidarity in the face of abuse and hardship). It is lovely to see theatre reset after so long, but it is inspiring to see it revive and attempt to do better.
Camp Siegfried, The Old Vic
Camp Siegfried featured a stunning performance from Patsy Ferran as a child at a Nazi indoctrination Spring Awakening-esque summer camp, coming to terms with her sexuality and the pressures of conforming to the racist ideology. The play was also beautifully directed by Katy Rudd in a verb minimalist style – my only criticism was at times the writing was slightly heavy handed, drawing out the parallels between 1930s Germany and Trumpland America a little too explicitly.
Sunnymead Court, Arcola Theatre
There may be lots of large-scale musicals on the West End right now, but that doesn’t mean new writing isn’t out there. In this refreshing small-scale short play, writer Gemma Lawrence tells a new kind of love story – the show is set on two balconies during London’s first coronavirus lockdown, as two women meet eyes from their flats in the middle of summer. I really hope to see it produced on a larger scale!
Diana: The Musical
The past few years have been somewhat of a high-point for movie musicals. From Tom Hooper’s 2019 adaptation of Cats, to the recent release of Kay Cannon’s Cinderella, as well as the release of Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Hamilton, which was filmed in 2016 and only released last year on Disney Plus, stage shows keep finding their way onto our screens.
The infamous story of Prince Charles and Princess Diana is no exception to this rule, with a musical adaptation of Diana’s story being released on Netflix.
Titled Diana: The Musical, the production certainly seems to be playing on the Diana hype after Emma Corrin’s portrayal of the Princess on series four of The Crown. Diana: The Musical, however, follows a different trend to many of the movie musicals which have come onto our screens in recent years. Whilst Hamilton, Cats, and Cinderella all had made names for themselves before being on screen (either as stage-shows or literature), Diana: The Musical has yet to have a proper theatrical run.
The show has been filmed in a theatre with no audience, seemingly recreating the feel of a real theatre show for a mid-pandemic online audience. Yet, this approach seems to fall flat; whilst the release of Hamilton last year was greatly anticipated and brought back the nostalgia of being in a theatre, now that theatres in the US and the UK are open, many are eager to get back to watching shows in person. Furthermore, the ill-fated story of Diana is perhaps, at this point, slightly overdone, with a film starring Kristen Stewart, titled Spencer, being released in November.
The release of this musical also raises questions about the nature of the movie musical. Do they take away from the real enjoyment of watching a show? Are stage musicals even suited to the very different media of film and television? Reviews of Diana: The Musical certainly suggest otherwise, with the show being universally panned by critics.
Contributions by Ollie Khurshid, James Newbery, Katie Kirkpatrick, and Maebh Howell.
Imagine working reduced hours over a four-day week and having a three day weekend, every week.
It seems like a radical idea, one that is far removed from the current obsession with grind and hustle culture which praises having little to no work-life balance as the ultimate manifestation of a ‘successful’ young professional. But, in the aftermath of the pandemic, could the four-day working week be the perfect solution to maximise productivity and worker satisfaction?
In essence, the four-day working week would mean that employees would work reduced hours without a cut in pay. As we emerge from the pandemic which saw millions of people forced to work from home for nearly two years, this may be a welcome change. Working from home over such a long period of time made a lot of employers realise that their companies can function without employees being on site and many have continued working from home despite restrictions being lifted. This means working practice has changed monumentally since the beginning of 2020. The four-day working week may be the next natural progression as the pandemic and multiple lockdowns gave people time to reflect on their lifestyles, with many realising that they need to prioritise their mental health and well-being by achieving a more rounded work-life balance. The four-day working week would provide employees with more free time outside of work, with no loss in pay. It seems like the next best step for governments and businesses to take if they would like to sustain a happy and motivated working population following such difficult and precarious times.
But is there any proof that the four-day working week actually achieves anything? Well, between 2015 and 2019, the national government in Iceland conducted a study which saw 1% of its working population, across a variety of sectors, be given a reduction of weekly hours. The experiment was a huge success as it saw an increase in productivity, well-being and workplace morale. It also led to long-term changes as a large majority of the current working population now works permanently reduced hours.
Elsewhere, the company Unilever also carried out an experiment in which it made its employees in New Zealand work for four days without pay reductions. Again, this test had a positive outcome as employees got 20% more work done and they reported their stress levels to be dramatically lower. Off the back of these experiments, other countries such as Spain, Ireland and Scotland are also trialling four-day workweeks, encouraged by the positive outcomes both economically and in terms of worker welfare.
So it seems that many countries are enchanted by the prospect of a four-day working week. This does not mean, however, that it is the perfect solution across all economies and sectors, such as healthcare or hospitality. With the implementation of a four-day working week, many businesses and companies would still expect their employees to carry out the same amount of work as a 40 hour week. This would mean drastically changing working practices to maximise efficiency and prevent office workers, for example, having to go home and continue working in order to keep up with the workload. Such a change would need time to implement into different business models and is not something to be taken lightly.
Despite this, as we leave the pandemic behind, there is no doubt that we have learnt a lot about working practice. Economists use ‘productivity’ or the ability to produce a certain amount of goods and services per hour as a tool to forecast economic growth. So in order for employers to be persuaded by reduced hours it may be important to reconsider the ways in which we work. At Microsoft Japan, meetings were capped at 30 minutes to ensure that they were as efficient and effective as possible. This idea of efficiency is something that has gained momentum during and after the pandemic as many people have realised that many things can be communicated and achieved simply over an e-mail or short message.
Another consequence of the pandemic is also an increased importance on well-being and mental health. If the working week is more productive but less strenuous in terms of hours and physical hours spent in the office, employee well-being is more likely to improve. A three-day weekend also gives employees more free time to spend with family or pursue hobbies. The four-day week would work particularly well in corporate sectors, sectors in which graduates report quickly experiencing burnout just a few years after getting their first job.
The feeling of control over our schedules and lives outside work is definitely something that everyone wants regardless of what stage of their career that they’re at and as the various experiments across the globe show, the four-day working week can provide just that. Many changes are on the horizon after the pandemic and perhaps the biggest one should be the way in which we work. It’s never been more appropriate to look after ourselves holistically and a big part of this will come from striking a good balance between our professional and social lives.
A number of interesting speakers have been announced to speak at various Oxford societies. Speakers include politicians, acclaimed writers, and Nobel Prize-winning scientists. Most events are open to anyone interested for free.
The Oxford University Conservative Association announced that Matt Hancock and Gavin Williamson will both be speaking this Michaelmas term.
Gavin Williamson was Education Secretary from 2019 to this year, most notably during the A level results scandal in 2020. He will be speaking on the 4th November.
Matt Hancock will speak on the 18th November. Hancock served as Health Secretary for the first year of the coronavirus pandemic before resigning after being caught breaking social distancing rules with his aide.
On the 2nd November Sir Roger Penrose, winner of the 2020 Nobel Prize in Physics, will give an online talk to the Oxford University Physics society.
In the 6th week of Michaelmas Term, the Oxford Diplomatic Society have invited a panel of ambassadors from countries hit worst by climate change to discuss the outcomes of the COP26 summit.
Oxford Women in Business have invited André Borschberg, CoFounder of the Solar Impulse project. This project involved completing the first round-the-world flight on a solar-powered aeroplane.
The Oxford University Labour Club have invited Wes Streeting, Shadow Secretary of State for Child Poverty to speak in the 5th week of term. Tan Dhesi MP will speak in the 7th week of this term.
Hosts of the Hurly Burly Shakespeare Show, Jess Hamlet and Aubrey Whitlock will speak online to the Oxford University Media Society about the making of their hit podcast. The podcast was founded in 2017, and discusses a play of Shakespeare or one of his contemporaries every week.
Judy Smith, Kirsten Walkcolm, and Jack Kelly will also be speaking to the Oxford University Media Society. Smith and Walkcolm are President and Executive vice-President of the strategic advisory firm Smith and Company. Jack Kelly is founder of TLDR news UK.
On the 3rd November Cornelia Funke, bestselling children’s author of Inkheart and Dragonrider, will speak online for the Oxford University German Society about her life between Germany and the US, as well as on her new Artists in Residence centre.
Alexander Weber, chief growth officer at one of Germany’s most successful start-ups N26 will speak to the Oxford University German Society.
Robert Watson, chair of the IPBES (Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem services for the UN) will give a talk on making peace with nature on the 25th October for the Oxford Biological society.
British mathematician Kevin Buzzard will speak to the Oxford University Mathematics Society on the 2nd November.
Dr Karen Miga, leading genomics expert at the Telomere-toTelomere Consortium will talk about their grassroots effort to complete the mapping of a human genome for the Oxford Biology Society.
Dr Baland Jalal, a researcher at Harvard University, will talk about dreams and sleep paralysis to the Oxford Psychology society, the time is yet to be confirmed. The event is free for members and £2 for the public.
Admission interviews for 2022-23 entry will be held online at the end of this year for the second year running. This comes as there are still various uncertainties concerning COVID-19 going into the winter.
Online interviews will take place on Microsoft Teams. Some applicants may require touch screen devices or a basic universal stylus for their interviews.
The University stresses that “no candidate or their school will be expected to purchase a touchscreen device in order to participate”. In cases where candidates or schools are not able to meet the University’s technology requirements, “colleges will discuss alternative arrangements” to find a solution.
Interviews are expected to take place throughout December. This would be in accordance with interview timings of other years.
All candidates are instructed to have some plain paper and a pen, access to pre-reading for the interview, and a copy of their personal statement. Some candidates may be asked to use interactive tools during their interviews. Some tools include adding text to shared platforms between the interviewer and the candidate, using ‘draw’ tools to highlight work or annotate work, and sketching diagrams or writing formulae.
The extent of technology an applicant is required to have will depend on which course they are applying to. Technology requirements have been divided into three separate tiers.
In tier 1, candidates will only need a computer, with speakers, a microphone, and a webcam. Some of the courses in this tier include Biology, English Language and Literature, and Medicine.
In tier 2, candidates will need access to an Interactive Virtual Whiteboard, in addition to a computer. The Virtual Whiteboard will be accessed through the website or app Miro. The University advises that student access Miro on the same device as that which they are accessing Microsoft Teams. Some of the courses in this category include Music, Economics and Management, and Biochemistry.
In tier 3, candidates are required to access an Interactive Virtual Whiteboard via Miro and Natural Handwriting Capture using a basic universal stylus. For applicants to be able to use the basic universal stylus, they will need to have a large touchscreen device. Candidates may be asked to sketch diagrams and write out mathematical notations using a stylus. Courses requiring the use of a stylus and a touchscreen device include Chemistry, Engineering, and Mathematics.
It is still unclear as to whether interviews for 2023-24 entry will be online again, or whether they will return to being in-person. Announcements will likely be made in the new year.
