Friday, April 25, 2025
Blog Page 323

‘Blanched and pureed’: what does globalisation do to world music?

0

K-pop group BTS made pop music history with their explosive 2020 single, “Dynamite”. It became the first song by an all-Korean group to top the Billboard Hot 100 chart. Within Korea, Bangtan Sonyeondan (the name with which BTS is more known as domestically) cemented their place among the ranks of retired Olympian Kim Yuna and Tottenham footballer Son Heung-Min as breathing banners of national pride.

But how much good did “Dynamite” really do for Korean culture? Its lyrics are entirely in English. Both of its songwriters, David Stewart and Jessica Agombar, are British, which for some may diminish the significance of its global success. Is the hit single really a triumph of Korean music and the result of successful diversification of the globalised music industry? Or is it an omen of homogenised world music, blanched and pureed under Anglophone influence?

L’exception française is the French response to such questions. France has a history of protectionist cultural policy, which was pursued by the post-WWII culture minister André Malraux. This was contemporaneous with, if not caused by, Anglophobia in the 1950s and onwards (although fear of Anglo-American superiority existed as early as the late 19th century); in the 1960s, President Charles de Gaulle sought to target the Anglo-American as ‘both a historical and a contemporary geopolitical rival. It was under de Gaulle, of course, that Malraux was Minister of Cultural Affairs. In line with such history, for music ‘l’exception’ involves a legal minimum quota of French songs played on the radio. A 2013 Financial Times article largely defends the measures, arguing that it: ‘should be understood more positively: as safeguarding a niche for some French cultural products’. Today, eight years later, with world music more globalised than ever in our age of streaming, I doubt such a safeguard is necessary.

The old-world equation of globalisation with Americanisation, the invasion of the Harley-revving rock stars and NYC-dreaming songwriters, no longer holds. Variety’s 2019 article declares our age of Spotify as ‘a time where breaking in America is no longer the primary goal or the definitive sign that an artist has made it’. The mainstage belongs less and less to 15-months-long America tours, Madison Square Garden and the Ed Sullivan theatre—and more and more to streaming platforms, installed in smartphones all over the world. So we begin to witness dynamics much more diverse than the non-American artist / American audience or American artist / non-American audience relationship.

Another dubious equation is that of globalisation with homogenisation. ‘Mondialisation ne signifie pas uniformisation du monde’ [Globalisation does not indicate global uniformisation], argues French political scientist Jean-François Bayart in an interview with Alternatives Economiques. In fact, globalisation has been producing new varieties.

Take rock music. It began, yes, with American rock and roll in the mid-20th century. But what followed American Elvis singing ‘That’s all right’ in Memphis, Tennessee wasn’t simply a range of echoes—although the line ‘that’s all right’ and its many permutations seem to be chorus favourites everywhere—with a kick of gayageum or maracas to vaguely signpost the band’s nationality (this record better sell, man, says the Hawaiian-shirt-sporting record company executive, as the non-Anglophone band frontman from a non-Anglophone country gulps foreignly). The best of what followed was a diverse harmony of original and incredibly distinct rock music from across the world.

French rock musician Renaud declares, ‘Y’a eu Antoine avant moi / Y’a eu Dylan avant lui’ [There was Antoine before me / There was Dylan before him], in his song “Société tu m’auras pas”. This grumbling, broken-voiced descendant of Bob Dylan scribbles French discontent all over his American inspiration, projecting his Frenchness onto American rock’s subversive self-expression—his disgust for the average French bourgeois and bobo (bourgeois-bohemian) makes him all the more French. With Apple Music’s ‘Renaud Essentials’ playlist downloading in the background, I dived into link after link of ‘Similar Artists’ profiles, stumbling upon my current two French favourites, Alain Souchon and Laurent Voulzy.

Mexican band Maná, which I “discovered” from their collaboration with Santana, sent me into a completely new direction. Proudly and loudly rock en español, they blast an internationally popular yet strikingly Latin American sound, imbibed with cumbia and bachata sounds.

Listening to Maná via streaming, as with earlier French musicians, further facilitated my exploration. Hours of listening and half a dozen clicks later, I landed on Spanish-speaking music elsewhere. I began with La Oreja de Van Gogh. When my high school Spanish teacher recommended the band years earlier, I had brushed them off to the back of my mind—the effortlessness and low commitment of the streaming platform allowed me to tap on ‘Puedes Contar Conmigo’ light-heartedly, then download their essentials, then become their loyal fan of 4 years—and still going strong.

Though I may have just exposed my rather low effort, ‘Top Hits’ listening tendency, my experience is but a quick glance at how diversified globalised music can be, and how easily accessible it has become. This is not to reject l’exception française as entirely pointless—its drive toward state sponsorship of local artists is just and needed. Its protectionist grounds, on the other hand, are indeed debatable, if not outdated in this era of incredibly fluid cultural exchange through streaming and online sharing.

“Dynamite” is undoubtedly a product of Anglophone influence. Yet even this single, as an Insider article argues, is more of a ‘balancing act’ between appealing to English-speaking and Korean audiences, and still engages with several elements of BTS’s ultimately Korean identity. Only a few months after the song’s release, “Life goes on,” another single by the group, this time predominantly in Korean and involving Anglophone as well as Korean songwriters, debuted at the top of the Billboard Hot 100 chart. It was the first non-English song to do so. BTS’s successes, then, seems to me as a triumph of Korean culture—if not world culture.

Image credit: Yun_Q via Flickr (Public Domain)

‘That’s So Fetch’: Teen Movie Musicals

CW: brief mention of eating disorders, suicide & sexual assault 

This week it was announced that Heathers: the Musical will be returning to the Theatre Royal Haymarket on the West End for a second run. The musical adaptation of Mean Girls is also still planned to open in London, and Bring It On is being revived this August. The West End is increasingly set to be populated by shows about high school hierarchies, their teenage heroines taking their places alongside the Hamiltons, Phantoms, Elphabas, and Mormons. So many teen movie musical productions lie in wait for when theatres reopen, fuelled by a year of theatre fans multiplying via platforms like TikTok… but will they ever be able to find commercial and critical success outside of the digital sphere? 

While it may seem like a recent phenomenon, the teen movie musical has been part of the fabric of musical theatre for decades. Arguably the first teen movie musical was 1988’s Carrie: based on the 1974 book and 1976 film of the same name, the Broadway musical became one of the most famous flops in theatre history, closing after only five performances. Other teen movie adaptations, however, have taken their place as musical theatre classics – for example, 2002’s Hairspray, now perhaps one of the most popular musicals ever, was originally based on the 1988 film of the same name. Following this, 2007 saw the hugely successful stage adaptation of Legally Blonde, which spawned a casting reality TV show called The Search for Elle Woods and a West End transfer. In 2012, Broadway then welcomed Bring It On: the Musical, with music by Lin-Manuel Miranda of Hamilton fame.

It was in circa 2018, however, that the teen movie musical really became its own genre. An illegal recording of the Off-Broadway production of Heathers: the Musical went viral on YouTube, and the show’s suddenly massive online following led to an Off-West End run at The Other Palace in 2018, followed by a West End transfer. In the same year, the theatrical adaptation of Mean Girls opened on Broadway, giving iconic lines like “That’s so fetch!” and “On Wednesdays we wear pink” a second life. In the wake of these two productions, numerous other adaptations were attempted. 90s teen movies became a particular target, with the jukebox musical adaptations of Cruel Intentions and Clueless using almost exactly the same soundtrack – to be fair, ‘Torn’ by Natalie Imbruglia is a pretty perfect fit for some retro teen angst.

A huge part of what makes adaptations like Heathers and Mean Girls so distinctive are their fan bases – it seems unlikely that Heathers would ever have made it to the West End without its impressive online following. It was also helped by Hamilton spawning a sudden boom in young musical theatre fans on platforms like Tumblr and Twitter and thus forming the perfect environment for a catchy show about teenagers to take off. Young people make up a huge amount of the audience of musical theatre, and therefore shows that feel like they have been made for them are bound to find an audience. In addition to this, these films often include subjects that feel highly relevant to teens but aren’t often seen in other productions; shows include topics that range from popularity politics and eating disorders to teenage suicde and sexual assault. This intense fan culture extends to live audiences: I saw Heathers twice in London and both times was surrounded by young people dressed up (‘cosplaying’) in red scrunchies, blue blazers, and black trench coats.

The primary issue these productions face is the discrepancy between fan popularity, commercial success and critical opinion. No recent productions have had very long runs, despite their massive online fanbases. In fact, Mean Girls had to resort to some of the least successful stunt casting in recent history, with recordings of Vine star Cameron Dallas as love interest Aaron Samuels going viral for just how incredibly out of tune he was. This is firstly because young people as a target audience are often less likely to be able to buy tickets: West End and Broadway tickets are increasingly extortionate, and teenagers are also less likely to be able to easily travel to London/NYC. Secondly, most of these shows receive mediocre to negative reviews, meaning they tend not to appeal to older theatregoers. With their primary audiences often unable to come, and those who can turned off by poor reviews, it’s not easy for a teen movie musical to sustain its run.

In spite of this, these musicals keep cropping up. Heathers, Mean Girls, and Bring It On are all set to be on the West End soon, and there are always more productions being workshopped (currently including musicals based on the 2010 indie film It’s Kind of a Funny Story, which centres mental health, and the 1999 cult lesbian film But I’m a Cheerleader). This is because teen movies naturally make excellent subjects for musicals. They combine ensemble casts of distinctive, eccentric characters, a comedic, feel-good tone, some kind of light moral lesson, and, of course,  the teen movie musical holy grail: a party scene. While it’s true that the similarities can make these shows feel derivative, they also prove that the format works. For example, the party scenes in all of these productions allow for key plot points to intersect with iconic costume moments, strobe lights, and flashy dance sequences. We see this in ‘Big Fun’ from Heathers, ‘Someone Gets Hurt’ and ‘Whose House is This?’ from Mean Girls, ‘A Night We’ll Never Forget’ from Carrie, and the iconic playboy bunny moment in Legally Blonde. All four shows also share at least one song that breaks down the high school/college food chain and speaks to the pressures of that kind of social environment: ‘Beautiful’ from Heathers, ‘It Roars’, ‘Where Do You Belong?’, and several other songs from Mean Girls, ‘In’ from Carrie, and ‘The Harvard Variations’ and ‘Blood in the Water’ from Legally Blonde

The truth is that when these productions take into account the current cultural and political climate and introduce catchy, original music, they can be really excellent examples of musical theatre. Heathers continues to be a success because it manages this – it walks the line between genuine heart and satire expertly, and the music is well-written and catchy. For this same reason, productions like Clueless and Cruel Intentions are unlikely to ever really take off. When using a story that’s already well-known, introducing original music is more important than ever to offer audiences something fresh.

Even successful shows like Heathers and Mean Girls, though, have continually struggled with awards and critics: Heathers received zero Olivier nominations, and Mean Girls had to resort to poor stunt-casting before closing in the pandemic. The reason for this is that musicals centred around teenagers are destined to become ‘cult’ shows: their audience is intrinsically niche, and, due to their youth, unlikely to be able to sustain commercially and critically successful runs, leading these shows to fan-centric cult status. The importance of internet culture also feeds into this, urging us to reconsider how we measure a production’s success.

Looking to the future, it seems like we could be walking into a renaissance of the teen movie musical. With Heathers and Bring It On both in London this summer, combined with the way that the pandemic will have spawned a new generation of young theatre fans eager to get into theatres, we’re unlikely to see a decrease in demand for stories about young people on stage. It remains to be seen, however, whether these shows will ever manage to break into the musical theatre canon and win awards and glowing reviews. It doesn’t look like adaptations are slowing down, in spite of criticism of the lack of original stories in theatre: with the TikTok musical versions of Ratatouille and Bridgerton making international theatre news, who’s to say which film will take to the stage next?

Image Credit: Brecht Bug via Flickr & Creative Commons (License: CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Oxford Union opens courtyard beer garden

0

Summer has arrived early at the Oxford Union, which has opened a new beer garden for food, drinks, and political intrigue. The Covid-secure beer garden, erected in the Union’s courtyard, serves up to 200 patrons and contains a gazebo for more than 100. Seating is at tables of six and Union members can bring guests.

The Union hopes to attract customers with new drinks offers and a new lunch menu each week, including £2.50 cocktails on Thursdays. The Beer Garden will play host to social events from pub quizzes to a drag night, and the Union aims to collaborate with societies such as the African and Caribbean Society (ACS) and causes like Pink Week.

The news accompanies the gradual reopening of pubs and other hospitality venues for outdoor service following the easing of England’s coronavirus restrictions on 12th April. There is no 10pm curfew and no requirement to purchase a ‘substantial meal’.

Members have praised the return to normality at the Union after a largely virtual year. One member, Grace Lawrence said “it’s really heartening to see outdoor spaces opening up especially after spending a term at home.” The opening of the Beer Garden coincided with the reopening of library facilities, and a Union spokesperson indicated that the indoor bar is planned to reopen next month. 

Following Monday’s opening, Adam Roble, President of the Union, told Cherwell “the Beer Garden today has been a huge success, and after a year of uncertainty it’s been so nice to be able to see Union members and their guests socialising in a safe environment again. We are really excited to be able to welcome you really soon!”

Arjun Bhardwaj, Treasurer-Elect, said he is “really excited at the transformation of the historic Union courtyard into one of the largest beer gardens in central Oxford.”

“We know how hard it has been for students to get spots at pubs recently, so with a capacity of up to 200 we hope to meet the large demand. As well as offering a wide range of draught beers, we are also able to serve a variety of food from the bar. We hope our members enjoy the unique experience!”

The beer garden will be open Monday to Wednesday 10am – 11pm and Thursday to Saturday 10am – midnight, with lunch served from 11:30am – 2:30 pm on weekdays. Alcohol may continue to be served until 3am depending on demand.

Image Credit: The Oxford Union Press Office

Oxford Charity Asylum Welcome fights Home Office’s proposed New Plan for Immigration

0

To challenge the Home Office’s proposed New Plan for Immigration, Oxford-based charity Asylum Welcome is providing Zoom consultation sessions, encouraging people to write to MPs, and soliciting ideas for collaborative action against the proposed policy changes. The plan, published on 24th March, is undergoing an open consultation until 6th May. 

Described by Home Secretary Priti Patel as “the most significant overhaul of the asylum system ‘in decades“, the New Plan for Immigration vows to launch tougher measures against “illegal immigration” while rewarding “legal immigration” achieved through resettlement schemes. 

For the first time ever, an asylum seeker in the UK will be branded “legal” or “illegal” based on their route of arrival. Asylum seekers entering the country via “illegal means” – having passed through a “safe country” before reaching the UK – will face the Home Office’s “every effort” at removal. Even those “illegal arrivals” who successfully claim refugee status will be “regularly assessed for removal” and find their access to benefits and family reunion rights limited. 

Asylum seekers’ claims of persecution and their age will undergo closer scrutiny, and people smugglers will face harsher sentences. The plan also promises to streamline the process of asylum appeals and fast-track deportations. 

These “fair but firm” measures, claims Patel, will deter people smuggling and human trafficking and relieve the current pressure on the UK’s asylum processing system. However, Patel’s definition of asylum seeker legality based on means of entry has been refuted by a UNHCR spokesperson, who has noted that the 1951 UNHCR Refugee Convention does not “oblige asylum seekers to apply in the first safe country they encounter”. 

Organisations working with asylum seekers and refugees have reacted with concern and alarm. Enver Solomon, CEO of the Refugee Council, has condemned the Plan as “unjustly differentiat[ing] between the deserving and undeserving refugee”. 

In Oxford, local charity Asylum Welcome is taking measures to challenge the plan and encouraging other members of the public to do likewise. The largely volunteer-run organisation provides a range of practical services including immigration and asylum advice, educational, language, and IT support, a food bank, and a gardening project.

Mark Goldring, Director of Asylum Welcome, acknowledges the need to reform the UK asylum system, but says he is “shocked” at the Government’s approach and describes it as “designed to stop people coming to the UK for sanctuary”. 

In response to the Plan’s punitive measures against “‘illegal immigration’”, Asylum Welcome has underlined its rejection of “the two-tier system for people being treated as legal and illegal”, pointing out that refugees often have no choices apart from “‘illegal’” means of entry to the UK in the face of harm or persecution. 

A male volunteer and a female client talking during an employment advice session at Asylum Welcome.
A volunteer at Asylum Welcome working together with client during an employment advice session. Image credit: Asylum Welcome

Asylum Welcome has held four Zoom meetings with refugees and asylum seekers and one with supporters and volunteers to explain the proposals, listen to concerns, and encourage possible proposal response ideas. Goldring states that the charity will “seek primarily to give voice to people with lived experience of the asylum system”. He also promises further action against the plan, vowing to respond “through a range of channels, directly and through networks, alliances and media” before the end of the consultation period on 6th May. 

Members of the public interested in participating in Asylum Welcome’s efforts to respond to the Plan are invited to email [email protected]. Asylum Welcome also encourages those concerned about the Plan to write to their MPs or contribute to the consultation on the UK Government’s website, and provides guidelines for both

Top Image Credit: Asylum Welcome

Oxford political societies respond to online learning until the 17th of May

0

Oxford University’s political societies have responded to the government’s decision not to resume in person teaching for students until at least the 17th May. A statement published by Oxford University Labour Club said the decision was ‘an outrage’ and that the government should “rethink their decision” not to allow all students to return to university for the start of term.

The Oxford University Liberal Democrats said that they “wholeheartedly oppose the Tory government’s nonsensical plans, according to which going to the pub is fine but going to a tutorial is not” adding that “we are in agreement with OULC that it is unfair to get students to justify their return.”

The statements come following the government’s announcement earlier in the month which stated that “providers should support the return of students where necessary to support the continuation of their studies, for example, where students do not have access to appropriate alternative accommodation, facilities or study space, where students need to return for health or safety reasons or where there is concern for a student’s mental health or wellbeing”. This means that Oxford students need the agreement of their college before they can return to university for Trinity term.

Explaining their opposition to the proposals, Oxford University Labour Club said that “we stand in solidarity with students who have been overlooked by the government yet again. It is an outrage that, with just days left until the start of term, this decision has been leaked rather than announced.”

The OULC went on to say that “the argument that a full return might cause a spike in cases has no basis in evidence’ and that ‘being forced to justify their mental health at a time when everyone is struggling is unnecessary and unfair.”

The president of the Oxford University Liberal Democrats, Asher Weisz, said: “We at OULD wholeheartedly oppose the Tory Government’s nonsensical plans, according to which going to a pub is fine but going to a tutorial is not. We are in agreement with OULC that it is unfair to get students to justify their return. All students should be allowed to return as soon as possible.”

“With cases so low and the rest of the country slowly opening up, the Government can afford to let all students back, especially since statistics suggest that most students are already in their university accommodation. Boris Johnson should invest more time in making sure that return is as safe and orderly as possible rather than in trying to prevent it. OULD will continue to advocate for the right of all Oxford students to come back to the city we love.”

Oxford University Conservative Association has been contacted for comment.

Image Credit: Tejvan Pettinger / CC BY 2.0

 

Antigua and Barbuda asks All Souls for reparations

0

Gaston Browne, the Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, has written to the Warden of All Souls College to ask that the College pays reparations to the country. Mr Browne said that the College had benefited from profits earned by enslaved labour on the islands.

The College’s library was constructed with a £10,000 endowment from Christopher Codrington, which is now worth around £1.7 million. Codrington owned 900 acres of land on Antigua, the larger and more mountainous of the two islands which make up the country. The smaller island of Barbuda, now famous for its pink sand beaches beloved by Princess Diana, was inherited from his father, who secured a lease of the island at no cost in 1685. His sugarcane plantations were tended by enslaved people.

The use of enslaved labour on the island was not stopped by the Slavery Abolition Act 1833, although the island’s enslaved population were still emancipated at that time. After Christopher Codrington’s death in 1710, the owners of his Barbuda plantations were compensated with a payment of £8,823. 8s. 9d under the Slave Compensation Act 1837 for the loss of 411 enslaved persons. The UK Treasury was still making payments under this act until 2015.

Mr Browne’s letter suggested to Sir John Vickers, Warden of All Souls, that the College should “repay its debt to enslaved persons on Antigua and Barbuda, who were the real source of benefit to all souls.” The proposed reparations would take the form of the creation of a scholarship to the college for “eligible Antiguans and Barbudans”, and donations to the Five Islands (Antigua) campus of the University of the West Indies”.

When approached for comment, All Souls referred Cherwell to a statement on its website reading: “Over the last three years the College has taken several steps to address the problematic nature of the Codrington legacy. It has erected a large memorial plaque at the entrance to the Library, ‘In memory of those who worked in slavery on the Codrington plantations in the West Indies’. It has pledged a series of donations to Codrington College, Barbados (a theological college also founded by a bequest in Codrington’s will) to a total of £100,000. And it has set up three fully funded graduate studentships at Oxford for students from the Caribbean; in effect, £6 million of the College’s endowment is now set aside, on a permanent basis, to produce the income that funds these studentships.” All Souls recently removed Codrington’s name from its library. The College did not remove a statue of Codrington from the library’s centre.

Common Ground told Cherwell they supported Mr Browne’s call for direct reparations from the College. They added: “We want to echo the sentiments of Rhodes Must Fall Oxford, who have already voiced their support for the initiative, and also expressed their disappointment at the fact that the statue of Christopher Codrington still remains standing within the college. By allowing the Codrington statue to remain in place the College is unable to fully stand in solidarity with Black communities both here and in the Carribean. It also shows a failure to truly comprehend the full extent of the dehumanisation, exploitation and trauma on which the College’s wealth stands. The efforts to repair past damages with current studentships offered to students in Barbados are undermined by their continued commitment to upholding the statue and the lack of direct reparations.

“It is positive to hear that the college has responded and agreed to investigate academic initiatives relating to the Codrington legacy and reach conclusions in the coming academic term. We sincerely hope that the college chooses to take action and pay reparations where they are owed. Back in November 2020, after All Souls announced that they will be preserving the statue of Codrington, Common Ground responded to say that we believe the College needs to go beyond acknowledgment if it truly wants to express its ‘abhorrence of slavery’ and stand in solidarity with those affected by colonial injustice. We feel that paying direct reparations to Antigua and Barbuda would be a step in the right direction for All Souls on the way to truly facing up to the atrocities on which the foundations of the College are built.”

The Office of the Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda has been approached for comment.


Image: Andrew Shiva / CC BY-SA 4.0

Colleges announce return policies

0

Following the government announcement that students on non-practical courses not already exempt will be unable to return to Oxford until the 17th of May, the University of Oxford has updated its guidance on students’ returns, stating: “providers should support the return of students where necessary to support the continuation of their studies.” 

In emails seen by Cherwell, colleges have outlined their policies for students who wish to return to Oxford before May 17th. In line with government and university guidance, students may return provided they fall under one of the exemptions: if they “do not have access to appropriate alternative accommodation, facilities or study space at home” or “for health or safety (including mental health and wellbeing) reasons.” In light of these changes, students who previously applied and were not given permission can contact their college to make a new request. 

In an email sent to students at St John’s College, the college said they shared students’ “disappointment and frustration” at the government update, but informed them: “our objective remains to welcome back as many of you as possible, within the parameters of what is permitted by the government.” For students who claim the exemption of health and safety, including mental health and wellbeing, the college said they would “initiate a discussion about what support [they] may need on [their] return” in order to ensure their safety and that of the wider college community. 

Students at St Edmund’s Hall, who were not already given permission to return, were told they could if “in [their] judgement, this is necessary for [them] to be able to use the facilities such as libraries to study effectively, to prepare for examinations, or for health reasons”. These students did not “need to secure the permission” of the college. 

Hertford College also told their students they shared in their “frustrations” and “had hoped for earlier clarity and a stronger recognition of both the case for return and the sacrifices made by students”. Students wishing to return early were asked to submit a “brief return request” flagging the “general grounds on which the request is being made” and if given permission, can return in the earlier window from 21 to 24 April.  The college also said that “all students who wish to return to residence for Trinity Term will be able to do so in preparation for 17th May” and instructed them to book an arrival slot between May 12 and 15. 

Students at Regent’s Park were told that the college would be happy to consider requests and would “interpret government and University rules as generously as [they] can”. The email also stated that if students wished to submit a request under one of the exemptions, they did not need to go into “great detail” but that a “simple statement of the relevant exemption” would be sufficient. 

The Queen’s College wrote to students stating that those who do not have access to appropriate alternative accommodation, facilities, or study space would be allowed to “self-certify for the exemption” but would require a “supportive GP statement where the student is making a case on matters of mental health”. 

In an email to their students, Exeter wrote: “The College recognises that the prolonged period for which many of you have now been required to remain at home may have made individual situations and difficulties more acute, and that this may include some of you who have previously made unsuccessful applications to return.” 

St Hugh’s told students that given the “slight change in the wording around the Government guidance on exemptions” they are hopeful that more students will be in College than in Hilary term. Wadham also “warmly encouraged” students who fall under one of the exemptions to apply, adding that the college is “very keen” to support those who wish to return. 

Meanwhile, Merton, Somerville, Balliol and New College reminded students that due to continuing restrictions, study spaces in college will be limited in the coming term and there may be nowhere for students who do return to work other than their own study-bedroom. 

Following the latest government announcement on university returns, PresCom, the committee of JCR Presidents, wrote to the Heads of Oxford colleges to suggest they adopt “a more trust-based approach” to allowing students to return. In a Facebook post, they said: “This approach must be both uniform  across the colleges and must respect students’ abilities as responsible adults to make their own decision as to the seriousness of their reasons to return.” 

On April 16, PresCom received a reply from Mr. Miles Young, Chair of the Conference of Colleges, which read: “I am glad to say that there is a clear consensus within colleges as a result of the consultation exercise we conducted in the early part of this week, which favours a consistent approach based on streamlined processes and a high degree of ‘self-certification’, but recognising, of course, that the granting of permission to return is the College’s prerogative, not the students’.” 

He added: “While there will inevitably be some differences in procedures and language, I think you can be reassured that colleges have come together with a willingness to do everything possible to ‘support the return of students where necessary to support the continuation of their studies’, as the new guidance enables them to do.” 

Image Credit: Alison Day / CC BY-ND 2.0

49 Years of Matrimony

0

Agnes need not have walked in on them fucking to know what was going on.

She had been collecting the pieces for years. Each bit of evidence emerged as a silent tumour in their marriage, so silent that Samwel did not realise how malignant they had become. He imagined that Agnes was too bright for him to bother hiding behind the elaborate routines that most men in his position did. He was also a doctor—a cardiothoracic surgeon. He was sure that Agnes was accustomed to him arriving home late, which he had done for more than 30 years. This was long before they stopped having sex and a little after he began seeing other, younger women.

 When he opened the walk-in clinic in their community and started working longer hours to demonstrate procedures for medical students, Agnes would sit on the couch at home waiting for him. When money was good, and they had a housegirl, Agnes made a practice of watching over her as she boiled the chicken. Samwel said that white meat was better for the heart than red meat but it required more attention and needed to be thoroughly cooked. Agnes would then switch on the TV, leaving it on the channel with the true-crime shows that Samwel liked. She would wait on the couch until she heard the mlinzi open the gate and the street children parading behind Samwel’s car. Once the children had received the empty medicine bottles for making their toy cars, Samwel entered the house, tired, but his voice was always full of charm and exuberance. ‘Those kids, they are never satisfied with the small pill bottles! They always ask for the big-big boxes!’

 They would laugh and talk and then eat their supper in front of the TV, the monotone enquiries of the British detectives keeping them company.

The Other Women used to be his female patients, and then when that proved more effort than it was worth, he would give little gifts to the nurses, complimenting them on their too-tight braids and asking them to drink tea with him in his office. He had his favourites like the plump one with the wide forehead and the light-skinned one with the dark labia but in all cases, weekends away with the women were not possible. His schedule would not allow that, and Agnes, between her retreats and work as a church elder, wanted to spend all evenings and Saturdays with Samwel.

 He also found it tedious to have his extramarital activities far from home.

 So that is where they happened. At home, when Agnes was away on her retreats, he would drive back from the hospital, the light-skinned nurse with the uneven breasts and dark labia in the backseat of his dusty 2000 Honda Accord.

 Before then, Agnes’ retreats were becoming longer and more frequent. In 2009 she visited her daughter Irene in America. Irene, a successful lawyer in Maryland, had just given birth to her first child, a son. She called some weeks before the birth, asking her mother to help with childcare in those months before returning to work. Irene explained that daycare at that age was out of the question, her African American friends had scared her with stories of little white children poking the eyes of their Black babies. That some of those daycare practitioners would leave the infants’ soiled diapers on for too long while tending to the other kids.

 ‘I’ve already bought the tickets, and the visa process is very straightforward. Of course, I’ll pay for everything,’ Irene said and then paused. ‘I’ll send you a letter of invitation tonight.’ Agnes chastised her again for choosing single motherhood. ‘And you are so beautiful too, with that smooth dark skin, eh-eh! And the gap in your teeth, I could have you married in two months or less!’ 

 ‘I just don’t understand why you made that ugly Ugandan friend of yours impregnate you.’ Agnes added. Irene feigned offence.

 Irene had never glorified marriage in the way that her mother had hoped. For Agnes, marriage was a state that elicited recognition—a rite of passage for women who did what they were supposed to do. Marriage itself was not the reward; it was the accolades of wife, daughter-in-law, and mother that Agnes polished and honoured. She felt sorry that she did not pass on this sense of reverence to Irene, who became too comfortable in her independence.

 Irene grew up reading, and reading, and reading herself into believing that she was good enough on her own. She came top of her class every year in high school—she could not spare time for the lazy fondling that her friends entertained from boys in the years above. When she scored high on her SATs, she knew that she would be just fine. She told her parents that she would go to university in America, and there she could find success.

 

From the moment she left law school, Irene worked harder than anyone she knew—first, as a way to prove herself as a Kenyan immigrant and then, to pay off the debt she had acquired. ‘You are the one who is educated in America!’ Her brothers would say whenever they wanted something from her and needed a shorthand way to ask for it. She knew she had really made it when distant relatives back home began sending her WhatsApp messages. These were long shopping lists asking for multivitamins. Requests for toys for their children. Uncomfortable praises that unceremoniously came before requests for money.

 Irene wanted children very badly because they were emblems of a comfortable life. If she could find success in her career and child-rearing, marriage was an unnecessary liability—one that could only threaten and would not guarantee her against total failure. After she became a senior associate at her firm, she asked her boyfriend of two years to impregnate her. She told him that she would take care of everything. Three months after trying, she became pregnant, and a month later, they broke up.

 Irene aimed to fully provide for her parents as soon she could, and Agnes knew this. She chastised, but she was proud. She smiled because one of her children still needed her. The other three with their city jobs called her in steady increments of time and only sent her money for electricity and Internet.

 On the night before her trip, Agnes wrapped beans, sukuma, and sardines for Irene with her clothes in her suitcase. The second night with her daughter, she made her ugali na maharage. ‘Now, these are real beans!’ Irene said with Baby flailing for the food in his mother’s hand. They laughed when Baby knocked a piece of ugali out of Irene’s hands. Even Baby chortled, amused by the joy his actions could cause, and Agnes felt familiar in her daughter’s foreign kitchen.

 When Irene took her to the big Walmart that was ten minutes away by car, Agnes felt at ease with her grandson strapped across her chest. Irene was beside her, selecting the large berries that she would use for her nutritional smoothies. ‘Those strawberries are too large, Irene! Have you been watching the documentaries I send you about American food?’ 

Agnes was away for nine months, and in that time, Samwel developed a habit of dropping his nurses home after work.

 Many times, he did not know what he was doing. He thought it must have looked comical: a 72-year-old man panting and struggling over a 20-something-year-old’s body, like tilapia out of water. He did not know why he did it either. Sometimes he would picture Agnes in her youth instead; it made him feel better about their marriage’s early days. If he were honest with himself, he did not know when it all started going stale. It could not have been a single moment but certain memories stood out like vignettes, explaining the erosion that presided as the third partner in their marriage. He thought it started in 1965 when Agnes was offered a prestigious Commonwealth scholarship for African women to study Biology at Cambridge. She turned it down to accompany Samwel on his residency in Kampala and left her university to look after the house while he worked. Or maybe it was after she gave birth to their second child, and Agnes moved away from her family in Kisumu to Mombasa, where she knew no one. Perhaps it was when the dog died, and Samwel buried it with the shovel Agnes used in her garden. Or when she began meeting the elders, attending church twice a week, and praying rapturously for long hours in the afternoons when she was at home.

 He and the nurse would always have sex in the living room. Never in his and Agnes’ bedroom because he knew that their antiseptic smell would stain the bed sheets—that while cleaning, Agnes would probe further and locate the cheap, muted perfume that the pretty nurse wore. When he got tired of the living room, he bought his nurse and Agnes the same perfume hoping that this would be the answer. The nurse wore her perfume religiously. Agnes did not, and therefore the living room was where the affair continued to happen.

 So it came as a blunt surprise when Agnes asked the question one evening over supper: Which one of your nurses are you sleeping with?’ At first, it struck him how placid and benign her voice was. It was almost as though she was asking about the procedures he performed that week. Which surgery did he find the most complicated, how was the pro bono work going, were the doctors going on strike after all. Not whom he was unfaithful with. Who had he jeopardised 49 years of matrimony for? What would she tell the other elders? He laughed at her. He laughed at himself; how could she have not known? Samwel was a respected man in their community, and people talked fast. Still, he knew this was not the only reason why. He knew he was careless, and this relieved him.

They finished the rest of their supper in silence, without the sounds of the British detectives to compliment the clatter of their spoons. That evening, Agnes slept in her eldest son’s vacated room, as she had done for the past 30 years.

 

Colour me this: a personal perspective on racism across cultures

It’s true, no one is born a racist but the cruelty of a racist system is that the moment you inhale, you become a part of it altogether. Like the firm tree roots anchored into the ground, racism is embedded in our system. The trunk a timeline of historic events transporting racist ideology and culture to our society now, us, the branches. But it’s time we abandon this diseased tree, break branches and replant them. I know it’s hard work and effort spent, but the zeitgeist now lives on our outpour of activism, responsibility and curiosity. We must work towards Martin Luther King Jr’s “invigorating autumn of freedom and equality”.

Empathy and curiosity are vital gear in the battle against systemic racism. People of colour by name but also colour by life. Learn about our lives and our stories, recognize the similarities between me and you and our differences also. We all have certainties and queries but ours are tainted with racism.

Here are mine.

There hasn’t been a time in my life where I have looked at my skin and despised myself. In fact, from a young age I loved my skin colour and I loved that I was brown – I did not have to learn to love it, I just did. I am lucky. But why is it even a privilege to feel that? Why do we need to ‘learn’ to love our colour? Why do we need to ‘understand’ that being coloured is actually not a bad thing? Why does it make me lesser than anyone else? Why.

I grew up in a multicultural community in South East Asia. Sounds lovely and one may assume that we live in a harmonious marriage of races and colour. No. The darker the skin, the harsher your reality. Whether it means going to the playground and other children not wanting to play with you, or being denied jobs and tenancies. What it certainly means is that you are inferior. And so, from a young age I was taught to never feel sorry for myself and to never let ‘my colour’ get in the way of my worth.  Why did I have to be taught anything at all to defend my colour? Why does the colour of my skin dictate the quality of my life?

So, for a long time, I thought the problem was my country. A country where children are taught to think that specific races and religious denominations are far superior than others. This is a country where the deprecation of darker skin is encouraged alongside a toxic mindset where fairer skin is idealized and those with it deserve significant preferential treatment. It’s true – you never see a darker skinned person in an advertisement, only the endless aisles of skin whitening products in pharmacies. However, leaving home at 16 to go to boarding school halfway across the world, I realized it is no different anywhere else. Racism manifested in a different form and shape, but it was and still is there.

My awareness of my colour only grew deeper. I was mimicked for the ‘mispronunciation of words’, described too often as ‘exotic’ and my teachers would hint that I should steer clear from applying to elite universities. Naturally, to assimilate, I masked my true identity and diluted the very qualities that made me ME. So much so that at university I was told “Oh but come on, you’re not really Asian are you”. Am I not?

Constant degradation of where I come from, always being reminded that I’m lesser for coming from ‘that part of the world’, for being brown. I was made to feel wrong for standing up to it, so I just laughed along.

I came across a metaphor recently and it resonated so strongly with me, there is no better way to put it. All the jokes, all the mimicking, all of these incidents are like paper cuts -small and will eventually heal. No point crying over a paper cut or complaining to someone about it. But, imagine getting paper cuts repeatedly and in the same place. Racism for me has been small paper cuts. For many others, it has been deep slashes, broken bones or bullets to the head. 

People of colour face different kinds of racism, but all our experiences include this constant questioning. Why am I not good enough? Do they see me differently because of my colour? Am I being treated differently? Were they racist or is it just me? Was I exposing too much of my culture? Not one question but many. All the time.

We live in a globalised society. Your culture lends into mine and mine into another’s. Unfortunately, we all have bias, conscious or not. But as Ibram X. Kendi rightly says “denial is the heartbeat of racism, beating across ideologies, races and nations”. It’s not enough to say that you’re not racist or to say racism doesn’t ‘happen’ where you live; it does, and the change that needs to happen requires effort. We learn racism from society and culture, through the news we read or the Netflix we watch. Racist ideologies permeate everything we consume. Racial supremacy and hierarchy do exist. Racism is intersectional.

We need to actively challenge our prejudices, our society and its teachings, to question and call things out whenever we can. Educating ourselves is imperative to mending the beliefs woven into the fabric of our society – read Reni Eddo-Lodge or Angela Davies, listen to Code Switch or follow Afua Hirsch. Most of us don’t understand how our racism is intersectional, how a person’s colour, race, culture, ethnicity and religion can often be linked and integrated. Being anti-racist means being curious and engaged, so ask a friend of colour about their identity and culture. We don’t want your pity, we just want to be understood and celebrated. Start anywhere but just start.

Artwork by Rachel Jung

Seaspiracy: vegan propaganda or important warning?

0

This month’s most talked about Netflix release was an unusual one, yet it sparked more debate than some of the platform’s most popular shows. The documentary Seaspiracy made it into the Netflix top 10 in no time, and the heated reactions about it in the media were just as quick to arrive. Many praised it for attacking the environmental impact of fishing head on, qualifying it as the absolute “must watch”. Meanwhile, others criticised it just as vehemently, and labelled it a piece of propaganda against the fishing industry and accused it of taking statistics out of context to promote veganism.

The documentary, directed by Ali Tabrizi and produced by Kip Anderson, exposes what is perhaps the biggest threat to our oceans: industrial fishing. At first, it might come as a surprise, since throughout the years, despite the rising awareness about plastic pollution in our seas, we have heard little about the dangers linked to our ever-increasing fish consumption. The recent BBC documentary Blue Planet II failed to even mention industrial fishing, and environmental organisations such as Oceana or the World Wildlife Fund fail to mention our fish consumption as a direct threat to the ocean. 

To give us an understanding on how fishing—not plastic straws nor any piece of single use plastic—is the most important threat to the oceans, the documentary discusses many damages that it causes. On the top of the list are bycatch of sea turtles, dolphins, and sharks, the destruction of the seabed through the trawling of huge heavy nets, and most obviously, the emptying of the seas which are at the point of collapse. Despite the controversy, the destructiveness of these practices have not been denied even by the harshest critics of the documentary, instead, they have taken issue with how this information is presented and supported. 

Throughout the one-and-a-half-hour documentary, the audience is bombarded with statistics and scientific studies combined with interviews with environmentalists, marine biologists and key actors from the fishing industry. Some fact checkers have looked at the individual numbers presented and have found that although these are not invented, they are in some cases taken out of context. For example, the claim that if fishing continues at its present pace, oceans will be “virtually empty” by 2048, refers to a 2006 New York Times article and, through it, a study published in Science. However, this assertion has since been refuted by many, including the scientists in charge of the initial study. Such a lack of precision from the documentary is indeed frustrating, as it undermines and diminishes its credibility and value.

Nevertheless, Seaspiracy gets more things right than wrong, and it does tackle the problem linked to the depletion of our oceans. Indeed, even if our oceans are not going to be empty by 2048, there isn’t much to be reassured by; 85% of all fish stocks are currently overexploited or depleted, and populations who are dependent on fish to feed themselves (an estimated 120 million people) are therefore becoming increasingly food insecure. Thus,  an environmental problem becomes a humanitarian crisis. 

Another humanitarian issue linked to the fishing industry and exposed by the documentary is the form of modern slavery to which many workers, especially in Southeast Asia, are subjected.  Researchers have established a link between the fishing industry and forced labour, human trafficking, physical abuse and even murder, and reports from the International Labour Organisation confirm that these practices are common place in the fishing industry.

Fishing companies are not the only ones in the industry who are involved in immoral practices. Seaspiracy is also concerned with the role that sustainability labels and environmental organisations play in an industry that more and more resembles a sinking ship. The director, Ali, interviews several executives of charitable organisations for environmental preservation. One such executive, Mark Palmer from the “Dolphin Safe” label, a label that guarantees that no dolphins were killed in bycatch, admitted that there is no way to actually provide such a guarantee, and that their inspectors could easily be bribed once out at sea. The failure of these key players presented in Seaspiracy to ensure the sustainability of fishing practices seems to be a sufficient argument for the authors to claim that sustainable fishing is impossible. Such a statement however, closes the doors to finding potential innovative solutions to ensure that fish can be caught in sustainable ways.

Therefore, with all the environmental and humanitarian problems caused by industrial fishing, and with their belief that sustainable practices is an impossibility under current circumstances, Seaspiracy only offers one drastic solution: eliminate fish from our diet unless you are one of the 120 million who directly depend on it. This is perhaps the message that unsurprisingly gets most of the documentary’s detractors worked up, because any discussion about the protection of the environment that touches on our food consumption is immediately presented as an ideological battle rather than a clear-sighted exchange.

Objectively, if fishing is, as the documentary suggests, the main threat to the survival of our oceans, then it can’t be a bad idea to stop taking tons of fish out of it every day. Ultimately an end of industrial fishing will be beneficial for the environment and humanity in the long term, so why is it that problematic that this documentary presents a change in diet as the “only solution” to save the oceans? 

Of course, veganism and vegetarianism is a powerful and effective course of action that should be considered by all of us, but whether we like it or not, such a drastic change in diet is a position that for now only a small proportion of people will take. Veganism, although on the rise, remains an unrealistic option for a large amount of the world’s population, as there are many cultural, geographical and financial constraints that come with any change of diet. So, by promoting this as the “only solution”, the documentary refuses to acknowledge any other legitimate efforts that can be made, excluding many people from the conversation.

Ultimately, Seaspiracy can be appreciated for having raised awareness of the danger that marine life is facing. By confronting the powerful fishing industry in front of the large Netflix audience, the documentary broke new ground by affecting the public discourse on an oft-overlooked, but nevertheless pressing global issue. That said, the questionable factual precision to support some of the documentary’s arguments undermines the important message that the film sets out to convey. And while their advocacy for a plant-based diet is relevant to the discussion, presenting it as the sole solution is counterproductive. But whether we decide to change our diet or not, let’s remember that oceans cover almost three quarters of our planet and that they are our lifeline. We must do whatever we can to protect it.

Image Credits: Australian Institute of Marine Biology (CC BY 3.0 AU)