Sunday, April 27, 2025
Blog Page 332

In Conversation with Raven Acid Bath Princess of the Darkness

William Foxton
-
0
In Conversation with Raven Acid Bath Princess of the Darkness

CW: Mentions of suicide, r*pe threats, and cyberbullying.

‘After years and years of silence and secrecy, I’m here to tell the truth,’ begins Sarah in her ‘coming-out’ video released earlier this year. ‘The videos were fake.’

It’s been over a decade since Sarah graced our screens as Raven Acid Bath Princess of the Darkness, her alter-ego that went viral in 2008, exposing her to the best and worst the Internet had to offer. Now, after years of hiding, she’s back with the answers to a mystery twelve years in the making.

It’s 2008, and Sarah has just released her first video. It begins with a sullen Raven announcing to her audience that her friend Azer won’t be joining her. Earlier that day, she recounts, she was in Hot Topic ‘being really goth and stuff’ when she saw Azer in a nearby Hollister, the ultimate betrayal of their goth identity. But Raven refuses to let Azer’s actions get her down.  Joined by fellow My Chemical Romance enthusiast Tara, played by her real-life sister, the pair lip sync for their lives to MCR’s ‘Welcome to the Black Parade’, a metaphorical middle finger to Azer, Hollister, and all non-believers.

It’s a lot. But it set the tone for what viewers were to experience on Sarah’s channel: dodgy make-up and die-hard goth. The subsequent videos vary in popularity and quality, though they’re linked by a recurring theme: an undying love for all things undead. The videos are the perfect time capsule, offering up a rare insight into a lost subculture.

However, there’s more to it than meets the eye. Assuming the identity of Raven, Sarah managed to pull off one of the greatest feats of trolling seen on the Internet in recent years.

Taking inspiration from sites like 4Chan and Reddit, fertile grounds for your typical Internet troll, Sarah decided to practice the dark art of trolling. Her aim was to create a character so earnest, and yet so misguided in her allegiance to goth, that real goths everywhere would be incensed. Arming herself with some aggressively stylised eyeliner and the belief that nobody truly understood her, she decided to impersonate the most heinous of subcultures: the mall goth (or ‘baby goth’ as she calls them), an off-shoot of the fully-fledged goth movement that emerged in the late 90s. If the goth didn’t care, the mall goth cared too much, mainly about Good Charlotte, Hot Topic, and Edward Cullen.

‘I asked myself – what could I do that would really piss off little baby goth Sarah?’, she tells me.

And thus, Raven Acid Bath Princess of the Darkness was born.

And she was a success. The videos were an instant hit, and Sarah began to experience an archetypal virality. She soon learned, however, that entering the cultural conscious comes at a price.

‘The reception that Tara, Azer and I received on YouTube when we originally posted the videos was not good,’ she begins wearily. Some applauded her ingenuity, recognising Raven as a comedic creation, but most thought the videos were real. ‘And because the internet was a much different place back then,’ she continues, ‘we attracted a lot of comments from people who basically bullied us.’

She reads me a selection from the thousands of comments left by anonymous users. They’re difficult to listen to.

‘ “Ugly fast-ass fake bitches you’re not gothic you stupid fat fucking bitches the only reason you hate life is because the girl sitting right next to you is prettier than you you fat dumb-ass bitch and the girl next to you is a stupid poser both of you are ugly as fuck why don’t you go fuck each other that’s the only way you will ever get laid you ugly fat ass bitch why don’t you both go cut yourselves because you’re a waste of fucking space you fat fucking bitch ☺”,’ Sarah reads from her phone. ‘That was one run-on sentence by the way.’

Most involve some sort of critique of her appearance. Many include incitements to suicide or rape threats.

‘Oh here’s a good one,’ she says, ‘Hands down the best example of satire I have ever seen. Super talented kids, for sure.’ A momentary relief, but it’s quickly buried among countless threats and insults left by the anonymous mass.

‘As a very sensitive person, the comments really got to me after a while,’ she tells me, ‘there’s a difference between reading “haha go kill yourself” from an Internet stranger once a year, or once a week, but if it’s every day, year after year after year…that’s a lot. And it weighs on you.’

Things got worse after an interview with journalist Ethan Chiel was published. Chiel had spoken to the girls in order to address the false rumours circulating that Tara and Raven were the co-authors of My Immortal, an infamous work of Harry Potter fanfiction released at a similar time that likewise parodied the goth genre. The hate took on a new power, as trolls began to link Chiel’s interview to the videos, blurring the line between Sarah and Raven. ‘People were bringing my real self into the harassment,’ she tells me, ‘crossing that boundary.’

This is what led her to go incognito, ceasing to upload videos and denying all links to Raven. It’s also the reason she was reluctant to reclaim the identity all these years later. ‘We were worried that if we came forward it would be 2008 YouTube all over again and we would just be bombarded with people telling us that we were fat and ugly and should kill ourselves,’ she tells me, ‘we stopped paying attention because we assumed that it was going to be the same negative bullshit we’d been inundated with pretty much every single day since we started posting.’

During the years that Sarah was in hiding, the mystery of Tara and Raven became a self-sustaining mythology, with Internet users adding new strands to the narrative. There’s the video of a teen performing Little Talk’s Of Monsters and Men under the name Tara Rowe, dedicated to an unknown Raven. It’s a deliberately ambiguous video, with the comment section turned off, posted on an otherwise empty channel. An attempt to further engage with the mystery? Perhaps. Then there’s the conspiracy videos, with YouTubers speculating over the girls’ fate and, of course, the My Immortal saga. There’s a theatricality to the whole thing, the mystery becoming something much bigger than Sarah could ever have imagined.

Her desire to keep the secret was also due to her concerns for ‘Tara’, whose real identity remains anonymous to this day. Recalling the vitriolic comments referring to their weight they received back in 2008, it’s something she wishes to protect 2021 Tara from:

‘[Tara] recently had a kid and her pregnancy was rather complicated and, as a result, her body changed a lot. She doesn’t look the same way that she used to and she’s really self-conscious about it. As her older sister, I really hate that, because she gave birth to a human baby and I think that’s pretty impressive. But she’s not ready to come out yet because she doesn’t look the same and she knows that if she does come out she would be met with all these comments. She can’t deal with that right now.’

Sarah’s decision to finally re-emerge earlier this year is not one she took lightly. ‘I came out because I felt like I had to,’ she tells me, a result of the ‘internet manhunt’ that arose in the quest to discover Raven’s true identity. Sarah now works as a dominatrix under the pseudonym Petra Hunter. Things became difficult for her when her followers began to speculate that Petra was an older version of Raven. Having shared her real identity in Chiel’s interview, she was worried people would in turn make the link between Petra and Sarah.

‘Because I’m a sex worker that means I’m already an easy target for harassment,’ she tells me, ‘I’ve been in the adult industry for a little over 10 years now and while the public perception surrounding sex work is definitely changing a lot, it’s still really hard to shake the fear of someone finding out my true identity.’

Sarah had managed to successfully deny allegations that Petra was Raven for years, but her followers became more aggressive in their assertions after a TikTok video went viral linking her two alter-egos. Her Petra account gained hundreds of followers in a single day; she was tagged in comment threads full of Internet theorists. Her followers became obsessed with finding the truth, at whatever cost.

‘It was kind of scary,’ she tells me, though she recognises that their desire to ‘out’ her wasn’t necessarily malicious.

‘I think it comes from the fact that younger generations, the ones leading the manhunt, haven’t really grown up without the internet,’ she tells me, ‘A lot of people find it really hard to believe that not everyone has an online presence or that not everyone wants to be found. People are so used to being able to search for someone and find them and when you can’t find someone, instead of giving up, you just double down even harder. For a culture that is very online, we made it very, very hard to be found.’

Sarah was worried about what might be exposed in their pursuit of the truth: her name, her address, her family. ‘I felt like coming out was the only way that I could regain control of the situation,’ she tells me, ‘I can’t be doxxed if I dox myself. So it was basically a fucking power grab.’

Hearing this, I question whether the virtual pat on the back these Internet theorists so desperately crave is worth the consequences this detective work can have on the lives of people like Sarah. I can’t help but wonder if we have a responsibility to leave some mysteries unsolved.

‘There’s always going to be an allure to a mystery,’ Sarah tells me, ‘and Tara and I loved keeping the mystery alive. We loved watching people try to find us, but it was actually really scary when they did.’

‘It’s so tricky,’ she continues, ‘because even if you think you’re being safe about what you’re revealing about your suspect, you’re never really going to know whether or not the information you’re posting is safe. You’re never really going to know if it’s fine or not until…,’ she pauses, considering this for a moment, ‘until the person speaks for themselves.’

A section of her website reads: ‘Tara and I don’t have personal social media, as we both prefer to keep our private lives as offline as possible. Please don’t overstep those boundaries.’ Coming out as Raven has allowed Sarah to set these boundaries, but does she think people will respect them?

‘I hope so,’ she says, ‘more for Tara than for me. I’m really protective of Tara and she’s made it pretty clear that she’s not ready to come out.’

The reaction Sarah received in 2021 is worlds away from what she was expecting: ‘99% of the reception I’ve gotten has been people saying “you’re hilarious, you were such an important part of my childhood, your videos are so funny…” etc. It’s been a real mindfuck for me because I have lived so much of my life convinced that the opposite was true.’ With a dramatic increase in followers and a long-overdue outpouring of love for Raven and Tara, is part of her thankful to those who ‘outed’ her, give the success it has led to?

‘It’s complicated,’ she concedes, ‘I’m really glad that I came out as Raven now. It’s been great. There’s part of me that wants to say thanks. But I don’t want to set a precedent at all…I don’t know. It’s a really weird position for me to be in.’

And what about the next person? The next TikTok or Tumblr user who finds a clue that leads them down an Internet rabbit hole in search of an answer to a mystery that might expose someone who wishes to remain hidden, what advice would she give them?

‘Pursue it,’ she says, ‘but be careful with what you find.’

Image provided by Sarah.

Thoughts on Literary Awards

Elena Buccisano
-
0
Thoughts on Literary Awards

Literary awards and prizes have been around for centuries, with the first British Award for Literature established in 1919 (The James Tait Black Memorial Prize). However, the concept of awarding prizes for art and literature dates back to the Ancient Greeks who competed for prizes offered for the best plays. Interestingly, the endurance of literary awards shows no signs of lessening; arguably, they are only gaining in momentum as more and more publicity and prestige is being placed on the winners. Publishing and commercial decisions are increasingly being made on the outcome of these awards, as are the decisions of consumers, who look to these awards for their next read. In light of this rise, a series of questions surface: should awards and prizes have such a stronghold in the world of literature? Do they do more harm than good? Can writing be accurately measured in a contest?

Indisputably, literary awards are crucial in today’s publishing world. Booksellers and publishers have been quick to capitalise on the publicity generated by awards such as the Costa Book Awards and the Booker Prize. So why were these awards launched, and have they become simply a publicity opportunity? The Booker Prize, now one of the most prestigious literary awards, was set up in 1968 as a result of discussion between Booker and the Publishers Association about the need for a significant literary prize in Britain. Its aim was to “stimulate public interest and controversy, reward merit and increase the sales of books”. But how far have literary awards digressed from their aims? There is no surprise that the rise in the prestige of these awards has led, in turn, to an increase in publicity and prize money. The Booker Prize’s lucrative monetary sum of £50,000 blurs the line between culture and commerce; the literary value of a text therefore becomes more and more intertwined with its commercial value. However, this does not necessarily have to be viewed in a negative light. By industry standards the £50,000 prize is a substantial reward and indeed, rare in the literary world. This highlights that few authors today can afford to write solely for art’s sake; they must make a living in some way.

Although these awards often proclaim their intention to ‘reward merit’, the criteria for excellence in literature are entirely subjective which poses a major issue as to the validity of the awards. It may be argued that because the verdicts of a prize board are potentially liable to error, these prizes remind us uncomfortably closely of what the works being judged are about: the human condition. In this way, whether literature can ever be accurately valued is something certainly up for debate. The dual 2019 Booker prize win for Margaret Atwood and Bernardine Evaristo reminds us that distinguishing between the value of literary works is more difficult than it might seem. The judges’ decision to break the rules and jointly award the prize tells us that determining the merit of literary works can sometimes be a bit like comparing apples and oranges; every work can have a perceived value in its own and individual way. Although it can be said that, despite differences in taste, it is still possible to determine whether a work is inherently ‘good’ or ‘bad’, distinguishing between ‘good’ works is arguably, not entirely possible. The issue of social value set against artistic and commercial value prevents the formation of a comprehensive measure of worth. 

Literary awards not only impact the commercial success of authors and publishing houses, but also inform the canon of contemporary literature. Many Booker Prize-winning novels, like Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children, have ended up as set texts in schools or on university courses. Others, like The English Patient or Life of Pi, have been made into blockbuster films. Most significantly, however, writers who are longlisted or shortlisted for prestigious literary awards can expect an immediate boost in sales. Central to all of this is how literary prizes have embraced controversy by exploiting publicity to further its economic success. This reflects the philosophy that lies at the heart of such prizes, which have indeed stimulated ‘huge public interest, controversy and sales’. The Nobel Prize for Literature has been hit by a series of scandals in the last ten years, including the sexual assault scandal of 2018. The Swedish Academy, which oversees the prestigious award, suspended it in 2018 after numerous allegations against Jean-Claude Arnault, the husband of Academy member Katarina Frostenson. This incident also raises issues concerning the makeup of academies and awards committees. Arguably, those who decide these awards wield the most power in the sphere of literary awards; their qualifications, bias and background all play an implicit role in the committee’s decisions.

In light of the sexual assault scandal, the 2018 prize was instead awarded in 2019: Polish author Olga Tokarczuk was awarded the 2018 prize and Austria’s Peter Handke was awarded the 2019 prize. However, these decisions spun into their own scandal. Peter Handke, the playwright, novelist and poet, was recognised for ‘an influential work that with linguistic ingenuity has explored the periphery and the specificity of human experience’. However, his support of the Serbs during the 1990s Yugoslav Wars and his speech at the 2006 funeral of former Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic (who was charged with violating the UN Genocide Convention) was quickly brought to light. These events raised an important question within the sphere of literary awards: should a writer’s political views and actions outside of their work be considered as part of the deliberations for the award itself? And what role do literary awards have in dictating morality within the literary community? Effectively, the actions of this powerful literary institution gave a voice to an individual whose moral compass can be questioned; the lack of foresight and sensitivity exemplifies the potential for literary awards to harm literature and its associated communities.

As much as literary awards have run into issues over the past years, they are undoubtedly here to stay. Recent technological innovations have allowed us to discover new ways of assigning literary awards. The winners of the Goodreads Choice Awards are decided by the public through an online vote. In 2020, more than 5.6 million votes were cast; this method of allowing readers rather than literary judges to assign the awards may be the future of literary prizes. At the heart of this model is the theory that the combined judgement of millions of readers is best placed to determine a book’s value. Even though the Goodreads Choice Awards is not a longstanding award, it is a reflection of the preferences of readers and the way in which new technology can contribute to the spreading of literature. Nonetheless, critics of this model have voiced their opinions. They have cited the fact that some texts were condemned by their contemporary readership at the time of publication, but rehabilitated later on once social contexts had changed. Even so, the most obvious criticism of vote-based awards like Goodreads becomes clear upon consulting any bestseller list which acts as a similar, popularity-centric metric. These lists are based purely on sales and therefore, are arguably not good judges of literary merit. The increasingly intertwined relationship between literary awards and technology has also indicated a potential evolution in the profession of the author. The social media obsessed era we are currently living in has meant that authors are turning to the internet to promote and discuss their books. Online reviews by readers themselves have become even more important in the reception of a new book. Marketing knowledge is now becoming a crucial skill for a successful author.

The criteria for the awarding of literary prizes have also evolved and are set to evolve further. Arguably, one of the first indications of this change was Bob Dylan’s 2016 Nobel win for his lyrics, becoming the first songwriter to win the award. The Academy awarded him the prize “for having created new poetic expressions within the great American song tradition.” After the announcement, Sara Danius, the permanent secretary of the Swedish Academy, said, ‘we’re really giving it to Bob Dylan as a great poet – that’s the reason we awarded him the prize.’ The debate on whether his work merited this award or should have even been considered for this award was a lively one. Yet, the decision of the judges to award a songwriter and musical artist the most prestigious literary award shows their willingness to open up the term ‘Literature’ to various art forms. Indeed, as Salman Rushdie said, ‘the frontiers of literature keep widening, and it’s exciting that the Nobel prize recognises that.’

One thing is indisputable: so many cultures, over many centuries, have felt it vital to award prizes to works of literature— which is to say, literature and art in general is prized. Although their stronghold and increasing influence in the world of literature may cause anxiety for some, ultimately the concern that fuels our complaints about the Nobel, Pulitzer and Booker prizes is one about the ambiguities of value and merit, about who deserves it and how it operates. The nature of literature’s subjectivity means the choices of these juries should be taken with a pinch of salt, but what they do achieve is the spotlighting of works that us, as readers, might draw our own value from. Finally, in light of the ever-changing nature of the literary landscape and the possibility for new ways of determining literary value in the future, these prizes might just have to do for now.

Balliol College apologises for 300 years of taking money linked to the slave trade

Anvee Bhutani
-
0
Balliol College apologises for 300 years of taking money linked to the slave trade

The Master of Balliol College, Oxford has apologised for the historical acceptance of donations linked to the slave trade over the past 300 years. Dame Helen Ghosh, Master of Balliol College, said the college’s research showed that it had accepted the equivalent of £2 million in today’s money from benefactors with links to the slave trade. This accounts for around 10% of donations between 1600 and 1919.

Speaking to The Sunday Times, Ghosh said: “Of course, looking back on this now we are sorry that we took those donations — whatever might have been in the minds of people who took them at the time.”

Some of the donations came from the owners of slave plantations and those who owned ships that transported slaves. Ghosh described this connection as “highly regret[table] whatever the level of donation”. The research, which will be published later this year, also revealed that Balliol’s most notable benefactor is William Beckford, whose family owned a slave plantation and bought the Fonthill Estate in Wiltshire.

The college’s endowment is worth around £123 million. In recent years, the college has seen a wave of progressivism including starting a scholarship fund for black and ethnic minority students named after Sir Seretse Khama, the first president of Botswana and a former Balliol student. It has also taken measures including divesting from fossil fuels and increasing accessibility within the college. Ghosh is the former director-general of the National Trust where she established a research program to investigate how Britain’s great country homes were linked to the slave trade. 

Balliol’s decision is part of a series of steps taken by various colleges to help retrospectively rectify their relations with colonialism. All Souls College, recently paid a £100,000 grant to a college in Barbados in recognition of its funding from Christopher Codrington, a wealthy slave owner who left £10,000 to build a library. The building was also renamed in January in an effort to make amends over Oxford’s contentious history, though they have kept the statue of Codrington. A decision on whether Oriel College might remove their statue of Cecil Rhodes is also expected soon.

Balliol College has been contacted for comment.

Image Credit: Betty Longbottom/CC BY-SA 2.0

University sport captains and presidents urged to commit to taking action against sexual violence and discrimination

Maurício Alencar
-
0
University sport captains and presidents urged to commit to taking action against sexual violence and discrimination

CW: mention of sexual violence and discrimination

Atalanta’s, Oxford University’s society which promotes and supports women in sports, has released an open letter standing “in solidarity with those who have been affected by acts of sexual violence perpetrated by men, or discrimination based on their gender, sexuality or race”. The letter outlines various pledges of action against sexual violence and discrimination. The letter also invites Oxford sports captains and presidents to sign it in order to show that Oxford’s sports clubs “share these commitments” that hope to eradicate these behaviours from Oxford’s sporting societies. 

Founded in 1992, Atalanta’s aims to “recognise and foster the impressive achievements of sportswomen across the University”. The society is not exclusive to female members and the website states the society has members from over 24 sports clubs. Atalanta’s letter follows the death of Sarah Everard, as well as other recent discussions over forms of discrimination that occur every day. 

The letter wishes to take strong action against forms of sexual violence and discrimination and outlines its pledges to “facilitate a discussion on sexism, racism and other forms of discrimination among our community”. The letter also outlines its pledge in “supporting our members in holding our perpetrators accountable”, and to “put in place institutional changes within our society” so that forms of sexual assault and discrimination can be eradicated. 

The operationalisation of these pledges is also outlined in the letter. The society wishes to hold a “society wide discussion group” and create an “anonymous form” in order for experiences of sexual violence, harassment and discrimination can be registered and so that wrong behaviour does not occur again. The society also hopes to introduce a welfare secretary into its committee to “act as a go-to point for members”. 

As harassment and discrimination is an intersectional issue and some individuals may feel the effects even more commonly or acutely, the society hopes to introduce “leads” in its committee “so that the voices of BAME, LGBTQ+ and disabled members are always being considered”. 

The letter also addresses the Sports Federation, and requests for it to implement “a clearer and more sign-posted system for reporting harassment within the sporting environment”. The reporting system would be “open to all members of Oxford University” and “all teams should be made aware of this”. 

Sofia Baldelli, president of Atalanta’s Society, told Cherwell: “Following recent events, Atalanta’s recognised the need for change in the Oxford sport community in order for victims of sexual violence, harassment or discrimination to be supported sufficiently.

“Along with the changes we are implementing to our society and what we are asking of the Sports Federation, we are asking captains and presidents of Oxford University sports teams to sign this letter and pledge to bring about changes within their clubs so that everyone can feel safe and supported within Oxford sport.”


If you are a captain or president of a sports team, you can contact [email protected] or click on the link in Atalanta’s Instagram bio to sign the letter.

Image courtesy of Atalanta’s Society.

The Mechanicanon: AI and Literary Value

Edward McLaren
-
0
The Mechanicanon: AI and Literary Value

It has been said before that ‘the Canon’ is a fitting description for collected quality texts of literature, music, or art because of the fiery, and often explosive, debates that the constituent parts and powders end up releasing. Unlike many a preserved military device of the same name, no functional literary or artistic canon is a museum piece leftover from the Napoleonic Wars, even if a great proportion of their elements derive from such a period. Canons are loaded, ignited and fired into one another, not from opposing gunships (most of the time), but across the imaginary battlefields between Traditionalist and Activist intellectuals. As neither is at hazard of being genuinely blown up, their volleys continue.

These canonical debates have, since the dissimulation of many a national ideal or faith, consisted of a small number of a priori judgements based either in the heritage-value of writing about known authors or the justice-value of writing about unknown ones. It follows that these rows are as changeable as politics and as unempirical as religion. Yet, who is to say disorder is inevitable if we learn, over the coming years, to make our judgements of quality in art and literature as stern and knowable as those found in certain mathematical proofs? It is my fearful opinion that by exploiting the overlaps between literary study, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence we will eventually arrive at ‘The Mechanicanon’, a finite number of objective masterpieces, and fulfil this prophecy, even if doing so would consequently annihilate the very schools of analysis which have kept artwork human.

My argument presupposes that when the intelligent aspect of AI comes to surpass that of the human, in terms of accurately simulating reality, it will answer the question of why certain artworks bring many people a sense of absolution, communicated meaning, or quality. These AI selected texts shall form the Mechanicanon, which is so called because it at once describes a hyper-intellectual machine canon (Mechanicanon) and a device for measurement that exiles one consciousness in order to make severe judgements of the sense of absolution across many (Mechanicanon).

This sense of absolution is not the only emotional standard AI could find for enjoyment by simulating a generalised model of the human brain, but it is the only measurement for purpose and quality that seems to allow texts to be appreciated one generation after another, across cultures. This sense of absolution and its connection to the endurance of texts is similar to what a friend of Freud called the oceanic feeling in ‘Civilisation and Its Discontents’:

“. . . a feeling which he finds confirmed by many others, and which he may suppose is present in millions of people. It is a feeling which he would like to call a sensation of ‘eternity’, a feeling as of something limitless, unbounded, – as it were ‘oceanic’. This feeling . . . is a purely subjective fact, not an article of faith; it brings with it no assurance of personal immortality, but it is the source of religious energy which is seized upon by various Churches and religious systems . . . and doubtless exhausted by them.” (p. 24, Norton Standard Edition).

This is not to suggest that Freud’s (or my) explanation could ever calculate the sense of absolution in the same way that AI would measure it across the simulated brains of humanity. Instead, the inclusion of this paragraph is mainly meant to show that long before our species became aware of the mere potential for a Mechanicanon, we already knew of a common sense of intuited meaning that could be realised through an experience of religion or art.

Of course, it is also important to my argument that the friend in question becomes aware in this passage of the fact that the sense of absolution is at once utterly individual and common to all. According to them, the sense of absolution fulfils the private urges of the self and the implied urges of the collective, as if they were one and the same. It is a sense of universal shared meaning that can be channelled in ‘millions’ through their exposure to certain texts, and therefore implies a hierarchy distinguishing the texts that can generate this feeling from those that cannot.

As someone who experiences something like a sense of absolution just from reading the extract of Freud I have presented, I find it surprising that we have only recently found out this hierarchy of texts has a neurological basis common to many people. For instance, the still-developing field of music therapy identifies certain well-organised, harmonious and calming pieces as effectively reducing the symptoms of dementia in broad groups of patients provided they listen for approximately thirty minutes at a time. Patricia A. Tabloski was responsible for finding that the first movement of Mozart’s ‘Sonata for Two Pianos’ generated the ‘Mozart Effect’, an intelligence enhancement in patients perhaps to do with the organisation of the cortical firing pattern for spatial-temporal processes. The other piece that produced a similar response was Pachelbel’s ‘Canon’, which appeared, in the same experiment, to produce a calming effect on the emotions of numerous patients and on the limbic system and parasympathetic nerve system. Both these successful pieces are pieces with a history of criticism describing a responsive sense of absolution in the listener.

What is perhaps more interesting is the fact the subsequent study ‘Adjunct effect of music therapy on cognition in Alzheimer’s disease in Taiwan’ found the same music tended to produce the same effect on listeners despite their being of a different cultural background. As the study went, it found there was not much evidence at all that Pop Music, Dubstep or Rap create a comparable effect, even in the case of those few examples which are supposedly calming in nature. This rejects the argument that the sense of meaning or absolution we get from music or art is culturally determined. Instead, it indicates that certain ‘high’ artworks are not only more powerful in terms of the effects which they produce within us, but better for us; ameliorating our pain.

Nevertheless, I do not mean to equivocate the effect of music on the human brain with the effect of literature. There are already papers which suggest that a history of reading and writing can reduce the brain’s vulnerability to dementia, but as reading is a longer and more time-consuming task than listening to music, we are less certain that human studies would separate ‘high’ works from ‘low’ as simply as in the case of what is read as opposed to what is listened to. It should also be mentioned that the positive effects of ‘high’ music on the brain do not directly imply a sense of absolution in the listener. It could be that the participants experienced a sense of heightened intelligence without the awareness of eternity that Freud or myself describe. Such a standard of true quality, for all its rhetorical sense, could be indebted more to culture than biology. But even if this unlikelihood is true, it does not undermine my argument that an AI simulation of all humanity’s potential brains could find certain pieces of artwork that would always produce such positive effects as Tabloski describes as well as the sense of absolution which we describe.

As soon as AI develops to the stage where it can accurately simulate a person’s cognitive responses, it shall be able to effectively measure which texts, literary, musical or artistic, produce the sense of absolution according, not to our definition, but that of its own supreme intelligence. If it averages its study across all potential human brains of all cultures using all known texts, it shall either calculate a number that are pleasing to all or pleasing to each culturally divergent group of human being. In this sense, the Mechanicanon will either be one whole (provided that culture does not have a large effect on the neurology of what is the experienced sense of the absolute) or divided into several parts (provided that it does).

This second option of a Mechanicanon divided between cultures will not be ideal, but it will still be very useful as it shall inform critics that certain cultural modes of textual experience are incompatible. We should say that the aforementioned studies and the long history of cultural exchange between peoples do not imply this will be the case, yet, even if it were, the divided Mechanicanon produced would still calculate an absolute standard of value for an individual within his respective culture.

We must also remember that once AI reaches the stage in its development where it will be capable of these beyond-human measurements, it may well choose a different category for quality measurement than I generalise as the sense of absolution. I firmly believe that from my experiences it is this term that best describes what separates a ‘high’ or canonical text from a ‘low’ or non-canonical one. Still, this judgement has been inevitably skewed by my possession of a single human mind that cannot evaluate itself effectively.

An advanced future AI that can interrogate the mechanisms of many human minds while at once remaining an accurate and detached mathematical unconscious will find a better word, a higher standard, and perhaps a stronger sentiment that it will use to qualify the texts of which the Mechanicanon should be made-up. For example, it might be a memory and the sense of a common memory between people that produces the awe of reverence rather than the obscure and placeless sense that I have identified. Potentially, an AI’s advanced study of overlapping human memories and the sentiments of memory would spawn a Mechanicanon before an investigation into my ‘sense of absolution’ would.

But, whether my term comes close or far from describing the AI’s standard, the influence of its evaluations shall be as creative to any study of artwork as they shall be destructive. After a brief period of resistance, I believe the critic will become either a person of science or a disgruntled hobbyist. When an AI can learn to measure the values of texts quicker and better than they ever could, it is logical for them to take on the role of its translator to the general public or give up their office. The first, I must add, will only be possible if the AI in question does not become its own most effective translator and completely subordinate those intellectuals. I hold it highly unlikely that any field of literary or artistic scholarship shall survive beyond the professor’s book-club or the public theatre.

It is the unsolvable debates about the Canon which have kept the related schools of literature, art, and music in a state of ambivalence for as long as the sciences have created measurable progress. The Mechanicanon, in other words, shall be a school in itself that requires no human to listen to it. Or, to return one last time to the metaphor of the military cannon, this new one shall – by learning to load and fire itself – exile us from even counting as its projectile or target.

Artwork by the author

Oxford ACS responds to racial harassment incident at Christ Church

Jill Cushen
-
0
Oxford ACS responds to racial harassment incident at Christ Church

CW: Racism

The Oxford African and Caribbean Society has released a statement on a racial harassment incident at Christ Church, Oxford. The society has been monitoring a racial incident that involved two first-year students at the college who harassed Grace Oddie-James with the N-word on 28 November 2020. They stated that subsequent events have been “extremely distressing” and impacted the victim’s welfare. 

Oddie-James’ request to know the punishment of the perpetrators was denied by the college. The society described the denial of her request as “deeply concerning” for reasons of “transparency and justice”. 

The statement raises concerns over Christ Church’s commitment to rooting out anti-blackness and their protection of racial perpetrators. Oxford ACS stated: “We believe that justice cannot be sufficiently served if the college is willing to sacrifice the duty of care they have to Gracie both as a member of Christ Church and as a victim of racism, for the benefit of shielding her perpetrators from accountability.” They also made two “simple and clear” demands of the college: “that a) Christ Church let Gracie know how the perpetrators will be disciplined and b) reform their disciplinary process so in the future it sustains such transparency for victims.” 

In the statement, the society also said that throughout the last academic year, the college has shown “it can be a hostile and uncomfortable environment for undergraduates with black heritage” and so far concluded that “Christ Church have a disturbingly unclear disciplinary process”. 

An email, seen by Cherwell, was sent to all Christ Church students on Thursday, reminding them that within hours of hearing indirect reports of the incident, the college appealed to students to come forward with any relevant information or concerns. In the email, the Censors’ Office informed students: “A thorough internal investigation has since taken place, resulting in a disciplinary process which is ongoing.” They also said: “We are all committed to making Christ Church a place that is inclusive, diverse and welcoming for all students and all staff.” 

Christ Church also released a statement to Cherwell, stating that the college “will not tolerate racism in any form and has robust procedures in place to deal with such allegations”. 

Speaking of the racial harassment against Oddie-James, the college’s spokesperson said: “It became apparent that the incident involved a student who had been rapping along with a Notorious B.I.G. song, which included the n-word. A thorough internal investigation took place, resulting in a disciplinary process which is ongoing. Christ Church has received independent legal advice through​out, informed by best practice guidance for the higher education sector from the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, with due regard to all students’ rights to fair and confidential processes. Welfare support was also offered from the outset.”

“Christ Church is wholly committed to confronting racial bias, harassment and discrimination in any form. We treat reports of such matters extremely seriously. The whole of Christ Church continues to work together to ensure that the College is an inclusive, diverse and welcoming community for all students and all staff.”

Gracie Oddie-James told Cherwell: “Something that could have been dealt with in a matter of weeks has come to, in part, define my first year of university. I want to make it very clear that from the outset I strived to maintain a healthy and positive relationship with college. And yet constantly, their words failed to be harmonious with their actions. There is no trust to be had.”

She added: “That being said, the JCR have been brilliant and I especially want to thank Giulia Da Cruz (president) and Viren Shetty (ERM rep). Finally, I have seen some people pushing to reinstate the CHCH boycott. I want to remind students that this negatively impacts the few black students in the college – I think I speak for all when I say the JCR is more than willing to work through this alongside every college. Certainly, this will garner better results.” 

Image Credit: Andrew Abbott / CC BY-SA 2.0

Oxford societies respond to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill

Flora Dyson
-
0
Oxford societies respond to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill

Oxford societies have responded to the government’s controversial Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill which passed its second reading on 15 March 2020. The bill seeks to place greater restrictions on protests and gives police power to place constraints on demonstrations, including their time span and noise levels. As well as addressing protest restrictions, the bill also increases sentences for serious criminals, including sexual offenders. There have been protests across England about the bill, including clashes with police in Bristol.

The government website says the new measures  “uphold the right to peaceful protest while providing the police with the necessary powers to stop disruptive protests from disproportionately infringing on the rights and freedoms of others.” The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill is opposed by the Labour Party. No Labour MPs voted in favour of the bill and all Liberal Democrat MPs voted against it. Though opposing the bill, Leader of the Opposition, Kier Starmer, has condemned violent ‘Kill the Bill’ protests. 

The bill is opposed by Oxford University Labour Club (OULC). In a statement released after the bill’s second reading, OULC said they “oppose [the bill] in the strongest possible terms.” OULC believes the legislation “is indicative of a worrying trend tending towards the adoption of dangerous, authoritarian policies by this government, and amounts to a threat to the UK’s democracy”. 

OULC believes it gives governments “the power to shut down outlets of expression which are often utilised by the most marginalised and unrepresented in society”, and reflects the Home Secretary’s, Priti Patel, “deep seated antipathy towards many protests, deeming the Black Lives Matter Movement ‘dreadful’ and Extinction Rebellion ‘eco-crusaders turned criminals’”. The society “urges its members and the student community to protest against the bill in a peaceful, legal and covid-secure way”. 

Oxford University Liberal Democrats (OULD) have also condemned the bill in a Facebook statement, arguing that it will undermine freedom of expression. The president of OULD, Asher Weisz, said that “the bill will massively constrain the ability of all people to protest by giving the Government sweeping new powers to take action if one person is ‘annoyed’ by a protest.” Weisz says the new measures are “an escalation of the Government’s already authoritarian attitude to protest”.

Oxford Civil Liberties Society, a non-partisan group, has released a statement saying “governments having sole power to decide which protests deserve to be heard is an affront to democracy.” They oppose the legislation on the grounds that it “risks allowing governments to decide which voices are heard, further marginalising those who are often ignored at election time. Peaceful protest is vital to democracy as it allows people to show their opposition to the government of the day”.

An online event run by campaigns such as Oxford Stand Up To Racism and Oxford Extinction Rebellion was used to speak out against the bill. On their Facebook page, Oxford Stand Up To Racism argued that the bill targets Black Lives Matter, the Gypsy Roma Traveller community, and activists for women’s rights. 

OUCA has been contacted for comment. 

Launch of the University’s Sustainability Strategy: ‘net zero carbon and biodiversity net gain by 2035’

Matilda Gettins
-
0
Launch of the University’s Sustainability Strategy: ‘net zero carbon and biodiversity net gain by 2035’

The University’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy has become policy, following recent approval by the University Council. The key goals of the strategy are to “achieve net zero carbon and biodiversity net gain by 2035”. Funding will be supplied via the Oxford Sustainability fund, whose sources will include “[existing] sources of sustainability funding” and “ [a] sustainability charge on business flights”.

The strategy is composed of ten priority areas, which are research, curriculum, carbon emissions from energy consumption on the University estate, biodiversity, sustainable food, sustainable resource use, international travel, local travel, investments and learning from the pandemic. It contains concrete commitments in all areas, as well as four enablers which are governance, reporting, funding, and offsetting.

The strategy has been shaped by the student body. A consultation began in Autumn 2019, with the Oxford University Climate Assembly in the Sheldonian. The latest consultation in November 2020 took the form of an online survey, which received over 1200 responses. Students had the option to prioritise areas of action and comment on the strategy. In response, it has been adjusted to put greater priority on climate education as well as research and education around environmental justice. The strategy covers only the University, and not College policy.

“[It] is crucial the strategy is followed as a priority, and that individual Oxford colleges follow suit in setting net-zero targets” said the Action Director at Oxford Climate Society, Ellie Holton. The Decarbonise Oxford Campaign is using JCR motions to make colleges commit to net-zero policy. The strategy also contains no restrictions on conducting research for, or in collaboration with, fossil fuel companies. 

“By maintaining financial and institutional ties with the fossil fuel industry,” says Oxford Climate Justice Campaign (OCJC), “our University perpetuates the unjust global power that these companies wield.” The campaign is currently writing a report which outlines links between Oxford and the fossil fuel industry, which will be published on 19 April 2021. Oxford Climate Society and OCJC are part of a collaboration of four student campaigners, working together with Oxford Student Union and Oxford Nature Conservation Society. Together they published a joint press release welcoming the University’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy, but warned that “there’s more to be done”.

Image Credit: Harry_nl/CC BY-NC 2.0

The UN Anti-Racism Day protests in Oxford in photos

Anvee Bhutani
-
0
The UN Anti-Racism Day protests in Oxford in photos

The UN Anti-Racism day, which occurs annually on the 20th of March, was adopted in 1966 as a way to protest racial inequality and discrimination. This year, in line with COVID-19 restrictions, socially distanced protests took place across the country to spotlight the anti-racism movement which has been growing since last year, not only in the UK and US but globally. The protest aimed to spotlight structural racism and healthcare inequalities which have grown under the current government, particularly in the context of the pandemic.

In Oxford, at 1 PM on Saturday, protesters and activists gathered outside Oriel College and lined up across the High Street. They were seen chanting slogans like “Rhodes Must Fall” and “Black Lives Matter” and placards and posters read “Oxford Benefits From White Supremacy”, “Defend the Right to Protest” and “No to Racism. No to Fascism”. At one point, the protesters knelt down with closed fists raised in a moment of solidarity.

The goal of the protest was to “come together united against racism, Islamophobia, antisemitism and fascism [and] stand in solidarity with refugees and migrants to send a powerful message to those in power that racism will be defeated.” The in-person demonstration was followed by an International Zoom event which featured global speakers who highlighted their personal experiences with racism. 

The following photos have been provided at the courtesy of the Rhodes Must Fall Oxford Campaign.

Modern musicals and new writing: where did musical theatre leave off?

Katie Kirkpatrick
-
0
Modern musicals and new writing: where did musical theatre leave off?

CW: Addiction, rape, homophobia, conversion therapy, depression

When theatres around the world closed a year ago, many of the hit shows were film adaptations like Frozen and Moulin Rouge, or jukebox musicals like Tina. While the apparent lack of original musicals can feel disheartening, there’s actually a lot of original work out there. Having spent much of lockdown getting obsessed with recent musicals of varying levels of obscurity, I decided to look at the different ways in which theatre has been growing and changing. 

A New Classic

An obvious place to start is with the most recent winner of the Tony award for Best New Musical: Hadestown. Written by Anais Mitchell and directed by Rachael Chavkin, the show reimagines the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice with a political edge, incorporating haunting vocal harmonies and an incredible set. Hadestown is a show that restores your faith in modern musicals, as it feels like a new twist on the classic musical. The elaborate set and evocative lighting make it feel like something from another world, and the writing combines soulful ballads that wouldn’t be out of place in the musicals of yesteryear with a folk vibe and an eclectic mix of voices. Hadestown manages to be universal enough to appeal to all kinds of theatregoers, while still offering something we haven’t seen before. 

Reinventing the Jukebox Musical

While normally I’m decidedly not a fan of jukebox musicals, recent Broadway hit Jagged Little Pill stands out from the genre and feels fresh. Morissette’s songs – the soundtrack to generations of teen angst – are cleverly rearranged, and three new songs flesh out the piece well. Its staging is hugely creative, with choreographer Sidi Larbi Cherkaoui creating an enthralling mix of dance and physical theatre. What sets JLP apart from the bulk of jukebox musicals, in addition to its new material, is the way in which many of the songs are completely reinvented: break-up anthem ‘You Oughta Know’ features lyric changes that make it specific to an LGBT relationship, and ‘That I Would Be Good’ is made into a trio reflecting three different characters’ conflicts with their families. The storyline itself also feels pressingly relevant without being forced: it centres on issues like presciption drug addiction and rape, while also touching on sexuality and race. Perhaps, sometimes, the challenges of using an existing catalogue of songs can give new writing more scope. 

LGBT Representation

Many recent shows have strived to discuss issues that feel relevant to audiences today – last year saw Netflix release the film adaptation of The Prom, an original show based on a true story about a lesbian student who wasn’t allowed to attend her high school prom with her girlfriend. Following in the footsteps of the Tony-winning Fun Home, the Broadway production put its lesbian protagonist in the spotlight and cast several LGBT actors, thus vastly improving representation in theatre where it’s been lacking. Until recently, there have been very few musicals centring the experiences of female LGBT characters, with the most recognised characters being Maureen and Joanne in RENT or the lesbians that appear in the second act of Falsettos. With Fun Home and The Prom leading the way, we can expect more to come: in 2019 I was impressed by a workshop production based on the cult film But I’m a Cheerleader, and there’s a lot of buzz around Lempicka, also directed by Rachel Chavkin, which is headed to Broadway. 

Mental Health

While the first show to come to mind on this topic will for many be smash hit Dear Evan Hansen, a particularly promising production in the works is It’s Kind of a Funny Story. Based on the book of the same name by Ned Vizzini, the author of Be More Chill, Funny Story is about a teenager called Craig who is diagnosed with depression and admitted to an adult mental health ward. For a storyline that sounds so gloomy, the show is surprisingly witty and candid, while still not shying away from the realities of mental illness. There’s yet to be a fully staged production, but YouTube videos are available of a workshop performance that features Dear Evan Hansen’s Colton Ryan, and it seems a run is expected in the not-too-distant future. Considering the success of Evan Hansen and the conversations about mental health being had in so many cultural spheres, we can surely expect more shows to tackle difficult themes head-on. 

Social Media

That’s not to say all new writing has to be serious and emotional. In recent years, platforms like Twitter and TikTok have become a huge part in finding an audience for new writing. A musical that’s recently gained popularity via sites like YouTube and Twitter is Preston Max Allen’s We Are the Tigers. The show, which had an Off-Broadway production in 2019, is a slasher comedy about a cheerleading sleepover which turns into a murder mystery. Its strength comes from the humour that runs through the book, as well as a soundtrack full of belting and tight harmonies. Shows have also begun to use social media in their scripts and staging – one such show is the Australian Fangirls by Yve Blake, about a 14-year-old girl who will do absolutely anything to meet her boyband idol. This is a trend we are likely to see continue, especially emerging from a time when all our interaction has been digital.

Who’s to say whether theatres will be able to open in June as planned? But regardless of when exactly the curtain rises again, there are plenty of promising new shows out there. Recent shows are pushing boundaries, and appealing to younger generations by talking about issues that matter to them. And with so many exciting writers, directors, and choreographers still creating original work, there’s so much more to come. 

Image credit: Ajay Suresh via Flickr & Creative Commons.

1...331332333...2,486Page 332 of 2,486

Support Student Journalism

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

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

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

Website by James Ashley