Thursday, May 15, 2025
Blog Page 347

Colleges announce vacation policies

Charlie Hancock
-
0
Colleges announce vacation policies

Following the unveiling of the government’s roadmap out of Lockdown in England on February 22nd, Oxford University announced that restrictions in place over the vacation between Hilary and Trinity terms would mean that students currently living in Oxford “should not move from your [their] term-time address, unless you [they] have a legal exemption to do so”.

In December, students had been allowed to leave their term-time addresses for the Christmas vacation. However, this exemption to travel restrictions does not apply for the Easter vacation.

The news that they would not be able to return home was met with alarm by students on social media, many of whom returned to live in college for academic or welfare reasons which would affect their ability to study remotely from home during the term. 

In emails seen by Cherwell, colleges have outlined their policies for students who are resident in college at the end of Hilary term. In line with government guidance, students who wish to return home for the vacation may do so provided they have an exemption under government guidance. 

Hertford College told their students that they “need to remain” in College accommodation unless they “feel you [they] have an exemption from the national restrictions”. Students who remain in college accommodation will not need to request vacation accommodation at the end of Hilary as they usually would.

Mansfield said they “assumed” that anyone living in on or off-site College accommodation would remain there “for the durations of the Easter vacation”. The College added they felt the guidance “places the onus on the student” to decide whether they are eligible to leave.

Keble, Magdalen and St Hugh’s also said that it was up to students to decide whether government guidance would allow them to return home. St Hugh’s added “College is not in a position to provide a ruling on whether a student is able to return home”.

Guidance from the government provides examples of “reasonable excuses” to travel, which include work, meeting others for care purposes, and “essential activities” such as accessing shops. There are also “further reasonable excuses.”

Cherwell approached Jon Heath, a partner at Levin’s Law, to explain how the exceptions applied to students. “Ideally, students would be able to rely on one or more named exceptions [from the guidance], because this is more certain than hoping that a police officer (who may decide to issue a fixed penalty notice) or magistrates’ court will accept an unspecified excuse as reasonable.”

Mr Heath added: “Students who suffer from mental illnesses such as depression may be able to rely on the exception ‘to avoid injury or illness or to escape a risk of harm’, though we think the authorities will be particularly alert to the risk of abuse of this exception. We would not recommend that students rely on it unless they have a documented history of illness, and it would be advisable to obtain a supportive doctor’s note.”

Students also raised concerns about having to pay residency fees over the vacation. According to policies seen by Cherwell, most colleges are charging rent at normal rates, albeit with various forms of financial assistance available.

Mansfield has reduced vacation rent from £17.38 per night to £8.69. Some students have been granted free vacation residence from the Senior Tutor, and finalists have access to 10 days of free residence.

Mr Heath told Cherwell: “returning home for the vacation in order to avoid such extra charges is likely to amount to a reasonable excuse, particularly given the precarious state of most students’ finances. We [Levin’s Law] emphasise that this is only our opinion and will remain so unless or until a case comes before the courts, so students should be mindful of the risk that a police officer or a court may reach a different conclusion.”

Mr Heath added that although Colleges did not have the power to force students to stay, they could penalise students who left. “Colleges and universities invariably have broad powers to discipline students for conduct which, while lawful, is undesirable in their eyes…We would like all universities and colleges to commit to not disciplining students for breaches of coronavirus restrictions if the student would have a sound defence in law to a criminal charge or can show that they believed in good faith that they had such a defence, even if that proves to be mistaken.”

Levin’s Law has offered to “correspond with colleges free of charge on behalf of any affected student”.

Mansfield told Cherwell: “Colleges will support students already in residence to stay in Oxford in order to comply with the guidance if necessary. It is up to each student to decide whether they feel the guidance allows them to travel home for an Easter break.”

Current guidance from the University states that students should remain in their University accommodation unless an exemption applies. The University guidance continues: “It is possible the guidance may change around 29 March, as part of the next stage of the Government’s easing of restrictions. If this is the case, we will inform you as soon as we can.”

Further information about the vacation and returning to Oxford can be found here.

Image: WolfBlur via pixabay.com

Winners of Oxford’s Beyond Boundaries competition announced

Flora Dyson
-
0
Winners of Oxford’s Beyond Boundaries competition announced

The winners

The competition was developed to increase the inclusion and visibility of Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic scientists and mathematicians and involves students creating art based on the profiles of six BAME researchers from STEM departments at the University of Oxford. There were 215 entries from school pupils in Oxfordshire.

Winners were selected from each year group by a panel of judges. One of the winners was Bethany Atherton, whose entry drew from the profile of Acheampong (Aché) Atta-Boateng and his research on bees and the pollination of cacao flowers.

Atherton said in a statement included in the University’s announcement: “Winning this feels absolutely amazing. I love to draw and spend most of my time doing this. To be able to include a strong message in my drawings that others will now see, makes it even more exciting. My grandparents keep bees and so Aché Atta-Boateng’s research about pollination jumped out at me, as this is a topic that is very close to my heart.”

Winners of this competition receive an opportunity to have their work displayed in the upcoming Beyond Boundaries exhibition in the Oxford University Museum of Natural History and are awarded £100. Runners up in each year category received £50.

The competition was noted in the university’s Diversity Awards 2020 for raising awareness of diversity in scientific research.  Daisy Hung, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Manager, MPLS Division, Oxford University, said: “It was a great opportunity for us to highlight the incredible researchers of colour in the Division and to show young people that they can be scientists too.”

Emmanuelle Dankwa, one of the researchers whose profiles were featured in the competition, also highlighted how she learnt from the experience, saying: “Participating in Beyond Boundaries has not only helped me think more deeply about the ways in which I communicate my research to non-experts, but has also afforded me the wonderful privilege to share my story to inspire a young person out there to aspire to careers in STEM.”

Entries to the competition can be viewed on the Beyond Boundaries website.

University delays foundation year rollout

Issy Kenney-Herbert
-
0
University delays foundation year rollout

Oxford University has delayed the implementation of “Foundation Oxford”, which will offer students with high academic potential a place on a one-year pre-degree course. This initiative is based on the Foundation Year programme that has already been in place at Lady Margaret Hall since 2016. The University announced this delay at the end of January.

The University announced its plans to launch “Foundation Oxford” in 2019, with the timeline for the uni-wide foundation year to be in place by 2022. However, Oxford University has since said this will be delayed until 2023.

The initial announcement stated this programme “will be offered to state school students from less advantaged areas and who have also experienced personnel disadvantage or a severely disrupted education. Eligible students could include refugees, children in care or those who are themselves carers or estranged from their families… Those who pass the course will then progress to undergraduate study at Oxford.” Once the initiative is up and running, it is expected that the programme will support up to 50 students every year across selected subjects. 

Cambridge University also announced a new foundation year program for students, with up to 50 Foundation Year students to arrive in the programme’s first intake in October 2022. 

Alan Rusbridger, Principal of LMH said to Cherwell: “We’re naturally disappointed that the start of Foundation Oxford has slipped a year. This programme builds on the pioneering work at LMH, which itself is based on 20 years of experience at Trinity College Dublin. 

It’s heartening that Cambridge University will launch its own Foundation year scheme in 2022 and we have given them all the help we can. We are also reassured by Oxford’s promise that it is still determined to launch Foundation Oxford in 2023. We are currently recruiting a 6th cohort for the continuing LMH programme – and very much hope to continue our own scheme through to 2023.”

This programme was announced alongside the other access initiative Opportunity Oxford that helps to prepare talented UK offer holders from under-represented backgrounds for successful student careers at our university: “Under the programme, selected Oxford offer-holders participate in an academic bridging programme which supports them in their transition from school or college to our university.”

David Lammy, the MP who has been a prominent critic of Oxbridge admissions for disadvantaged and minority ethnic students, said the new foundation year was “a major step forward.” He went on to further state “These changes continue to allow Oxford’s 38 autonomous colleges enormous discretion over how seriously to take access. For true systemic change to be achieved, admissions should be centralised and contextual data should be used at every stage in the admissions process.”

A spokesperson for the University told Cherwell: “In light of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the University has taken the difficult decision that the first year of its Foundation Oxford access scheme will be 2023, rather than 2022 as originally planned. Foundation Oxford remains a keystone of our ambitions to admit more state school students from underrepresented backgrounds, along with the successfully launched Opportunity Oxford bridging scheme.

“Now in its second year, we have just made 167 Opportunity Oxford offers to students and the University remains on track to meet its targets for admitting students from more disadvantaged backgrounds. We are increasing the academic support we provide to students impacted by the pandemic, which has highlighted educational inequalities. We are also continuing the development work on the Foundation Oxford course and will announce more details in due course.

“Opportunity Oxford builds on the success of a bridging programme at University College, while Foundation Oxford has grown out of a five-year pioneering trial at Lady Margaret Hall (LMH). Nearly 50 students from under-represented backgrounds have been admitted for the LMH Foundation Year. The very first student to graduate from the scheme last year obtained a first-class honours degree in music. We hope that the Lady Margaret Hall programme may be extended for a further year to continue to develop learning and to share experience before the launch of the University-wide programme.”

Image Credit: Herbi1922/CC BY-SA 4.0

07/03/21, 11:56 – this article was edited to include a comment from the University.

Citizen scientists study polar bears with Oxford researchers

Rochelle Moss
-
0
Citizen scientists study polar bears with Oxford researchers

Oxford University scientists are working alongside a group of Canadian researchers to involve citizen volunteers in a project which aims to examine polar bear behaviour. Utilising 10 years worth of images volunteers will assess a series of photos which will reveal trends in polar bear behaviour. 

The project is the first of its kind and hopes to broaden current knowledge on polar bear behaviour. When it began in 2011 the primary aim was to answer whether the creation of field camps had worked to attract or repel polar bears. The aims of the project have now expanded in scope and hope to answer important questions including: What drives polar bears to visit human infrastructure or activity? Do observations of polar bears change over time?

The project runs on Zooniverse, a platform for citizen science, hosting over 2 million volunteers who assist researchers in analysing and organising data. The Zooniverse website shows that there are currently 1358 volunteers supporting the research. The Arctic Bears project asks these volunteers to study batches of photos alongside a field guide. The volunteers provide the researchers with information on the number of bears or cubs, their genders, and multiple other factors. There are five trail cameras installed at three different field camps, as well as another eight located at the Churchill Northern Studies Centre. These cameras have captured over 600 different polar bears. Whilst all the cameras are located in Wapusk National Park in northern Manitoba, the sites are almost 200 kilometres apart which ensures the data provides information on varying environments.

The unique approach taken by the Arctic Bears Project carries many benefits. The process is very efficient and without the support of volunteers the labour intensive work could take years for the researchers to complete. Creating ‘citizen scientists’ also encourages active participation from those who would otherwise be detached from the process. Individuals are able to become more involved as well as gain a greater understanding of the issues. Finally the process is non-invasive, meaning it is not stressful for the animals being studied. 

One of the project’s most notable discoveries so far is capturing black bears, grizzly bears, and polar bears living together for the first time. The cameras have also confirmed the pattern of polar bears moving from the sea to land in Summer and Autumn, when the ice melts.

Image: Hans-Juergen Mager via unsplash.com

Xie elected Oxford Union president, BRIDGE slate wins all major positions

Charlie Hancock and Abigail Howe
-
0
Xie elected Oxford Union president, BRIDGE slate wins all major positions

Chengkai Xie has been elected president of the Oxford Union for Michaelmas 2021, winning 520 first preferences or 72.6% of the vote. Xie was the Librarian of the Oxford Union in Hilary 2021.

The Bridge slate has also won all other major positions:

Librarian: Michael-Akolade Ayodeji, Bridge, with 72.4% of the vote.

Treasurer: Arjun Bhardwaj, Bridge, with 79.9% of the vote.

Secretary: Larissa P. Sidarto, with 79.9% of the vote.

This marks a victory for the BRIDGE slate which ran unopposed for almost all major positions this term and pledged to democratise events (with speaker, debate and Q&A suggestions), along with setting up Foundation Year memberships and tiered-access for the Union. They also committed to platforming marginalised voices and beginning a state school outreach programme.

ALTERNATIVE pledged to “arrange a charity event for homelessness in Oxford”, host more speakers to discuss human rights and to “make sure everyone reads the standing orders and understands them”.

PROGRESS promised to host a panel on the future of the African Union, improve the speaker diversity ratio, reduce membership fees and guarantee access member committee interviews.

This marks the third time the Union has held elections online. 

Ayesha Khan (BRIDGE), Eu Ro Wang (BRIDGE), Rachel Ojo (PROGRESS), Ahmad Nawaz (ALTERNATIVE) and William Feasey (BRIDGE) have been elected to the Standing Committee.

Alfred Dry (BRIDGE), Olya Kotova (PROGRESS), Shariq Haidery (ALTERNATIVE), Arpan Kumar De, Kate Zhu (PROGRESS), Naman Gupta (PROGRESS), Grace Oddie-James (BRIDGE), Ambika Sehgal (BRIDGE), Declan Nelson (BRIDGE), Charlie Mackintosh (BRIDGE) and Eliza Dean (ALTERNATIVE) have been elected to the Secretary’s Committee.

Image Credit: Barker Evans.

Seen and not heard: the film industry’s troubled relationship with female directors

Scarlett Colquitt
-
0
Seen and not heard: the film industry’s troubled relationship with female directors

The film industry has a problem with female directors. 

This should not be too much of a tendentious statement to make given Hollywood’s track record with equality. There is still a glaringly obvious lack of women heading up films, and the fact that Kathryn Bigelow remains to this day the only female recipient of the Academy Award for Best Director is testament to this painfully slow progress.

The issue is inherently rooted in the maxim that women should be seen and not heard. Whilst no-one but the most overtly sexist among us would dare to repeat such a statement in earnest nowadays, it encapsulates the way in which the film industry continues to treat women despite ostensible attempts to level the playing field. When women are in front of the camera, they are very often seen through the male gaze, perhaps as Tarantino’s muse or as a Bond Girl playing out the latest hazily-sketched male fantasy. 

When women dare to direct a film, they are more likely to be listened to if they soften their perspective and do not shake the boat too much. Female directors are viewed as women first and foremost, and then directors.

Women’s stories are often diluted to suit commercial tastes. But this stifling of artistic freedom is not the only issue that female directors face. There is a tendency to view female directed films as one homogeneous block, as if all women view the world through the same narrow lens. It would be absurd to suggest that Michael Bay and Charlie Kaufman somehow have the same directorial vision, just as it is to suggest that Agnès Varda may have something innately in common with Sofia Coppola beyond their womanhood. Yet critics and viewers alike fall into the trap of looking for ever-tenuous links between the artistic vision that binds female directors together and in doing so, become blind to the deliberate ambiguities and contradictions that underpin the vast oeuvres of these directors.

The veneer of softness that critics clumsily paint on female directed films belies the important, and often ignored, critical messages that lie beneath. There are a plethora of female directors creating films that are anything but “soft” or homogeneous. Greta Gerwig’s ​Ladybird presents the raw struggles of teenagehood and the indissoluble bonds between mother and daughter. Emerald Fennell’s ​Promising Young Woman does away with the idea of a “good girl” and presents a revenge narrative that is shot in Barbie pink but doesn’t not lose any of its kick. Céline Sciamma’s ​Portrait of a Lady on Fire deals with the notion of looking and observing in its most artistic sense, shunning the male gaze that has traditionally cast a shadow over the depiction of femininity as an artistic endeavour. These women refuse to be shoehorned into one genre or one set notion of what it means to be a director who just so happens to be a woman.

The problem is that female directors often find themselves in a Catch-22 situation. If they focus on femininity, relationships or the woes of womanhood, their films are accused of being sickeningly saccharine and overly sentimental. If they choose not to focus on these issues, they are accused of having turned their backs on other women and their stories.

When women write action films or war epics, their attempts are seen as nothing more than a pale imitation of anything that a male director could create. When they have a go at directing a rom-com, their films are dismissed as trivial stories that will only interest women (conveniently forgetting about Richard Curtis, the de facto king of the cheesy rom-com.)  Male directors are afforded more opportunities to be taken seriously for the stories that they tell under whichever genre they choose.

There is also a disparity in the way in which the film industry awards and venerates directors. Male directors can bounce back from a few slightly mediocre films or even a box-office flop or two. Fuelled by delusions of grandeur – or even by delusions of adequacy – some male directors ride on the coattails of critical acclaim. In contrast, female directors have to keep proving themselves time after time, film after film, in order to keep their place in the hallowed halls of prestige and critical acclaim. 

Female directors are living proof that all those who identify as a woman should be both seen and heard through a multitude of perspectives, including through the intersection between gender, race, sexuality and class. There is progress being made, slowly but surely, and the inclusion of three female directors in the Golden Globes nominations is welcome news. Female directors from around the world are increasingly getting their voices heard and shouting from the rafters for more equality. Let’s hope that their voices keep getting amplified.

Dip your toe into Schitt’s Creek

Mikaela Choo
-
0
Dip your toe into Schitt’s Creek

Schitt’s Creek is a show where the main character talks to her many, many wigs. It is a show which manages to make a storyline about bedwetting genuinely romantic. It is a show that’s set the record for most Emmy wins for a comedy in a single season. It is a show that you need to be watching right now.   

Co-created by Eugene Levy and Dan Levy, who are father and son both on and off screen, Schitt’s Creek begins with the formerly ultra-rich Rose family moving into a motel room in the titular small town, bought by Johnny Rose for his son David as a gag gift (as you do). It delivers on the crude comedy its title promises. The Roses are great at being socialites, but not so great at being good people, or at being a family. The process of them working on these things is really, really funny.

Catherine O’Hara as matriarch Moira Rose is a revelation. Exhibit A: her eccentric accent, which is both a source of laughter and a subject of actual linguistic analyses. Exhibit B: everything she says in that accent, like her nuggets of parental wisdom (“Gossip is the devil’s telephone. Best to just hang up.”) and advice about posting nudes online, (“Never! Never without good lighting!”) 

More than anything, Schitt’s Creek is kind. It’s kind to its characters. As easy it would be to reduce the Roses to caricatures, they are portrayed as human (or at least, as trying their best to be human). They’re relatable (even despite the fact that David, a grown man, thinks that the minimum wage is $45/hour). But the joy of the show doesn’t come from watching the Roses do crazy things and thinking to yourself, “What planet are they from?!” It comes from watching the Roses do crazy things and make mistakes and learn to be kind to eachother, all while staying true to their eccentric selves. Like when Alexis shows up to her brother’s wedding in a wedding dress (“This is not a wedding dress! It’s a white full-length gown!”) and walks him down the aisle, which is simultaneously sweet and also borderline incestuous – a brand of funny that only Schitt’s Creek could pull off.

And the show is, I think, one of those rare gems that is more than just a comedy and is really, actually a WAY OF LIFE. And not in the way that I tell myself The Office is to justify watching it for the millionth time. What Schitt’s Creek does better than any other show on television is make you look at the world with kinder eyes. It blesses us with David and Patrick, the couple at the heart of what is hands-down the best love story on television. And gives us a revolutionarily casual depiction of a community without homophobia. This depiction is meaningful because it doesn’t moralise – it shows us what life could be like. Dan Levy perfectly articulates the magic of this: “If you put something like that (homophobia) out of the equation, you’re saying that… shouldn’t exist.”

If you watch just one episode, it has to be Season 4, Episode 6: “Open Mic.” It starts with Moira finding her co-workers’ sonogram on her desk and responding as any mother/long-time benign neglecter of her children would, by asking, “Who put a picture of a ghost on my desk??” More funny stuff is said and then we get to Patrick, who suggests hosting an open mic night, much to David’s horror. But when Patrick serenades David with Tina Turner’s “The Best”, you can see the mortification on David’s face melting into tenderness, and then David is tearing up and his mother Moira is tearing up and so are you. Schitt’s Creek will win you over. It is, quite simply, the best.

Art by Emma Hewlett

Central Oxford to be closed while new Netflix show filmed

Jill Cushen
-
0
Central Oxford to be closed while new Netflix show filmed

CW: mention of rape.

Areas of central Oxford will be closed later this month for the filming of the Netflix series Anatomy of a Scandal.

A notice was released by Oxfordshire County Council earlier this week which informed residents of the closures of streets in the city centre on March 25th and 26th. Catte Street and New College Lane road will be closed from 6pm to 2am on the 25th. On March 26th Brasenose Lane, Catte Street, St Mary’s Passage and Radcliffe Square will be closed from 2.30pm to 2am.

The six episode series will follow the storyline of the best-selling novel by Sarah Vaughan. The author, who read English at Brasenose College, is also the executive producer of the Netflix adaptation. The novel tells the story of a scandal shrouded in privilege and intrigue among the British elite and the women caught in its crossfires. The show, from the creator of Big Little Lies David E. Kelley, is directed by S.J. Clarkson, who has worked on Succession and Orange Is the New Black.

Netflix describe the show as “an insightful and suspenseful series about sexual consent and privilege set in London”. When James Whitehouse, a Westminster politician, is accused of raping his young reseacher and mistress his marriage and the lives of three women are changed immeasurably. His wife Sophie, who James met while at Oxford, is determined to clear her husband’s name. Meanwhile Kate, the prosecutor on the case, wants to make him pay for his crimes.

The charismatic politician is played by Rupert Friend, a native of Stonesfield, Oxfordshire and famed for his role as CIA operative Peter Quinn on Homeland. American-British actress Sienna Miller will star as society woman Sophie who is convinced of her husband’s innocence.  Kate, the ambitious and emotionally detached defence barrister, is played by Michelle Dockery who is best known for her role as Lady Mary Crawley on Downton Abbey.

The first season of the show will be self-contained but the show’s producers hope to create an anthology style series and devote subsequent seasons to different scandals.  It is expected that the show will premiere sometime in 2021 but a release date has not been announced.

Image: Ozeye. Licence: CC BY-SA 3.0.

Emma Chamberlain and the changing face of fashion

Beth Proctor
-
0
Emma Chamberlain and the changing face of fashion

“She got the gold hoops, Prada fit, I’m in love with all of it” sings ROLE MODEL, over the punchy bass line of his latest single ‘Blind’. Fans have been quick to speculate that the song is written about nineteen-year-old YouTuber, Emma Chamberlain. The pair have hinted at their relationship on social media, and it seems the singer isn’t the only one who loves her look. Chamberlain’s signature gold hoop earrings and stylish wardrobe are part of a personal brand that has gained her millions of fans. She was recently listed as one of TIME magazine’s “25 Most Influential People On The Internet”, with The Atlantic dubbing her “the most talked-about teen influencer in the world”.

Chamberlain documents almost every aspect of her life online. She started her channel in 2017 and, in the summer of the same year, struck gold with a video entitled We All Owe The Dollar Store An Apology. In the spoof haul, she models various items for the camera, including a set of ninja-turtle wristbands and a pair of kid’s sunglasses. The video went viral, and she gained thousands of subscribers almost overnight. Today, she boasts more than 21 million followers across her social media.

Her style is colourful, eclectic, and constantly evolving. A scroll through her latest Instagram posts reveals a cross-section of bright fabrics and vintage nineties pieces. In one photo she wears a pair of pink velvet jogging bottoms straight out of Mean Girls, in another, she poses in a leather jacket that echoes Brad Pitt’s iconic Fight Club look. Her interest in fashion is marked by a series of thrift hauls, outfit lookbooks and makeover videos on her channel. Yet, unlike other fashion influencers, her brand isn’t the polished, high-octane product of a management agency or marketing team. In fact, it is the exact opposite.

Chamberlain frequently appears looking bedraggled and bleary-eyed in front of the camera. She films everything from glamorous photoshoots to Sunday’s spent in bed. In a recent vlog, she tries on a pair of lime green tights and poses awkwardly in front of the mirror: “Wait, that’s kinda fire actually … I feel like I could kind of make it work”; then, five minutes later, “Forget about the green tights, it didn’t happen”. She experiments with what she wears and doesn’t take herself too seriously. Her willingness to film the times when it doesn’t work out is a welcome dose of reality in an industry so often dominated by unrealistic images of perfection. By embracing the fun in fashion, she inspires her viewers to do the same.

Estimates suggest that she makes anywhere between $120,000 to $2 million from her videos, on top of earnings from sponsorship deals and other business ventures. Her weekly podcast, Anything Goes shot to No.1 on the podcast charts in fifty countries when it was launched last year. She has also started a successful clothing line and a coffee company with the tagline: “Zero bullshit. Just coffee”. Like her coffee, Chamberlain’s brand is simple; she is the cool, funny girl you wish you were friends with. Her videos are edited like a last-minute school project – the camera zooms in as text appears and dissolves in wiggling lines of Comic Sans. Sometimes, the shot pauses as her voice echoes to illustrate a particularly dramatic point. A New York Times article described “an entire subgenre of videos that mimic her style, and a host of YouTubers who talk, or edit, just like her.”

Unsurprisingly, Chamberlain’s status as a trendsetter has caught the attention of the fashion industry. In 2019 she made her fashion week debut with Louis Vuitton and has since collaborated with supermodel-turned-YouTuber Karlie Kloss in several videos. Last month she appeared in Vogue’s Beauty Secrets series on YouTube, where celebrities talk through their skincare and make-up routines. Previous episodes have featured the likes of Rihanna, Gigi Hadid and Kendall Jenner.

Chamberlain’s collaboration with Vogue signals that the fashion industry has begun to appreciate what internet stars have to offer. Recent findings published from a study on social media and consumer attitudes revealed that “Americans trust recommendations from actual people significantly more than they trust advertising and promotion from brands”. Influencers wield increasing power when it comes to promoting products, and deals like Chamberlain’s recent endorsement of Bad Habit Beauty are lucrative. Sponsored posts can receive millions of likes, generating huge sales without the production costs of a traditional advertising campaign.  

For image-conscious companies, however, working with influencers can be a double-edged sword. In July, Chamberlain was one of several LA influencers to attend a party in Hollywood Hills for TikToker Larri Merritt’s birthday. Videos from the event showed guests mixing freely without wearing masks, in a clear violation of Covid-19 guidelines. The Hollywood Fix suggested that there were at least 67 people at the party, whilst crowds of people queued to get in outside. Those involved faced major backlash from fans and other influencers. Fellow YouTuber Tyler Oakley took to Twitter to express his anger, writing: “if your favourite influencers are at huge house parties during a pandemic (& are dumb enough to post it on social media)… they are bad influences. unfollow them.” Chamberlain has yet to release a statement.

At the time of the incident, infection rates were rising rapidly in California. It was the first state to report more than half a million cases of Covid-19 and Los Angeles County was one of the worst-affected areas. In August, fellow influencer Bryce Hall was charged with violating the area’s safer-at-home order for hosting a series of parties like the one Chamberlain attended. He faces a fine of up to $2,000 (£1,500) and a year in jail if found guilty. The charge is a timely reminder that influencers can’t escape the consequences of their actions, no matter how many followers they have. 

Over the last five years, Emma Chamberlain has become one of the most popular creators on YouTube. Her style is instantly recognisable, and her content resonates with millions. She has also been involved in an incident that many won’t forget. As the fashion industry embraces a new generation of internet stars, brands face a dilemma. Influencer’s personal lives are out of their control but closely linked to their image. Going forward, they will have to strike a balance between revenue and reputation. In the chorus of his song ‘Blind’, ROLE MODEL sings, “I’ve never seen something quite like you”. His words are fitting. The changing face of the fashion industry is new and unfamiliar; the only certainty is that influencers like Chamberlain are here to stay.

A Return to the Roaring Twenties

Rochelle Moss
-
0
A Return to the Roaring Twenties

The announcement of several vaccines approved by governments across the world and, more recently, their roll out has begun to turn peoples attention to life post pandemic.

Upon entering a New Year people are generally full of hope, excitement, and personal promises of what they want to make of the next 12 months. Yet this New Year was in stark contrast to previous firework-filled welcomes. Personally, I’m not the type of person to make New Year’s resolutions, however I do always feel some sense of a new beginning when the clock strikes midnight. This year, however, the Big Ben countdown did not create such feelings of change, rather, it felt pretty similar to every other day since March: unremarkable.

The events of the past year have been continuously defined by the pandemic, with almost every news article forced to mention the dreaded C-word. It has undoubtedly shaped every aspect of our lives: from personal relationships curtailed by household rules, to rising unemployment, to soaring levels of Netflix watching. It also looks likely to continue to shape life, at least for now. The Bank of England predicts unemployment will peak at 7.7% in April to June of this year, and with limited opportunities to spend inflation has decreased to 0.5%. However, despite the limited changes we may see over the coming months, news of vaccines has filled us all with hope and excitement for life post-pandemic.

A century ago young adults may have felt something slightly similar to what we feel now. As the world entered the 1920s it said goodbye to the Spanish flu, a disease which infected 500 million people and is believed to have killed between 20 to 50 million. They also said goodbye to a decade defined by war, inflation, and the austerity it brought. They entered a new decade, with no war, no disease, and a budding social revolution.

We’re no strangers to the stories of the roaring 20s. Flapper girls symbolised the culture of this decade, with jazz and dancehalls entertaining the youth who had been starved of such activities the decade before. Consumer spending skyrocketed with new cars, in particular the Ford Model T of 1924, providing young people with the freedom all young people desire. Of course there was also a sexual revolution, spurred on by all the freedom and fun the 1920’s had to offer. Perhaps, with the hope of the three vaccines which the British government have approved, and the millions who have already been vaccinated we can look forward to a 21st century version of the roaring 20s?

An economic boom does look to be possible considering the current climate. With governments purposefully suppressing the economy in order to in turn suppress the virus the current economic slump is quite unique. Many middle class families are fortunate enough to have acquired large unwanted household savings – having been unable to spend on holidays, dinners and activities. When life goes back to normal these savers will want to spend.

However, perhaps bigger than the economic boom could be the cultural one. Whether or not you have been economically impacted by the pandemic, almost everyone has been socially impacted. The young have been told not to party, the middle aged not to go to work, and the old not to see their family members. The end of the pandemic will throw us back into socialising just as quickly as we were pulled away from it, and with it may come a cultural explosion. The arts, nightlife and travel have all become distant dreams over the past year, with many pining for their return. The things we missed most this year might just come back the biggest. With a surge in demand for ‘fun’ these sectors are likely to deliver and come back to life almost as fast they disappeared. At the very least there will be a renewed appreciation for culture and the importance of it within our society.

Some modern writers however are predicting that the pandemic will have changed our attitudes towards intimacy forever. Some have even gone so far as to declare the death of the handshake and the hug. However the 1920s is not just renowned for a cultural revolution but also a sexual one. Just as a return to normalcy must have seemed impossible in 1918, with dating and partying denounced to a fond memory, 103 years later we appear to be in a very similar boat. Whilst it may take time to return to the party there is one thing the abundance of facetime calls, socially distanced walks, and Zoom quizzes have made clear over the past year: human beings are determined to socialise.

Perhaps, we could also see a revolution in attitudes. The 1920’s did not just see a sexual revolution but also a political one. Women became more equal members of society, able to vote and with more free time following the creation of household gadgets, changes which resulted in a gradual shift in attitudes. Maybe our 20s will see something similar. The pandemic has made us alter our attitudes about lots of things,  from appreciating moments spent with friends and family, to having more time to self-reflect and pursue personal interests. Maybe this will see a change towards a more caring society, which is more accepting than it has been in the past.

One of the most significant changes in attitude is perhaps towards a renewed understanding of the need for the welfare state. As a society we have collectively faced a global crisis, creating a renewed empathy towards strangers. Just as World War 2 forced people to recognise the need to support all members of society, hopefully the welfare headlines of this pandemic will do the same. From the recent free school meals scandal to stories of an overwhelmed and overworked NHS the pandemic has highlighted some of the problems which have been present for years. Just as the welfare state blossomed after World War 2, maybe it will see a regrowth following this latest humanitarian crisis.

However, just as the original roaring twenties was brought back down to Earth by the depression, we must make sure we aren’t blinded by the 21st century version of Gatsby-esque glamour. Even when the pandemic is over its effects are likely to be lasting. Unemployment may remain high, and whilst many will have been growing their savings, others will have been eating into them as a result of lost jobs and economic uncertainty caused by the pandemic. The psychological effects of the pandemic will also be severe. Many will continue to struggle from grief or will suffer from the after-effects of such intense social isolation. And these are just what the developed world may face. Developing countries may continue to battle the virus with vaccine roll out dates a distant dream for many.

Predictions which envisage a far more bleak life post pandemic are just as prevalent as those which predict the opposite. Children and young adults are one demographic which have been hit particularly hard, with effects that could last a lifetime. School students have been thrown into a year of Zoom calls and Teams lessons with exams cancelled and grades changed. Such an experience has undoubtedly affected the most deprived students the most, with restricted access to study space and technology. What will be the effect on these children in 5 or 10 years? Whilst the British education system is certainly not perfect, education does have the power to act as an equaliser, however the pandemic has highlighted its gaping inequalities. Will we see a swing towards a more unequal society as the Covid-19 generation grow up and their educational disparities grow in importance?

The pandemic has not been easy on anyone, and we must not forget the awareness this collective experience has brought us when it’s all over. So, whilst the excitement of life post pandemic is certainly something to keep us going through the seemingly endless days of lockdown, we cannot forget those who won’t have such roaring 2020s.

Predictions of what life will be like in a couple years time will always be uncertain. No matter how advanced the economic models or historical comparison may be there will always be a hint of the unknown. However hopefully 2021 will get to see the glimmers of hope which the vaccines bring come to life. And, hopefully, roaring twenties Round 2 will be even more fun and inclusive than the original ever was.

1...346347348...2,494Page 347 of 2,494

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