Monday, May 19, 2025
Blog Page 35

Oxford researcher awarded £2m to build arthritis risk calculator

Poppy Littler-Jennings
-
0
Oxford researcher awarded £2m to build arthritis risk calculator

A prestigious award of £2 million over five-years has been awarded to Professor Laura Coates, Senior Clinical Research Fellow at the University of Oxford, as part of a National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) research professorship. As the first ever rheumatologist to be awarded this research professorship, Coates plans to
develop a risk calculator for arthritis.

Only 73 people since 2011 have succeeded in obtaining this award, many of whom have since become senior research leaders. The award entails three support posts, research costs, and access to a leadership and development programme.

Professor Coates’ research focuses on psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, a chronic inflammatory variant of arthritis from which approximately 640,000 people in the UK suffer. Around one-third of those with the skin condition psoriasis go on to develop psoriatic arthritis. Professor Coates plans to develop a risk calculator that would estimate the risk that people with psoriasis have of developing arthritis. 

Professor Coates said: “I will also design a new national study to test personalisation of treatment for those who do develop arthritis. I will work with people living with psoriatic arthritis and medical teams to design this study using digital supports like apps and we will be able to test different treatments and personalise these for different people.”

The NIHR website details the eligibility criteria, requiring applicants to “have an outstanding research record of clinical and applied health care research”, and to “have demonstrated effective translation of research for improved health and care.”

Other research topics that the recipients of this award plan to explore include independence for older people across community and hospital settings, improving care for children with life-limiting conditions, and a prediction tool to streamline diagnostic pathways for suspected endometrial cancer.


Professor Lucy Chappell, Chief Executive Officer of the NIHR, underlined the honour of this research award, saying: “The NIHR Research Professorship is one of our most prestigious career awards. The award funds outstanding researchers to help address the major health and care issues of today and in the future, strengthening health, public health and care research leadership at the highest academic levels.”

Oxford Union believes multiculturalism does have a future in the UK

Noah Robson
-
0
Oxford Union believes multiculturalism does have a future in the UK

The Oxford Union last night voted that multiculturalism does have a future in the UK, the final count seeing 80 votes in proposition and 148 members voting against. After the debate concluded, a motion seeking to overturn the removal of ex-Director of Press Nathanael Kennedy-Leroi from committee failed to pass.

The debate began with Oliver Jones-Lyons (Christ Church), an elected member of Standing Committee at the Union. He argued that multiculturalism had “no present and no past” in the UK, describing it as a “nice fluffy idea that sounds good but looks rather different when you explore what it actually means.” He pointed to examples such as faith schools that operate outside of UK law which have been a “hotbed of abuse and radicalisation of young people”. Throughout his speech – an impressive dance around the fear of being cancelled – Jones-Lyons said the UK should look to implement civic integrationism, rather than viewing people as members of distinctive cultural groups.

Next up was the Union’s Director of Partnerships Olivia Knight-Catalinete (Christ Church). Most of the first half of her speech was taken up with mocking her college counterpart, Jones-Lyons, for his “crimes against the culinary world”: A reference to his home cooking posted on social media (this author declines to comment). As for her argument itself, she criticised the manner in which multiculturalism had so far been implemented, describing it as “a reflection of a failure to integrate”. Her conclusion, which was based around the risk of British culture losing its significance, led to one member questioning whether she truly believed in the opposition cause she was arguing for.

Continuing for the proposition was Eric Kaufmann, a Canadian Professor of Politics known for his work on identity politics. He opened by reflecting on his appearance at the Union 20 years ago, when he argued on a remarkably similar motion as to whether multiculturalism was failing in Britain. His core argument was that multiculturalism was more obsessed with “celebrating differences rather than commonalities” – a phrase he repeated at least four times during his speech. Kaufmann said that such an approach was acceptable in cases where the intensity of cultural divides meant assimilation was unlikely, such as in Northern Ireland, but not in the UK, seemingly failing to realise that Northern Ireland actually is indeed part of the UK. 

Lord Singh of Wimbledon, a crossbench peer and Director of the Network for Sikh Organisations was up next for side opposition. One of the clearest and calmest speakers of the night, he described the “tendency to add an -ism to anything we’re a little worried  and scared about” as a worrying trend. Drawing on the old cliché that we are “all members of the same one … human family with equal dignity and rights,” Lord Singh explained how it was important not to confuse multiculturalism with cultural division, in which an “us vs them” dynamic thrives.

Floor speeches followed, but not before somewhat of a mass exodus from the chamber leading to President Israr Khan to request that those leaving “please hurry up”. Closing out the case for the proposition was Peter Whittle, a former deputy leader of UKIP, who sought to dispel stereotypes of his party by playing up to as many as possible. He proclaimed that multiculturalism had led British society “to the point of collapse,” denying six points of information during his 10 minute speech. During this time, he praised Elon Musk for drawing attention to a grooming gangs scandal in the UK, said the past week in America had given him “some hope,” and described islamophobia as a “made up nonsensical term anyway”.

Former Conservative Party MP Sir Robert Buckland was the final speaker, with one of the most compelling speeches of the night. Striking back against Whittle’s points, Sir Robert said the UK “did not need a South African émigrée living in America telling us about the affairs of this country,” and claimed that the multiculturalism complained about was not multiculturalism in its true sense. He pointed to his former constituency of Swindon as an example of integration being successful, suggesting that we should “encourage others to contribute in ways that complement, not distract from, what should be a shared set of values”.

Following the main debate, a special adjournment motion sought to overturn a decision by the Standing Committee which had removed Nathanael Kennedy-Leroi from his position as Director of Press in Week 0 of this term. Kennedy-Leroi claimed that this had occurred because he had decided to no longer run on a slate with the librarian, Moosa Harraj, someone he described as a close friend of the president’s, and instead switched to a rival slate instead. He expressed being “hurt and disappointed, but most of all confused,” given he had completed work during the vacation which he said included confirming seven guest speakers.

Opposing him, Sarah Rana, the Union’s treasurer, said the removal was because the president had wanted the Director of Press to be neutral, and that Kennedy-Leroi had been offered alternative roles on committee once the president found out about his decision to run for election. She criticised “more political antics being dragged to this chamber,” and pointed to the fact that the governing body had voted 9-1 in favour of removal. After a vote by voice acclamation produced an unclear result, a vote by membership card saw the motion fail, with 57 votes in opposition against 29 in favour.

Editors’ note: Commentary herein represents the opinion of the reporter, not of Cherwell.

How far has Oxford come since the millennium?

Donovan Lock
-
0
How far has Oxford come since the millennium?

Unless you’re among the pedants who insist that the millennium began in 2001, this year marks a quarter-century since humanity celebrated the second millennium of the Gregorian calendar. For the world, these 25 years have been defined by key developments such as the September 11 attacks, the sudden spread of mobile phones, and the COVID-19 pandemic. For Oxford, however?

At first glance, little has changed: it remains a world-class university as it has for centuries. But on closer inspection, there exist many noteworthy changes less visible to students; after all, the typical reader is under 25 years old and leaves Oxford within half a decade. Just how has the 21st century treated one of the world’s most ancient universities?

Perhaps it is the misguiding allure of attending a college over twice as old as the United States, but I find it staggering how much of Oxford is still physically evolving. This quarter-century has given us two new colleges: Green Templeton College was established in a merger, rising from the ashes of Green College and Templeton College in 2008, and Reuben College started accepting students just a few years ago in 2021. Conversely, permanent private halls (PPHs) have thinned in number, with Greyfriars, St Benet’s Hall, and St Stephen’s House each losing their PPH status in 2008, 2022, and 2023 respectively.

Department buildings tell a similar story. The past 25 years have given us superb educational facilities, such as the Andrew Wiles Building, the Blavatnik School of Government, and the current site of Saïd Business School. But a crucial distinction sets the former building apart from the latter two. Sir Andrew Wiles, a professor of Mathematics at Oxford, famously proved Fermat’s Last Theorem – a problem that remained unsolved for centuries.

Appropriately, the Andrew Wiles Building (home to the Oxford Mathematical Institute) bears his name in recognition of his extraordinary academic achievement. On the other hand, Leonard Blavatnik and Wafic Saïd are billionaire philanthropists, known for questionable ties to governments worldwide. Blavatnik has faced scrutiny for his associations with Russian oligarchs, and is the recipient of personal sanctions imposed by Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy; Saïd is known for the lucrative Al-Yamamah arms deal between the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia, worth £40 billion.

Indeed, morally dubious donors have proven to be a trend in recent years. The list does not end with Blavatnik or Saïd: the Stephen A. Schwarzman Centre for the Humanities was funded by £185 million in donations from the eponymous patron, best known as the CEO of Blackstone. Accordingly, the student body has exhibited a keener awareness of the University’s funding and investments, throughout the quarter-century. From protestors occupying the new Saïd Business School building upon its opening in 2001, to students pressuring the University to divest last year, financial scrutiny has clearly become more prominent than ever.

The student body composition provides intriguing statistical trends: in 2006, around one eighth of undergraduates were international students, a figure rising to one fifth by 2023. Moreover, the proportion of non-EU students approximately doubled from 8% to 16%. Whatever the next quarter-century holds for Oxford alumni, its reach will certainly be felt worldwide.

Apart from the sustained level of prestige (people are impressed when you tell them where you study, yes?), the perception of Oxford has jumped rather sporadically these past 25 years. Consider the medium of film: the year 2001 commenced the Harry Potter film franchise, which has given us many a gaggle of tourists, and at least two merchandising shops. Within the same period, Oxford was painted in a somewhat less pleasant tone by Saltburn.

This aptly captures the dichotomous public perception of Oxford – on one hand, it is a place of academic excellence and the quaint city of dreaming spires, yet on the other, it is an incessant sleazefest for the elite. Given that the modal Briton has not attended a university, who could blame them for thinking such a reasonable thing? Across the quarter-century, Oxford produced 15 Nobel Laureates from its alumni and staff, and one Fields medallist. Billions of doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine were distributed around the world. And yet, a commonly parroted perception of Oxford has little to do with academia.

The elephant in the room is a matter of political leadership – this nation has had eight prime ministers since 2000, and seven of them are Oxford graduates (in case you’re wondering, Gordon Brown earned his MA and PhD at Edinburgh). Few things can spell out a university’s prominence as blatantly as a history of national officeholders. Perhaps more interestingly, Oxford was where several prime ministers earned their political stripes: notably, Boris Johnson – via ruthless campaigning – was president of the Oxford Union, and Liz Truss was president of the Oxford University Liberal Democrats within her first year.

This remains a constant in British politics. Since 1945, every prime minister that graduated from an English university was once an Oxford student. Last decade, ‘elitism’ became a particularly touchy subject for our politicians, with haunting tales of the Bullingdon Club reminding the nation just how out of touch our leaders can be. It did not matter to the public whether or not ‘Piggate’ happened, it was simply believable. However, this streak of Oxford alumni will likely break soon; Keir Starmer and Ed Davey are the only party leaders with an Oxford education, after all.

So, the quarter-century largely ends as it began in Oxford. An Oxonian is prime minister, the University’s chancellor is a baron, academic accomplishments remain superb, and our financing is still amoral at best. If any change naturally occurs at Oxford, it will inevitably be slow; the University’s history of success ensures that the status quo is peculiarly treasured. But a resistance to change comes with the concomitant risk of falling behind. Oxford is an establishment that highly benefits its students; it is our moral obligation, as future alumni, to uphold a legacy we can be proud of.

Have an opinion on the points raised in this article? Send us a 150-word letter at [email protected] and see your response in our next print or online.

Has the modern movie musical lost its magic?

Ciara Beale
-
0
Has the modern movie musical lost its magic?

As I begin writing, my parents have just walked through the door having finally experienced the cultural phenomenon that is Wicked (2024). My mother is singing something resembling ‘Defying Gravity’. My father, on the other hand, is complaining that the final scene interrupted an otherwise pleasant nap. Whatever your opinion on Wicked, it undeniably defined the tail-end of 2024.

As a fan of the live musical, the film made me wonder: is something always lost when we take the magic of live musical theatre and try to recreate it on-screen?  Subverting the conventions of stage musicals in screen adaptations is a comparatively recent phenomenon. Thinking back to old-Hollywood movie musicals, they tend to be more simplistic, recreating the principles of stage musicals rather than moving away from them. Jon M. Chu’s Wicked was visually exciting, but was it doing too much? 

Stage musicals are all about illusion; moving furniture in the shadows between scenes and coming up with creative solutions to problems that only occur when directors can’t simply yell ‘Cut!’. Examining  the recent history of musicals adapted from stage to screen, productions  haven’t always been as solid as Wicked. Dear Evan Hansen (2021), for example, has been a favourite musical of mine for some time. Although the film was enjoyable, the now-nearing-thirty Ben Platt was probably more convincing as a troubled teen when he first appeared as Evan on Broadway. 

An audiences’ distance from the stage blurs things that are harder to miss on the big screen. Another infamous example of a movie musical that, in attempting to avoid audience scrutiny, did the exact opposite, was Cats (2019). Poor Dame Judi. Maybe it’s for the best that stage musicals are forced to use animal costumes , rather than trying to make things look ‘real’. CGI can only do so much, but movie musicals seem to increasingly rely on it.

Don’t get me wrong, musicals on stage can also look ridiculous – my family will never recover from Billy Elliot swinging around singing in a slightly affected northern accent – but, arguably, this is part of their charm. Certain reviewers of Wicked were relentlessly critical of the switches between Erivo’s singing and speaking voice. Others found the fixation on perfect CGI overwhelmed the bare bones of the story, which musical fans know and love. The ‘Defying Gravity’ scene took my breath away, but was a far cry from the intimacy and raw emotion that the musical commanded when I first saw it on stage. The difference is that we demand perfection from what we consume on-screen, while in live theatre we forgive a little messiness, and find the experience all the better for it.

However, this is a problem that old-Hollywood musicals seem (mostly) exempt from. As a general rule, they don’t compete  with the stage in the same way. It’s not a case of the screen fixing the problems or difficulties of a live stage, but a mixing of both mediums which creates something better than the sum of its parts. I know that I am not the only person who rewatches The Sound of Music (1965) every Christmas. This season it was playing on BBC  One and each of my family members made the same comment: it doesn’t matter if you want to watch it or not, you will not change the channel. We were all transfixed. Though the infamously living hills of The Sound of Music look decidedly fake, and the synchronisation of voice and mouth wasn’t quite up to scratch by 1965, it is a wonderful watch. 

Other films like Singin’ in the Rain (1952), with its meta film sets, and Mary Poppins (1964), inexplicably featuring animated penguins, have the same captivating quality because they refuse to be seamless. Maybe future film musicals can learn a thing or two by looking back instead of lurching forward and embracing the magical imperfection that characterises the musical. 

Back to the Future: Are 2010 Throwbacks the Soundtrack of 2025?

Gabriella Ofo
-
0
Back to the Future: Are 2010 Throwbacks the Soundtrack of 2025?

The early 2010’s occupy a curious space in cultural memory, neither distant enough to be considered history, nor recent enough to feel like the present. Yet, this period is enjoying an unexpected renaissance. Chart-topping hits from artists like Miley Cyrus, Bruno Mars, Rihanna and Maroon 5 are re-entering the mainstream, propelled by waves of nostalgia and the algorithmic influence of platforms like TikTok. This resurgence highlights nostalgia’s dual role as both a refuge and a creative force, shedding light on the evolving relationship between music, memory and identity.

Nostalgia has always been central to music, offering listeners a sentimental escape from the complexities of the present and a reconnection with what feels like a simpler, more optimistic time. Today, this longing for the past has been amplified by social media platforms that thrive on nostalgia’s ability to evoke powerful emotional responses. On TikTok, tracks from the past have found new audiences, becoming the backdrop for viral trends that reshape their cultural significance.

These songs, often sped up, slowed down, or remixed, take on new layers of meaning, appealing to younger audiences whilst rekindling memories for older ones. TikTok’s ability to seamlessly merge the past with the present has also revived even older tracks such as Sophie Ellis-Bextor’s ‘Murder on the Dance Floor’ (2001) or M.I.A’s ‘Paper Planes’ (2008), proving that the platform’s influence extends far beyond any single era of music. 

This nostalgia extends beyond individual tracks into the very creation and identity of new artists and their sounds, showcasing a cyclical relationship between influence and reinvention. The girl group FLO, for example, embody the resurgence of girl bands, incorporating the genre-defining harmonies, lyricism and vocal arrangements of 2000’s icons Destiny’s Child. Such reinvention demonstrates how nostalgia influences the present, as artists channel the past not as mimicry, but as inspiration, creating something new whilst albeit familiar. The dominance of throwbacks in the mainstream are a very revelation of how the sounds of the past can also be a space for creative transformation. 

For emerging artists however, nostalgia poses a significant challenge, as they must carve out their place in a landscape where they not only compete with contemporaries, but also the cultural weight of the past. Raising the question, is the resurgence of nostalgia indicative of cultural stagnation, as innovation is overshadowed by the comfort of familiarity? Or is it evidence of a new form of creativity, where the past is actively revived and reimagined for modern listeners?

In many ways, the very resurgence of throwbacks and the impact of nostalgia can act as a bridge between musical eras. The soundtrack of 2025 will most likely be defined by this delicate mixture of memory and innovation, as old sounds are reimagined to reflect the identity of a new generation. Nostalgia, far from being a passive retreat, proves itself to be a defining force that shapes the sound of tomorrow.   

From the Chrysler to the Weston: 100 years of Art Deco

Florence Wolter
-
0
From the Chrysler to the Weston: 100 years of Art Deco

Picture the scene: the 1920s, jazz and sequins are stealing onto the dance floor. On the gallery wall, new techno-infused modernist forms are weaving their way into post-war aesthetics. In France, Paris breathes a sigh of relief in the aftermath of German occupation. In this atmosphere of Parisian liberty, Gertrude Stein penned: “it is not what Paris gives you, it is what she does not take away.” Yet behind this, anxieties were bubbling about what France had to give modern global culture. “Even the Americans themselves reacted, and sought to create for themselves – for better or worse – an original art” wrote Minister of Commerce Lucien Dior: “during this what did we do…? Nothing, except copy our own old-fashioned styles.” Out of this insecurity, not without an air of competition, the 1925 International Exposition of Modern Industrial and Decorative Arts was unveiled in Paris. This was the birth of Art Deco, a gift that would redesign the world.

The exposition’s fundamental stipulation was that everything be exclusively modern. It was expected, though, that this modernity should embrace the extravagant optimism of the period. Beyond the thirteen opulently designed entrances, the exposition was organised by pavilions, each competitively garnished to display the artistic creations of different French products, regions, and territories, as well as each of the international pavilions. These were accompanied by merry go rounds, fireworks, 300 ballerinas, and—to illuminate the Eiffel Tower—two hundred thousand light bulbs in six colours. So when Le Corbusier revealed his Pavillon de l’Esprit Nouveau (ascetic, grey, and furnished only by mass-produced furniture and his designs for Plan Voisin), organisers of the exposition, horrified, attempted to conceal the shameful offering behind fences.

Both a development of and opposition to the Art Nouveau style, Art Deco is distinct for its incorporation of cubist elements which instill an angular, geometric quality. Art Deco is found in the visual arts, architecture, and commercial product design from furniture to fashion—parker pens and streamlined locomotives. Its influence looming large in cities across the globe: construction for the Chrysler Building, an iconic feature of New York’s skyline, began in 1929. Three years later, Christ the Redeemer was completed in Brazil, and has gazed down at Rio de Janeiro ever since. When thinking of Art Deco, Oxford is far from the first city that springs to mind. However, at the heart of the University, the Weston Library offers a local example of Art Deco architecture, designed in 1934 by Sir Giles Gilbert Scott—and that’s without mentioning the books within Oxford’s libraries. Iconic covers including the Celestial Eyes dust jacket of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby or (love it or loathe it) the cover art of multiple editions of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged exemplify Art Deco from Oxford’s bookshelves.

Return to war in 1939 would bring a sharp end to the lavish tastes and garish embellishments of Art Deco, but even before this, modernism was creeping in. Despite Art Deco interior designer Paul Follet’s claims that “the superfluous is always needed”, architectural decadence could not be justified in the face of the Great Depression of the 1930s and material wartime need of the following decade. Against this backdrop, Le Corbusier’s modernist counterclaim that the house was merely “a machine to live in” aligned more concretely with the modern world, while Art Deco’s geometric extravagances left the style more fragmented from reality than ever. “Decorative art,” Le Corbusier wrote, “as opposed to the machine phenomenon, is the final twitch of the old manual mode, and is a dying thing.”
This year, 100 years after the revolutionary advent of Art Deco, Paris’ Musée des Arts Décoratifs will launch an exhibition reflecting on the 1925 International Exposition of Modern Industrial and Decorative Arts. One cannot help but wonder whether such a return to the past is the best way to mark the spirit of modernity that precipitated the Art Deco style. Will 2025 begin an era of retrospection, and not growth? In answer to this, it is important to consider the cycle of progress, and how vital the past is in the influence of the future. As Frantz Jourdain, member of the Society of Decorative Artists, said of his 1925 inspiration: “we consequently resolved to return Decorative Art, inconsiderately treated as a Cinderella or poor relation allowed to eat with the servants, to the important… place it occupied in the past.” This month, the first of 2025, marks both a centenary of the past and the beginning of a new year; perhaps modernity allows for both.

Odeon to close to make way for £37m council project

Cherwell News
-
0
Odeon to close to make way for £37m council project

Odeon cinema on Gloucester Green is set to close in January and be replaced by a £37m council project. Oxford City Council will demolish the building, which has operated as a cinema since 1936, to replace it with a hotel and community space. 

The ‘aparthotel’ will include 145 rooms, a bar, and a café, and will have windows on all sides, which Oxford City Council say will improve the atmosphere of Gloucester Green and meet modern building standards, reducing its environmental impact. A Council spokesperson told Cherwell the project will take around three years to complete. 

According to the City Council, Odeon made it clear it did not want to renew its lease after 24 years at the location and when it became obvious that no new tenants wanted to take over the cinema, the City Council launched a procurement exercise in September 2022 to determine the best future use for the site. Despite being invited to participate, a spokesperson told Cherwell, Odeon declined to submit a proposal for a new use for the building. The redevelopment plan was finally approved in October 2024.

The City Council says the “much-needed” development will bolster the tourism industry by attracting overnight visitors. The council cited a 2015 report from Experience Oxfordshire to Cherwell that found overnight visitors spend 1.5 times more than day-trippers while only 17% of Oxford’s 6.6 million annual visitors stay overnight.

Alex Hollingsworth, Cabinet Member for Business, Culture and an Inclusive Economy told Cherwell: “More overnight visitors will increase the number of people using our restaurants, bars, and theatres, helping local businesses thrive. Gloucester Green is already a thriving successful place because of the market, and the community centre will help expand on that success.”

Hollingsworth also highlighted Oxford has other cinemas such as the Curzon at Westgate Oxford, Ultimate Picture Palace in Cowley Road, Phoenix Picturehouse in Walton Street, and Vue at the Kassam Stadium – which in fact lies outside of the Oxford ring-road.

Many residents, however, point out that these alternatives are prohibitively expensive and argue the proposal reflects a broader trend of prioritising tourism over local needs. A resident said Odeon’s decision to not renew their lease stems from the council making Oxford “pretty much inaccessible.” Another resident added: “The residents of Oxford are slowly being pushed out of the city, so tourists can invade it.”

An Oxford student told Cherwell: “I liked the Odeon because it was affordable and central and I never went to other cinemas because they were too far away or expensive.”

The plan has received 97 formal objections from residents, who expressed concern in light of recent entertainment venue closures, including Kiss Bar and ATIK. Despite this, no members of the public spoke in objection at the planning meeting.

Cherwell contacted Odeon for comment but did not receive an answer.

One-fifth of Gen Z embarrassed to consume non-alcoholic drinks

Bella Gerber-Johnstone
-
0
One-fifth of Gen Z embarrassed to consume non-alcoholic drinks

Young people are still held back by fear of “social judgement” from drinking low or non-alcoholic beer according to research by Heineken and the University of Oxford’s Professor Charles Spence. In response, Heineken, are kick-starting their new campaign this “Dry” January, naming it “0.0 reasons needed”.

Experimental psychologist Professor Charles Spence collaborated with Heineken to survey 11,842 adults across five developed non-alcohol beer markets. The study found that 21% of Gen Z said they have “concealed drinking low and no alcohol versions of alcoholic beverages because of social pressures”.

2024 saw the highest demand for non-alcoholic beer yet, with Heineken 0.0 sales increasing by 14% in the first half of 2024. Gen Z are the generation most likely to have drunk low or no-alcohol drinks, with 73% of Gen Z participants saying they had tried one. Baby boomers (aged 60-80 years old) were the second most likely, with 58% saying they had. The Financial Times have speculated the link between this growth and the 1% drop in global beer sales, as drinks data provider International Wine & Spirit Research (IWSR) noted in 2023. 

Social pressure is an important factor in low or non-alcohol drink consumption. 38% of Gen Z men said they would be willing to drink them but only if their friends did too. This was 35% for Gen Z women. Professor Spence commented that “it is evident that people still do sometimes face social judgments from others concerning their choice of non-alcoholic drink.”

According to research, more people are opting for low or no-alcohol beer for health reasons. Professor Spence remarked in Heineken’s press release that “alcohol is no longer the default in social situations” and that there is “more mindful consumption”. 

Cherwell’s recent Intoxtigation, surveying over 1000 students, found that the drinking culture is still strong at Oxford. It found that 51.8% of surveyed students reportedly drink the NHS recommended average 14 units in one night. A student told Cherwell: “I would consider drinking non-alcoholic drinks if I was just going to the pub casually or if I have an early morning the next day, but if I am going clubbing then that just wouldn’t do.” 

Exploring ‘Into the Woods’

Olivia Sloan
-
0
Exploring ‘Into the Woods’

Last week, I sat down with Luke Nixon, Lydia Free, and Isobel Connolly, the directorial force of a new ‘vivid and visionary’ production of Sondheim’s timeless classic Into the Woods being held at the Oxford Playhouse from 29th January to 1st February. Together we unraveled what it takes to build the woods from scratch and guide a cast through the shadowy forest floor, how we can explore the humanity of some of our most beloved fairy tale characters, and how to simply embrace the chaos of Sondheim’s ridiculously complex score. Luke, Lydia, and Isobel share their inspirations, challenges, and a few behind-the-scenes secrets that make their rendition of this musical masterpiece one-of-a-kind.

Cherwell: Why did you decide to stage Into the Woods in the first place?

Luke: It’s felt like forever since me and Lyds [Lydia] first spoke about taking Into the Woods to the Playhouse in our final year.

Lydia: We started to talk about it around two years ago and the seed of our friendship was that we both loved this musical so much. We decided to take the plunge and get staging it when we were on our years abroad, at which point Izzy joined the project. Since then, the three of us (all Aries…crazy) have been whittling away for almost a year trying to bring it to life! In all honesty, I just wanted to put mine and Luke’s friendship to the test. Co-staging a mega sondheim musical in a 600-seat theatre when I have never been involved in a musical and Luke has never directed. Easy. Izzy is the only one who knows what she’s doing.

Luke: The musical just gives us it all, really. A phenomenal score, some beautiful ballads, some amazing opportunities for an ensemble to shine as well as a tight network of intricate relationships that are a pleasure to watch. It’s also hilarious; that’s one thing we’ve been really keen to push through our production. 

Interviewer: The show intertwines so many beloved fairy tales—how do you balance the familiar stories with fresh creative interpretations?

Lydia: We have set the play in a very bare-bones way to draw maximum attention to the theatre ‘space’. We are laying out the fictionality of the fairy tales as much as possible in that way. With a really strong, fantastical backbone, we want the nuanced, clashing parts of humanity and morality that the musical explores to shine out against it.

Luke: We’re using what we know of these fairy tales—their characters, their stories, their relationships—and exploring why we love them so much, why are they still so relatable nowadays? It’s because they’re wholly truthful; amongst the farce and the ridiculousness are characters genuinely experiencing the madness, and this has been so enjoyable to play with. The company is formed of sixteen characters who are fully-fledged, fully feeling people, and this is something that we have taken real pride in moulding. 

Interviewer: Sondheim’s music is notoriously intricate; what has been the greatest challenge you’ve faced in bringing it to the stage?

Isobel: The music has been a mammoth task to teach and learn, but also a lot of fun. The cast have tackled it head on and really embraced the intricacy and detail of the score. I think the biggest challenge has been working to make the emotions of the songs feel genuine, whilst maintaining the accuracy that Sondheim’s music demands, and everyone has really risen to that challenge. 

Lydia: Into The Woods is difficult to keep fresh for the whole show because about 90% of the action happens in nebulous woodland landscapes. It requires immense collaboration to continue to look at the small space of the stage in new ways and find new corners of it to continue to surprise the audience throughout the show. It has been a challenge doing that, but the collaboration has of course been a joy. 

Luke: I mean there is just so much going on. The cast are stunningly talented so that’s a relief, but there are just so many little intricacies that we have been trying to pay homage to; lots of them are literally tiny little things that no one will pick up on. The greatest challenge however is when the Into the Woods melody comes back in again for the 57th time and we’re trying to do something new with it. Again. 

Interviewer: If you could add a new fairy tale character into the story, who would it be, and where would they fit in?

Luke: Well, I mean, I genuinely believe Rapunzel’s twins are Hansel and Gretel so I would love them to grow up in Act II and take down the Witch gingerbread-style. 

Lydia: Wait, I love that. 

Luke: It would be so fun. Would add so much to the set budget.

Isobel: I’d say the ugly duckling, who I feel would hang out with Jack and Milky White as an adorable trio. 

Lydia: I’d say maybe Shrek. He could bop about with the narrator. 

Interviewer: If you were to venture into the woods like the characters, what would you wish for, and why?

Lydia: I would wish for Stephen Sondheim’s resurrection and for Sara Bareilles to come and watch the show and get a group picture with the company backstage, much like Meryl recently did for the cast of The Hills of California on Broadway last month.

Isobel: Can I also have Lydia’s wish? But Sara Bareilles brings Bernadette Peters with her too. 

Luke: Maybe a job for when I graduate, I think. That’d be nice. 

Interviewer: If you could bring any real piece of magic into the production, what would it be?

Isobel: This cast, band, and crew are already pretty magical, but I’d go for characters being able to fly. Would probably add some extra pizzazz.

Lydia: I would choose for Eleanor Bogie [The Witch] to actually be able to perform sorcery, so that when she waves her hands, gusts of wind and flying disco balls and floating audience members actually occur. The magic she already possesses is in the way she will make you sob in ‘Stay With Me’.

Luke: Shape shifting. So we can nail those speedy quick changes without having to faff with clasps and laces and buttons. Sorry Grace [Costume Designer], love you. 

Interviewer: Why should people come and see your production of Into the Woods?

Isobel: Because you’ll love it! 

Lydia: So many people have poured so much passion and time into this show and you can really feel that when it’s being performed. The amount of effort and care from cast to designers to flies operators to marketers – it’s a joy to feel that thrumming, and the audience very much will when watching. 

Luke: It is a truly fantastic production that hopes to be a super enjoyable night at the theatre in the dark depths of Hilary. It is a heart-warming comedy about love, loss, and the murky grounds of morality that has been a real pleasure to stage. And Sondheim’s score is just gorgeous. Everyone on and off the stage has put blood, 

Lydia: Literally. 

Luke: Literally. Blood. Sweat, and tears. 

Isobel: Literally. 

Luke: Literally! So much blood, sweat and tears. And the results will prove it. 

Peach Productions’ Into the Woods will be performed from 29th January – 1st February 2025 at the Oxford Playhouse.

Tickets are available here: https://www.oxfordplayhouse.com/events/into-the-woods

Rishi Sunak to join Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government

Bryn Mollet
-
0
Rishi Sunak to join Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government

Former UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is taking a job at Oxford University’s Blavatnik School of Government as a member of the World Leaders Circle and Distinguished Fellow after he resigned as Conservative Party’s leader last July.

Sunak posted on X: “Excited to join @BlavatnikSchool at Oxford and @HooverInst at Stanford. Oxford and Stanford shaped my life, and I look forward to contributing to their world-class work addressing the challenges and the technological opportunities of our time.”

The World Leaders Circle is a global network for former heads of governments to exchange policy ideas and promote international cooperation. 

The MP for Richmond and Northallerton, Sunak studied PPE at Lincoln College and graduated in 2001. He said he holds “huge affection for Oxford” and that studying here “shaped [his] life and career”.

Newly-elected Chancellor Lord William Hague, who was also Tory leader, said: “Rishi’s connection to Oxford University runs deep, and it’s great to see him coming back to his alma mater to contribute in such a meaningful way. I have no doubt his insights will inspire the next generation of leaders who are starting their journey here at Oxford.”

Sunak will also be taking up a role at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute after he resigned as Conservative Party’s leader in July last year.

1...343536...2,496Page 35 of 2,496

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