The University of Oxford and the Oxford University Student Union (SU) have launched a campaign to improve water safety awareness in Oxford.
The ‘Think Twice’ campaign follows a Conference of Common Rooms (CCR) motion in Trinity, proposed by Brasenose JCR. It aims to make students aware of hazards around Oxford’s waterways and communicate ways to access help.
The campaign urges students to pay attention to the temperature of water, which can be fatally cold even on hot days, as well as water level, which can change rapidly. Students are urged not to jump straight into open water, nor to walk, run or cycle through water where they cannot see the bottom.
Hazardous items can also be beneath the water, from rocks, rubbish, and glass, to boat motors that could catch on clothing and cause serious injury.
It highlights the danger of going near areas of open water under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, and urges students not to enter water wearing non-swimwear and/or footwear, even where swimming is usually allowed.
Open water can also be a risk to health due to poor water quality and pollution. Thames Water, who provide Oxford’s water, were fined £122.7m this year for breaching rules over sewage spills into the river, and were ranked the worst water supplier in England this week.
The initiative incorporates advice from the RNLI and the Royal Lifesaving Association, and will be communicated to students through common rooms.
Discussions of the motion last term saw various JCRs highlighting the danger of “pushing trashing and celebrations to more remote or less supervised locations”.
Students currently face £150 fines for trashing, which the University’s ‘Celebrate SMART’ campaign warns against. A spokesperson for Think Twice told Cherwell that the SU will be working alongside the University to ensure “clear safety messaging” around water.
Rory McGlade, the proposer of the water safety motion and Brasenose JCR President, told Cherwell that “with continued advocacy, [common room leaders] hope to encourage colleges across Oxford to permit celebrations to occur on site”.
Allowing post-exam celebrations to take place in college grounds would mean that students “aren’t pushed out to the edges of Oxford near waterways, but are brought back into the fold in central Oxford, where the risks are lower”.
Speaking about the risks of many Oxford ‘traditions’, McGlade expressed his hope that Think Twice is a strong starting point for water safety at Oxford, rather than being an end goal. He explained that “the initiative will evolve throughout the year, following input and debate by common room leaders”.
The SU will report back on the progress of the campaign to CCR throughout the year.
Katrina Mulligan, Head of National Security Partnerships at OpenAI, spoke at the Blavatnik School of Government last week about the relationship between artificial intelligence (AI) and global security, warning that “everything you know about AI is already out of date”.
Before joining OpenAI, Mulligan held numerous senior roles in the US government and launched the travelling press corps for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. She explained that after years in public service, she realised that “sometimes smart and well-intentioned people don’t always make the right decisions”, motivating her to join OpenAI and work on the frontlines of a technology she believes will shape some of the world’s most consequential choices.
Mulligan described OpenAI’s commitment to developing “technology for good” and discussed the frameworks the company has built to determine when and how AI should be deployed. She highlighted ChatGPT’s rapid growth, reaching 100 million users within two months of its launch, as evidence of how quickly the technology has entered everyday life.
To counter misconceptions, she noted that many common beliefs about AI, including views that it’s “not that good”, a “black box”, or “too risky”, are already outdated. Comparing AI to electricity, she said that while the technology may still appear dangerous or unpredictable, it will eventually become as essential to modern life as power itself.
Mulligan traced the evolution of OpenAI’s models, explaining that earlier versions performed at a “junior high school level” while current reasoning models now exceed PhD-level understanding. These newer systems “take time to think,” shifting the focus of scaling from data and computing power to deliberation and reasoning.
Encouraging the audience to experiment directly with AI tools, she remarked: “You do not get fit by reading about working out.”
She observed a growing disparity between generations and regions in how AI is perceived and used. People over 40, she said, tend to use ChatGPT as a replacement for search engines, while those under 30 increasingly rely on it as an operating system for daily life. Meanwhile, Western countries are far more focused on risk and regulation, whereas China and many developing nations prioritise rapid adoption.
When asked what concerns her most, Mulligan identified “mass surveillance”, “removing humans from decision-making”, and “weapon development”. She stressed that “no one company should dominate on this technology” and that international cooperation will be vital, since every country has “land, energy, and power” to contribute to the global AI ecosystem.
Reflecting on the accelerating pace of technological progress, Mulligan remarked that “the world is looking at a calendar, OpenAI is looking at a watch”. Despite her two decades in national security, she said her belief in “the good of humanity” continues to guide her work in ensuring AI’s development remains responsible and inclusive.
As students, our voices can be powerful. They can strengthen human rights movements, achieve University divestments, and bring down political careers. But all too often our voices are held captive by those who ought to be listening. We’re dismissed as naive, foolish, and immature. We’re overlooked because, after all, what would we know, we’re only young? The truth, however, is that today’s youth are tomorrow’s future. Our voices matter, and the government should do more to listen.
A few weeks ago, the Cherwell team and I were working on a story about Oxford offer holders stranded in Gaza. We’d written on this topic previously and this time I was particularly keen to get a comment from the Home Office – here began my ‘battle’ with His Majesty’s Government.
Over the course of two weeks, I was spun through a messy web of mis-truths. It all started with my first phone call to the Home Office where a press officer emphasised that it wasn’t policy to speak with students, saying that I should write: “The Home Office declined to comment”. So I did just that. But our conversation piqued my interest. I wanted to know why he wouldn’t speak to a student journalist.
I went back and forth several times with press officers from the Home Office and the Department for Education. After countless phone calls I was left frustrated, annoyed and, most crucially, ignored. Frustrated because I’d been lied to (in reality, no such policy existed); annoyed because I’d been messed around; and ignored because my questions remained unanswered.
The reality is that the press officers that I spoke to didn’t take me seriously because I was young. They didn’t get back to me because they didn’t think it mattered. But it does matter – it should matter. Not only because I was writing about a hugely important issue, offer holders stranded in Gaza, but because Cherwell matters, students matter, young people matter.
We might be a student paper, but that’s not to say that we write about trivial issues. Our readership comprises some of the country’s greatest minds.
The great plague of politics is that today’s decisions don’t just impact the here and now, they impact the world for many generations to come. So when our voices are ignored by governments, when we are held captive by those who are meant to listen, we lose out on an opportunity to shape policies which will profoundly affect our futures.
Some weeks after my ‘battle’ a new society emerged on Oxford’s political scene. Founded by students Esme Thompson and Callum Turnbull, the ‘Your Party Society’ was inspired by Jeremy Corbyn and Zara Sultana’s alliance. It was founded because of a feeling that the Oxford Labour Club hadn’t done a good enough job of holding the government accountable. I reached out to Your Party, as well as other Oxford political societies, to better understand their thoughts on the value of young voices. Callum was the only one kind enough to respond.
He told me that “people look at what’s going on in Oxford very closely”, adding that “there’s a strong understanding that student voices do have power, but I think that’s treated with fear more so than respect. There’s more of an attitude of ‘we need to control what’s being said’ rather than an attitude of ‘we need to listen and have a dialogue’”.
Hearing Callum’s perspective was fascinating, not only because he’s deeply involved in student politics, but because, unlike me, he was so positive about the opportunity facing young people. Our conversation covered everything from lowering the voting age, which Callum told me was a purely “political move”, to Warwickshire’s 19 year-old Council Leader, George Finch.
Reflecting on young people in politics – including Keir Mather MP, the youngest Minister since William Gladstone – Callum said: “I do think there’s space now for young people across the political spectrum to be listened to and voted for, because there’s a lot of anger about how young people have been treated over the last ten, fifteen years.
“Whether that pulls you to Reform, or whether that pulls you to the left, it all stems from that same anger. There’s anger from young people because they want to get involved, because they want to change things.”
Someone who shares this anger is ‘Anna’ (not her real name), a student activist and member of Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P). I asked if she thought her activism was taken seriously. “Somewhat,” she said. “I think the University and the government see us as a nuisance and less of a threat. If we were taken seriously I feel some change would have happened already.
“I say somewhat because I think together they do see us as a threat but it takes a lot for a large group to consistently organise and rise together.”
Similar to my conversation with Callum, I was curious whether Anna felt the government cared about the voices of young people. She said yes, “theoretically” the government “cares about young people and their futures and opinions. However, when you look at their response to any dissent or criticism, the government’s response is careless and hostile.” She added that “a prime reason for consistent protests and direct action is to get the government to listen.”
When I asked her if she felt respected, Anna said “I feel neither respected nor heard, but that doesn’t matter. It’s not the goal. The goal is to hold the government and institutions accountable irrespective of how they feel about me or fellow student activists.”
Anna might be right. Perhaps the goal isn’t merely being heard, but exercising our right to speak up for what we believe in – to speak truth to power, to better our futures, and to hold institutions to account. But even still, that doesn’t mean that we should be overlooked.
As young people, our votes and our voices matter. We might be young, but we’re not stupid. Callum doesn’t believe we’re ignored, but controlled. Anna doesn’t protest for attention but for action. And I don’t write stories for fun, but because I believe in the truth. Our voices matter, and the government ought to do more to listen.
That starts with dialogue instead of fear, respect instead of apathy, and honesty instead of lies. Today’s youth are tomorrow’s future. It’s about time we were treated as such.
An off-licence store at 67 Botley Road has been granted permission to sell alcohol despite over 100 complaints from local residents. The site of the shop was previously the Pickle and Lime, a traditional greengrocer which closed down due to ongoing road closures in the Botley area.
Pihu Enterprises Ltd., owned by Mansi and Tapan Chowdhry, applied for a license to sell alcohol in their shop from Monday to Sunday between 5am and 11pm. Their application described the premises as a “ground floor retail shop” which would sell general groceries, alcohol, tobacco, and vapes.
Over 100 locals lodged complaints to Oxford City Council in opposition to the shop’s application to sell alcohol. One individual on Hill View Road wrote that they were concerned about protecting children from harm given how close the premises is to West Oxford Community Primary School and the risk of children taking up vaping.
The “disruption of residents” due to the long opening hours of the off-licence was another concern raised by a resident on Alexandra Road, as was “public nuisance” regarding the sale of alcohol.
In response to these complaints, Mansi Chowdhry insisted on the reliability of their business in response to the backlash, saying that they “genuinely respect and value the views of the local community”.
The business owners focused on 80% of items on sale being groceries, bakery items and “day-to-day essentials” and further addressed the points of concern with their intentions and plans to combat potential issues regarding the sale of alcohol and vapes.
Conditions were also agreed to in the original paperwork, including the need to show identification if customers appear under the age of 30. The “training of staff” and being “careful of noise” were also detailed in the agreement.
The shop’s licence has since been approved, with the opening hour amended to 7am instead of the original 5am opening hour requested in the initial application.
Not that long ago, video games were considered the cultural equivalent of fast food: lowbrow, overstimulating, and best left in a packed lunch. They were something your 12-year-old cousin yelled about during Christmas, not something you’d bring up in an essay about postmodern narrative structure. Fast forward to 2025, and now the same people writing dissertations on Mrs Dalloway are also clocking 80 hours in Disco Elysium and calling it “research.”
The question is no longer should gaming be taken seriously – it’s how seriously are we prepared to go? Whether you like it or not, gaming has crawled out of the basement and into the seminar room.
Academia Has Entered the Chat
Universities have started offering actual modules on game theory, digital storytelling, and ludonarrative dissonance (a fancy way of saying “why does the story say one thing while the game makes me commit war crimes?”). Students are analysing level design like it’s architecture. Some even argue Minecraft should be on the syllabus next to Brave New World, which makes sense when you realise both involve dystopia and extensive resource gathering.
And yes, before anyone says it, gaming still has its lowbrow reputation, but you can’t deny its growing narrative sophistication. Games now explore grief, identity, civilization collapse, and late capitalism. That’s more depth than most Victorian novels that end with a marriage and tuberculosis.
Breaking the Stigma
There’s still this lingering belief, especially among people who keep Proust on their nightstand for clout, that video games are all guns and gore. The idea that games can tackle real, messy emotions still makes some critics squint. But they do. And not in a token “one sad character in a cutscene” way. Full narratives are built around depression, anxiety, grief, and identity crises.
Subscription services like Game Pas Core are filled with games like Celeste strap a metaphor for mental illness to your back and make you climb a mountain with it. Night in the Woods drops you into a dead-end hometown full of capitalist despair and talking animals with unresolved trauma, and somehow it all feels way too familiar.
Cultural Legitimacy: Now Loading
Of course, the old guard still scoffs. They see gaming as unserious – flashy, addictive, emotionally shallow. But let’s be honest: the same argument was made about novels in the 18th century, film in the 20th, and literally every medium that’s ever had the audacity to be popular and enjoyable.
Gaming is how a generation is learning to understand the world – through boss fights, dialogue trees, and morally grey decisions that have real consequences. It teaches logic, empathy, ethics, and how to keep going under pressure. Playing Dark Souls isn’t just punishing; it’s become therapy for many. Games are already doing the emotional heavy lifting, whether some consider them a lesser form of art or not.
So, has gaming finally earned a seat at the academic table? Maybe. It’s still showing up in jeans and a graphic tee while everyone else wears tweed, but at least it’s here – and probably holding a surprisingly articulate opinion on Hegelian dialectics in The Witcher 3.
And if nothing else, it’s giving students a break from essays, lectures, and the crushing weight of existential dread. Which, frankly, might be the most educational experience of all.
Oxford recently made headlines by dropping to fourth place in the TimesGood University Guide. Should we worry that Oxford is losing its way? A closer look at the factors defining the ranking reveals several flawed measurements, some of which are in direct contradiction with each other. More fundamentally, by combining every possible factor into an aggregate, it obscures the fact that different people value different things in a university. Rigorous measurement of universities’ performance can be very useful in holding institutions to account and helping students choose where to apply – unfortunately, this ranking does neither.
It ought to go without saying that a ranking table is only as valuable as the criteria behind it. This is no small quibble. Just look at the variation in between The Times’ UK and international rankings: this year Oxford came first in the world, but fourth at home; the LSE was top in Britain and 52nd in the world.
Let’s examine what data goes into the mix. According to The Times, there are seven umbrella categories: teaching quality, student satisfaction, graduate job prospects, research quality (all weighted at 1.5); entry standards, percentage of students getting a 1st or 2.1, completion rate (weighted at 1); ‘people and planet’ (weighted at 0.5).
There is an issue with almost all these metrics.
The first is that teaching quality is based on student surveys: there is no universal or objective standard against which it is measured. Even if we accept that graduating students are the best judges of teaching quality – and how many people have disliked a teacher, only to realise later how valuable they were? – this measure remains unreliable. Some students might judge relative to their expectations of the university. Others may be influenced by past experience: if you are lucky enough to have gone to an excellent school, you may be nonplussed by the teaching at Oxford, whereas those less fortunate may be in awe of the same teaching. I appreciate that it is difficult to design a more objective measure of quality, but this suggests a deeper flaw in a guide purporting to rank each university in minute detail.
Student satisfaction is a questionable metric. Of the top ten universities, Oxford and Cambridge come last here. Could it be a case of the highest expectations being the hardest please? Or do those universities which demand the most of their students – presumably a positive on the other criteria – have the least satisfied students?
Entry grades are a flawed measure too. They measure how academically successful the average student was prior to arriving, rather than the quality of the work they produce and the teaching they receive at university. This measure shows where the highest performing schoolchildren choose to go, which is likely based on reputation as much as reality – hardly a useful standard for a ranking designed to dispel preconceptions about universities.
Perhaps the most glaringly flawed statistic is the proportion getting a 1st or 2.1. If I were to be facetious, I would suggest the lower the percentage the better! This is simply a reward for grade inflation; it punishes the universities with the most rigorous exams – the very ones that push students to achieve their best and are most valued by employers. Similarly, dropout rates could be determined as much by the rigour of the course as by the support given by institutions.
Finally, we move to the suspiciously named “people and planet” section, on which Oxford scores particularly poorly. It turns out to be measured by peopleandplanet.org, an organisation which, amongst many activist aims, wants to abolish all national borders. Universities are ranked on factors ranging from how much waste is recycled to the nakedly political – divesting from the ‘border industry’, ending relationships between career services and the mining sector. There may be good arguments for doing these things, but people should be aware that factors unrelated to education influence the ranking. Related to this is the ‘social inclusion’ score. It includes things like state-school admissions (tellingly excluding grammar schools), and comparing drop out rates between different groups of students. These may be important considerations. The Times does not actually say how this influences the rankings, but, if it does at all, it contradicts the entry grades score: since universities cannot influence the quality of schooling, the easiest way to increase representation of disadvantaged groups is to reduce entry requirements.
For all of the complaints I have made about the metrics, each one may well be important to an individual person: some care very deeply about recycling; some will feel that being in a good research environment will be beneficial even as undergraduates; some will be worried about dropout rates. For the simple reason that everyone has different strengths and weaknesses, aspirations and preferences, not everyone will benefit from the same thing at university. For what is the purpose of the ranking? Is it to help prospective students choose where to apply? If so, to some the most important consideration might be that Imperial graduates appear to have the best job prospects, and that St Andrews has the best teaching as rated by students – not that Imperial came sixth and St Andrews second. If it is to help employers assess applicants, the rigour of exams might be the most relevant. For academics it might be the research quality, or staff satisfaction. To combine all the factors that might influence someone’s decision-making into an aggregate score – even if they directly contradict each other – obscures as much as it illuminates.
I would argue that Oxford (and Cambridge) is attractive because of the tutorial system, because of the confluence of extraordinarily talented individuals meeting outside their degree, and because of the beautiful surroundings, both architectural and natural. To others these may not appeal, regardless of The Times’ ranking. Rather than worrying about the league table, we should focus on preserving what makes Oxford so brilliant – and, not incidentally, so attractive to applicants.
People who dream of enjoying iconic holidays in India, often put Rajasthan on top of theIr must-visit list, and it is easy to understand why..
From its gorgeous palaces, legendary tiger reserves and mind-blowing desert safaris, no other place in the country can even come close to what Rajasthan can offer.
Whether you are a nature lover or more of a city dweller, this seven day itinerary to “The Land of Kings “ will be enough to explore the grandeur of its most famous attractions.
Best time to visit Rajasthan
November to January is the busiest but also the best time to visit Rajasthan as the temperatures are comfortable, making sightseeing easy. February is also fine, but if you plan a desert safari, it can get very hot in the Jaislmer desert.
Getting around in Rajasthan
Rajasthan is a very large state but has an excellent network of road and rail connections. Air connectivity is available from Delhi, but not between internal cities.
This self-guided itinerary, though a bit tight, is crafted by using a combination of flights, train and a road trip in order to allow you maximum time to immerse in the activities and attractions that Rajasthan has to offer.
The Indira Gandhi International Airport in Delhi will be the starting and end point of your itinerary, unless you want to extend it to any other part of India.
7 day Rajasthan itinerary
Day One: Delhi to Jaipur
Assuming your flight lands late night or early morning at Delhi, there will be a short layover before you catch your 45 minutes flight to Jaipur.
On arrival you can check into your preferred hotel for some rest and start your exploration of the Pink City in the afternoon. You can hire a tiki-tuk for around $10 and your driver cum guide will do the rest.
Take a tour of Hawa Mahal or the Wind Palace, an unmissable part of any Jaipur itinerary. Built in 1799, this impressive pink and sandstone building is the city’s most iconic landmark. You can enjoy best views from the Tattoo Cafe located on the opposite side. Overnight at Jaipur.
Day Two: Jaipur
After breakfast, head to the Amber Fort, a UNESCO World Heritage Site built in 1592 and named after the goddess of fertility, Amba Mata.The palace is huge and you will need a few hours to explore it. Hire a guide for $5, it is worth it.
Your next stop is Jai Mahal, a palace surrounded by the Man Singh lake. There is a bustling market here which is perfect for immersing in the local culture.
Finally in the evening, head to the Nahargarh Fort and enjoy the surreal sunset views from the Kali Burj vantage point. Overnight Jaipur.
Day Three: Jaipur to Sawai Madhopur
There are several early morning trains that will bring you to Sawai Madhopur in under three hours.For many, the highlight of a trip to India is spotting the majestic Royal Bengal Tiger and your best chance of spotting the animal is at the Ranthambore National Park, near Sawai Madhopur.
Seeing these magnificent creatures in a zoo or a safari park is one thing, but watching them prowling in their natural habitat is a thrilling experience, one that you are not likely to forget.
Being hunters, spotting these big cats is not always easy, but trying to track one down is equally thrilling. Ranthambore holds a high density of tigers, and going on an open jeep safari is the best way to see them.
You will go on two safaris to Ranthambore, one on your first afternoon early and the second early morning, in the company of a naturalist to maximize your chances of seeing the animal. Overnight catch the 2305 Mewar Express for Udaipur. Arrival 0725 hrs.
Day Four: Udaipur
Check into your hotel for some rest and after breakfast begin your Udaipur City exploration by visiting the City Palace, the largest of its kind in Rajasthan.
The palace was built over four centuries ago, and is actually a complex of 11 smaller palaces, each with their own unique style of architecture.
The palace sits on the banks of Lake Pichola, and offers breathtaking views of the waters and the mountains in the background.
A short walk away is the Jagdish Temple, dedicated to Lord Vishnu, Lord Ganesha and Lord Shiva. Built in 1651, the temple is free to enter for all.
Enjoy the Dharohar Folk Dance show that takes place every evening at 7pm at Bagore ki Haveli, an ancient mansion on the shores of Lake Pichola.
The show offers a magical display of traditional Rajasthani music and four types of dances played on the traditional instruments, tabla. Overnight at Udaipur.
Day Five: Udaipur
Rise early to experience the best thing to do in Udaipur City by going on a sunrise tour to the Bahubali Hills, a short drive out of the city. Watch the sunrise here as it lights up the beautiful lakes of the city. You will be spending the better part of the morning here.
Since you are already down the road, a further distance away you will come across the Kumbahalgarh Fort, an impressive UNESCO World Heritage Site, known for its very long walls, second only to the Great Wall of China. In the evening return to your hotel. Overnight Udaipur.
Day Six: Udaipur to Jodhpur
Drive early morning along NH 27 to Jodhpur(240 km/4.5 hrs) and upon arrival check into your hotel.
Go on a sightseeing tour of the city and admire the many forts and palaces in the vicinity.
Enjoy a cultural program at the Raikabagh Pakace before heading to the railway station to catch the 2015 Runicha Express night train to Jaisalmer. The train arrives at 0230 hrs, so you have ample time to relax in your hotel.
Day Seven: Jaisalmer
On your last day of the trip check out the beautiful Jaisalmer Fort in the morning and the Jaisal carvings in the Patwa Haveli in the afternoon. Later on drive to Sam Sands for your desert safari.
To be truly awed with nature, a safari in the Thar desert offers some of the best sunset views in India. Ride on camel back to roam in this untamed wilderness for an adventure of a lifetime. Return to Jaisalmer.
On your last night you have the option to catch the early morning 0240 express train to Delhi(arrival 2150 hrs) or catch the 1330 Indigo flight to Delhi arriving at 1455 hours in case you plan to fly to your next destination immediately after the tour is over.
At Oxford, desire often wears a gown. It speaks in footnotes, engages in debates in the smoking area, and sends you into an existential crisis because it used ‘dialectical’ correctly in conversation. There is a peculiar sort of longing here, less carnal than cerebral, but just as consuming. We do not so much fall in love as fall into analysis.
We call it admiration to stay respectable. But admiration at Oxford is really lust with better vocabulary. It is the fantasy of intellectual intimacy, the longing to be understood – or at least impressed – by someone whose mind reflects our own best version back at us. Tutors, supervisors, and the effortlessly-incisive postgraduate who dismantles arguments for pleasure all feel like mirrors reflecting our ambition and desire for understanding. It is this fantasy of intellectual intimacy, rather than romance, that keeps us engaged. Psychoanalysis might call it projection; the University calls it ambition. Either way, the heart writes essays it pretends are about Barthes.
The institution itself is built on sublimation, desire transformed into productivity. We fall for brilliance, then hide it under theory. The tutorial becomes the socially acceptable form of seduction: two people in a small room, locked in a battle of wits and repressed feeling. Oxford trains us to turn passion into prose and to transmute emotion into evidence. The result is an erotic life of the mind, more durable than love and far safer.
Rules against staff-student relationships try to sanitise this dynamic, but prohibition only sharpens the fantasy. Such intellectual attachments remain alive precisely because they must stay purely theoretical. Unattainable figures of authority become mirrors for desire: no mess, no heartbreak, just perpetual curiosity disguised as aspiration.
Beyond people, Oxford itself functions as a collective fantasy: the dream of being chosen, exceptional, clever enough to belong. But fantasies are brittle. You arrive and discover that everyone else is just as anxious, and you compensate with performance. You become the idea of an Oxford student, burnt-out but brilliant, ironic about your own collapse. The late-night library photo, the ball ticket you cannot afford, the caption about despair and deadlines: it is all choreography. We aestheticise exhaustion because it feels like evidence of importance. Achievement itself becomes a form of performance, a carefully curated exterior, and failure, paradoxically, acquires its own glamour.
Oxford often romanticises falling short: the tortured genius who misses tutorials because he is thinking too deeply, the student who leaves because university cannot contain her ambition. These moments of underachievement become cultural currency, a way to desire without obligation. Falling short is both spectacle and freedom, a mirror for what we cannot quite attain.
Oxford thrives on longing. You do not come here to be satisfied; you come to be almost satisfied forever, chasing the next grade, the next recognition, the next person who might finally understand you. In a generation obsessed with metrics, likes, and curated intellect, Oxford amplifies the same desire to be exceptional. Desire becomes the energy that keeps this world turning.
Perhaps that is why we all look slightly haunted by fifth week, not because we are overworked, but because we are over-imagining. Longing is safer than possession, and impossibility has its own clarity. In a culture obsessed with achievement and perception, ignorance – especially of what we truly want – may be the only honest thing left.
