Saturday 29th November 2025
Blog Page 4

Why Roblox Continues to Dominate the Gaming World in 2025

The Game That Grew Up with a Generation

Roblox isn’t just a game, it’s an entire universe built by its users, for its users. What started as a modest sandbox experience for young creators has evolved into a digital behemoth. In 2025, Roblox is no longer the scrappy underdog, it’s the main stage for millions of developers, players, and digital entrepreneurs. With an emphasis on player-generated content, social experiences, and accessible game-building tools, Roblox has tapped into something bigger than gameplay: it’s shaping digital culture.

Accessibility, Creativity, and Currency

Part of Roblox’s long-standing success lies in its accessibility. You don’t need a high-end PC or console to dive into the platform any mobile device will do. But beyond that, Roblox empowers its community with intuitive creation tools and a marketplace economy powered by its in-game currency, Robux.

And this is where the Roblox gift card quietly powers the ecosystem. These digital cards make it easier for users, especially younger ones who may not have access to online payment methods, to safely purchase Robux and access premium content or avatar upgrades. Whether it’s buying a rare skin, unlocking game passes, or supporting their favorite creator, Roblox cards are the invisible fuel keeping the engine humming.

Built for Gen Alpha, But Ready for Everyone

While originally beloved by tweens and teens, Roblox has steadily matured alongside its audience. In 2025, it’s not unusual to find creators in their twenties and thirties building complex simulations, monetised story-driven games, or educational tools using Roblox Studio. The platform has embraced developers by offering real revenue opportunities, from payouts based on engagement to partnerships with brands and even the option to cash out Robux.

This level of integration between play and profession means Roblox isn’t just where kids hang out – it’s where innovation is happening. It’s where the next generation of game designers, coders, and entrepreneurs are cutting their teeth.

Community Is King

Unlike traditional gaming titles with fixed narratives, Roblox thrives because of its user-driven content. There are no creative boundaries: horror games, tycoon simulators, fashion shows, virtual concerts – you name it, someone’s made it on Roblox. This dynamic ecosystem evolves faster than any major studio can keep up with. And the best part? Players aren’t just participants – they’re collaborators.

The platform’s social elements, like chat features, friends lists, and party systems, make it feel more like a digital hangout than a solo gaming session. That blend of community and customisation has turned Roblox into a virtual third place for millions of users around the world.

Staying Ahead of the Curve

Even as the gaming industry gets more crowded with new platforms and flashy titles, Roblox has managed to stay one step ahead. Why? Because it listens. Roblox Corporation continues to invest in AI tools, moderation systems, and user protections, focusing heavily on digital safety, especially for its younger demographic. In a time when online spaces are under scrutiny, Roblox’s proactive measures have helped maintain trust and loyalty.

On the content side, Roblox’s embrace of UGC (User-Generated Content) and its continual improvement of the development platform has created a snowball effect: more creators bring more content, which brings more players, which attracts more investment. It’s a cycle that shows no sign of slowing down.

A Digital World Fueled by Digital Goods

Roblox isn’t dominating by accident; it’s engineered for adaptability, creativity, and community. In 2025, it continues to lead not just as a gaming platform but as a cultural space where digital identity, storytelling, and play all converge.

And when it comes to fuelling that world, tools like Roblox gift cards play a surprisingly crucial role. They’re not just a payment method, they’re a gateway to immersive experiences, creator support, and digital independence.

‘An evening of refined fun’: ‘An Ideal Husband’ reviewed

0

An Ideal Husband is a guaranteed evening of refined fun. Carfax Productions’ take on Wilde’s classic play is charming and does the text’s wittiness justice. But don’t be deceived by its sparkling surface: a lot of thought and consideration has obviously gone into staging this and all its cast and crew should be very proud of the final product. 

Wilde’s text follows a rising star politician Sir Robert Chiltern and his wife, Lady Gertrude Chiltern, both apparently upstanding citizens focused on improving society. The arrival of the mysterious, seductive, and – we quickly realise – dangerous Mrs Laura Cheveley has the potential to change everything. In possession of a secret that could dishonour Chiltern in the eyes of the public and, more importantly, of his own wife – for whom he is the paragon of goodness, the ideal husband – Mrs Cheveley is prepared to blackmail Chiltern into supporting the Argentinian canal scheme (a fraudulent venture). 

At the door, producer Teddy Farrand generously offered me a programme that audience members otherwise had to pay for. Although this may seem like a strange choice for a student show, when you see the programme you will understand why. Including a preface by Dr Tim Manningmore, lecturer of English at Regent’s Park College, a director’s note by Anabelle Higgins, and plenty of photographs by Tomasz Hearfield, An Ideal Husband’s programme was as detailed and carefully put together as you’re likely to get.

Lucy Wheeler in the role of Mrs Laura Cheveley undoubtedly steals the show. She is ridiculously charming, but also brings a nuance to Wilde’s femme fatale which elevates every scene she is in. There is an intensity to her gaze and presence, which makes both her desperation and allure completely convincing. You can feel other characters being drawn in by her magnetic pull; when she is onstage all eyes are on her. 

George Porteous, Rose Hansen, and Will Hamp also give great performances. Porteous as Lord Arthur Goring had the audience in his palm, he is effortlessly funny and every bit the dandy without ever falling into caricature. Rose Hansen brings maturity and seriousness to her role, which sets her character apart from all the frivolous, fast-speaking socialites that come in and out of her home. According to the programme, both Hansen and Porteous are American. Their accent work was truly astonishing – they sounded more Victorian than some of their British castmates! Finally, Will Hamp’s earnestness wins us over to Sir Robert Chiltern, managing to get across that despite past indiscretions Chiltern is a good, honest man. 

The supporting cast was also strong. Marcus Phillips’s outrageous French accent is particularly funny. He is barely onstage, but his performance is certainly memorable. Occasionally, however, it felt like the physical humour brought by the ensemble clashed with the more subtle performances from the lead cast. 

Louise Guy’s sound design is a highlight: the live piano music – played by Guy herself and Louis Fletcher – adds greatly to the show’s elegance. Rowena Sears also deserves a massive congratulations for her costume design. Not only is she able to completely transport us to the period, but her costuming choices encapsulate the essence of the play’s characters: the juxtaposition between Cheveley’s risque black dress and Gertrude’s practical New Woman skirt and top visually sets the two up as foils. 

The show was at its weakest when it came to overcoming the challenges of the venue. Regent’s Park Chapel seems an awkward space to stage any piece of theatre, but especially one where characters are constantly walking in and out of rooms. Entrances and exits had a tendency to feel awkward and overly prolonged. Probably due to the limited space, actors also had a tendency to stand in a line while delivering their lines, which especially when the stage became crowded was slightly awkward. 

Lighting a chapel is always complicated, but this lighting designer had a particularly difficult job. Unfortunately, the difficulties of the venue seemed to prevail. Lit entirely by two uplighters, characters were more often than not poorly lit and the angles at which these lights were positioned cast strange shadows all over the back wall. For a play that was otherwise naturalistic in its design, the occasional use of blue lighting worked against the show. Although I understand it was meant to emphasise the characters’ emotional states, it mostly hampered the performances, cheapening their dramatic impact. 

Minor technical issues aside, Annabelle Higgins is a director to watch out for. Her passion for the play comes across from start to finish and she is clearly able to get great performances out of her actors. Next time Carfax Productions puts on a play, however, they might consider having their actors read Cherwell rather than The Isis.

An architectural tour of the Schwarzman

The product of a controversial £150 million donation, the new Schwarzman building is a dominating new presence for the city and university, built within the architectural patchwork of  the Radcliffe Observatory, Somerville College, and the Blavatnik School of Government. But whilst the Blavatnik takes its cue from the sleek, all-glass modernism of a Canary Wharf skyscraper, the behemothic Schwarzman, designed by Hopkins’ Architects, offers an entirely different impression.

Professor William Whyte, who acted as chair of the project board, told Cherwell that the brief for the building’s design was to create “a contemporary version of a traditional Oxford building” – a description as vague as it is evocative. And yet it describes precisely the impression one receives of the Schwarzman upon first viewing: a building which is unashamedly modern, and yet engaged in a subtle dialogue with the storied architecture of Oxford. 

Approaching from the North, the principal façade combines the familiarity of Oxford’s warm, honey-coloured stone with  vast windows, glazed with a single, uninterrupted pane. The composition centres on an outwardly projecting pavilion, supported by a sleek arcade of eight bays, which contains the compact, new Bodleian Humanities Library.  

This polished yet sober classical reference successfully negotiates the balance between tradition and modernity in a synthesis which is somewhat reminiscent of interwar stripped classicism. Whilst this stylistic parity may on the one hand recall the architectural language of continental fascism, Professor Whyte countered that the building was as much in dialogue with the work of Lutyens, as with the Palazzo del Civiltà Italiana. This classicism in geometry and form  lends the building something of a “civic” feel, to use Whyte’s phrase, an impression important for a building intended from the outset as a public, as well as an academic, space.

The Schwarzman avoids, however, the charge of inauthentic historicism.  It does not strive for the elegance of its neighbouring Radcliffe Observatory, completed in 1794 by the neoclassical architect James Wyatt. Instead, the Centre gives the impression of muscularity, a solidity of presence – largely a product of the building’s adherence to the passivhaus standard of sustainability. The symmetrical groupings of windows in the central pavilion give way to a playfully disordered composition of openings, which Whyte comments drew inspiration from the arrangement of windows at New College. 

Curiously, the entrance pavilion is a storey shorter than the rest of the building, undermining its massive presence. It gives the impression of a building embarrassed by its own bulk, stooping down at the centre to bashfully meet the Observatory. The landscaping between the two buildings manages this awkwardness with a little more flair.  The circular patterns of planting and lawn create a charming garden which flows naturally between the two buildings, easing the transition through the newly created plaza.

Moving inside the building, the sleek and crisp feel continues. The building’s interior is unashamedly modern, even corporate, although the use of wood offers a humanising touch. The main feature of the interior is the impressive glass-domed atrium, which rises through the full height of the building, flooding its depths with light. The wooden slats which crisscross the dome burst outwards like a star, and in their geometry recall the flavour of Islamic architecture. 

The atrium itself, with the off-shooting faculty offices whose names are displayed over their glass doors, recalls the labels in the quad of the Old Bodleian Library, and Whyte also notes the proportional similarity to the interior of the Radcliffe Camera. There is clearly an intent in the Radcliffe Observatory Quarter to create a coherent assemblage of university buildings mirroring the traditional University centrepiece of the Radcliffe Camera, Bodleian and Sheldonian, although an evaluation of the success of this endeavour must await the redevelopment of the as yet empty plot adjacent to the Schwarzman. 

The Schwarzman Centre, then, makes a fitting addition to an ancient scholastic heritage, sensitively tying in with the Observatory without alienating the post-modern buildings that surround it through an excess of ornament: a cautious and relatively successful approach to adding to Oxford’s built environment.

One of the most urgent films of the year: ‘Urchin’ review

0

There are few films which have the power to change how you interact day-to-day with the world. Urchin (2025) is one of them. Far from an easy watch, it seeks to capture the chaos and sheer emotional pain that comes with being homeless. It will make you stop and think the next time you interact with a homeless person, help you see the world through a more empathetic lens, and, critically, encourage you to take less for granted.

Only a deeply committed performance could enable such a film to succeed, and debut writer-director Harris Dickinson finds one in Frank Dillane. Dickinson, having made a name for himself as an actor with Beach Rats (2017) and Babygirl (2024), shows he is just as adept behind the camera as in front of it. His sharp direction combined with Dillane’s emotional intelligence as a performer brings out the complexities and contradictions of Mike’s (Dillane) story.

Mike is a homeless man whose life goes from bad to worse after he is arrested for assault. Refusing to simplify the complex issues linked to homelessness, Dickinson’s script sees Mike attempting to rebuild his life after his release from prison. The arc Mike’s life follows from there makes clear the barriers, both practical and emotional, which confront someone trying to step back from the edge. Mike faces difficulties trying to stay sober, find a job, and navigate love, all amidst a backdrop of systemic societal failings.

It is these systemic problems which the film could have done more to address head-on. Mike’s backstory is not fully developed; there’s only a passing reference to the fact he was adopted. Fleshing out his upbringing and his route to homelessness further could have made his character even richer, and linked back to some of the broader structural problems underpinning the homelessness crisis. The film’s exploration of Mike’s difficulties in getting housing after his stay in a hostel, where he is told he is likely to be “low priority”, is a strong start in this direction, but more emphasis on this theme could have made the film feel even more relevant.

One of Dickinson’s boldest choices as writer-director, moreover, is to incorporate a variety of surreal elements into the film. Some of these work better than others, and the film is perhaps strongest when it remains rooted in the harsh reality of Mike’s day-to-day experiences. Nevertheless, some elements of surrealism help to convey his deepening psychological distress, such as a bathroom scene where Dickinson’s choice of a blue-tinged palette references how Mike sees the world during withdrawal.

It is the moral ambiguity of Mike’s character, however, which makes him most relatable. Dickinson refuses to give him a purely redemptive character arc, instead opting to show both his strengths and weaknesses as a person. This is a man who assaulted someone trying to buy him food, and, when later given the chance to explain his actions to the victim, failed to do so. 


The fact the film still manages to make the audience root for Mike is one of its biggest achievements. His deep vulnerabilities are at the emotional heart of the story, and the overall impression is one of enormous wasted potential. Dillane’s performance does wonders in conveying Mike’s mix of hope, rage, despair, and joy, and how he desperately wants to believe in a vision of himself “in the driver’s seat”, as one of the self-help tapes he is given describes it. Throughout all of this, however, he emerges as a fully-formed human being, not merely a victim worthy of sympathy, and it is this which is the film’s primary strength.

At the same time, Urchin forces the audience to stop and think about what living a good life really means. In a bitter argument with love interest Andrea (Megan Northam), Mike accuses her of throwing her life away by becoming a hippie, collecting rubbish for a living, and making grand plans to start a business which she knows deep down will never amount to much. Such existentialist themes are a favourite conversation topic for Andrea, another aspect of her life which Mike ridicules, even if his hypocrisy is shown by his own far-fetched plans to start a chauffeur company.

The film thus illustrates how quickly and brutally a person’s life can unravel, while nodding to deeper questions of what makes life worth living in the first place. Andrea tentatively suggests love, but the intensity of the argument which follows shortly after makes clear the pain, as well as fulfilment, which can come from committed relationships. Mike himself explains earlier in the film that he had been avoiding dating for over two years, perhaps referencing some prior trauma which the film, frustratingly, leaves unaddressed.

Overall, this is a very strong debut from Dickinson. Strong casting, crisp writing, and an eye for the small tragedies of life mark out what must surely be a significant directorial career to come. Even his own supporting performance in the film is worthy of praise. Just as he prepares to play John Lennon in Sam Mendes’ upcoming films about The Beatles, it is clear that Dickinson’s skill at writing and directing will ensure his relevance in the film industry won’t abate any time soon. The fact this debut is so socially-conscious and thought-provoking makes this achievement all the more impressive.

A Sunday in the Park with Marianne.

0

She wears no rings. Her ears are double-pierced, hanging with astrolabes and star-studded. She wears two necklaces—one is a golden cross, and the second is a white diamond. Her wrists are thick with bracelets. But no rings. 

She no longer wears gloves. I wonder if this is by her choice, or practicality. Her hands are white and creamy. Butter-soft, and when I clasp one in my hand, she feels oddly fragile, though I know she has withstood worse.

There is a crafted beauty to her and I think perhaps her sculptor could not quite fashion rings out of his portfolio. When she smiles in greeting, her eyes are dwarfed by the cherry red of her cheeks. Tiny crescents of ocean. I kiss her cheek and feel her eyelashes soft against my skin. 

The park is heavy with promenaders. We negotiate prams and nannies and stray children; pensioners walking prim poodles. The sun bites the back of my neck. 

We haven’t met since before the war. When we were both brides flushed with the shining attention drawn by a kneeling man in a garden of roses. 

Her wedding was a ripple in time. She was gorgeous in white, adorning the arm of her father, first, and then her husband, in a house of God, under the eyes of God. 

Deep into the wilderness, there is a grove secluded from the public eye. I have never known another soul to walk there. It is shabbier than the rest of the park, overgrown and half wild. An anti-Eden: I think that God cannot see us here. 

The bench where we sit is chilled by shade and I am drawn closer to her warmth. The green of the trees accentuates her blue-and-black dress; I think of how the forest caresses the night sky. I would kiss her there, under the stars, as I kiss her now. Her lips are paper-soft. 

There are no sparks; no fireworks. We ache and undulate, oceans roiling within and we muffle the sounds that mouths make when they work. I wonder if she muffles them for him. 

I wonder a lot, but very little when she is opening, like a flower in the sun, wrapping her arms around me, pushing her forehead into mine. 

When she is like this, I forget that when she goes home she becomes mummy and she will melt into her husband’s arms as she has done mine. That when I get home, I will breathe only the colour black. Thick and suffocating, it winds down my throat, and only her oxygen in my lungs can clear it. I die on a hill of cliches, and find her alone to be new. 

She wakes me from dreamlike musings of reality with soft kisses to the side of my neck. I am a feeling creature in her arms. Nothing but stupid sentiment, irrational and insolent in the face of reason. Of truth. She cradles my face and I feel like a virgin again, brimming with excitement rather than the usual dread. 

I know, without reservation, that she cannot remain in my possession. My grasp is firm, and I have known what it is to hold onto something and never let go. Yet, as we hear bicycle bells and carrying laughter, she pulls from me. My planet spirals out of orbit. 

She doesn’t feel it like I do. Like a tug at her ribs, or a hole in her heart. 

And I hate her for it. 

I hate that it is easy for her. She slips from loving me to loving her husband like changing clothes, an old habit, an easy routine. 

Falling through longings, I find I am made low by the weight of my own desire. My own wretched flesh which, goose-flesh rising, wants only to touch her. 

When she leaves, I will know everything there is to know about love. The bicycles chime like church bells and I hear her children laughing on the breeze.

They are whispers in time, and I am centuries-deep. 

I watch her push two rings onto her left hand. The sun bounces off the stones; dazzling. 

Magnolias

0

Slender boughs tremulous under the weight

of tight-lipped buds, pink like dawn’s blushing glow,

she peeps from the garden, standing tiptoe,

feels the sun’s caress. Like the call of fate,

silken rays command the buds to unfurl,

and burst forth in springtime’s dizzying whirl.

A whimsical breeze o’er the garden plays,

fills each flower’s chalice with melody,

his laughter finds an echo in the tree,

rustling, whispering of joyous summer days

to come, and under the spell of his song,

the magnolia blooms and dreams all night long.

A sudden summer storm. A cloak of night

muffles the pallid moon; sky torn apart

by lightning, like a cry wrenched from the heart.

The magnolia shudders with strange delight,

the breeze engulfs her in a wild embrace,

as half-abashed, each flower hides its face.

Breathless morning finds the tree all forlorn,

aloof in the stillness. Blossom’s tatters

Strewn on the ground like a dream that shatters

in the cold light of day. In silence mourn

the disheveled boughs, for the breeze is still,

a crushed petal falls on the windowsill,

limp like a discarded ribbon, some sink

into the sparse patch of soil, or are blown

to the street to be trampled by feet unknown.

Dirt obscures the petals’ once pearly pink,

yet from their deaths will next year’s blooms be born,

So, dear magnolia, look not so forlorn!

Shy of beauteous ruin, the breeze stays away,

repentant; soon in gaudy leaves she smiles,

regretting her blooms no more, she beguiles

the breeze once more as friends to laugh and play.

At times the breeze remembers in his flight

The scent of petals in the passionate night.

A Spell For Students 

0

Reading unfinished? Essay half written? Lectures not attended? Then this is the spell you need, guaranteed to make you succeed at your degree*

Under the full moon brew two 

tablespoons of tea, or if you prefer 

coffee three.

At the subsequent 

sunrise, smear a single tear 

stolen from a tutorial onto 

a clearly torn page from a textbook.

Stir the above in an unwashed mug, 

complete with a broken pencil snapped with love. 

As the rain slices through the night, sprint 

around the quad thrice, mug outstretched

and mouth open wide. 

Scream carpe diem, be bold, be free

until your voice is sore, then 

pour the contents across the floor

and academic success will be yours!

*works best with 8 hours of sleep

Brown boots, black boots, and the politics of autumn style

0

Autumn always brings a question of existential importance: brown boots or black boots? It’s more than a colour choice; it’s a subtle declaration of intent. Fashion might be dismissed as frivolous, but what we wear communicates who we are, who we aspire to be, and how seriously the world should take us.

I recently found myself in a full-blown brown-boot-versus-black-boot debate with my courier. They were unhelpfully neutral; I was less so. It was the perfect reminder that even small fashion choices can spark surprisingly fierce philosophical reflection.

In academic spaces, this balancing act is especially tricky. Women are told to dress “polished but not distracting,” to look professional without appearing frivolous. My solution? Fashion that is purposeful, characterful, and unmistakably you.

  1. Curate a Signature Piece
    Every wardrobe needs an anchor. It could be a hat, a coat, or a pair of gloves, something that announces you before you even speak. Mine is a Dutch naval coat from the 1980s, thrifted by my dad, which somehow gives me instant gravitas. And let’s be honest, thrifted coats are basically wearable history lessons. Think Anna Wintour’s glasses: a small signature can be surprisingly powerful.
  1. Decide Your Makeup Philosophy
    Maximumist or minimalist, you need a lane. My red lipstick is practically part of my identity; without it, I feel unfinished. Others may swear by eyeliner, foundation, or even a subtle contour. Consistency is key; it signals confidence, not vanity.
  1. Embrace Colour and Pattern
    Autumn doesn’t have to be beige. Bold block colours – hunter green, burgundy, mustard yellow – can be contrasted with patterned skirts or trousers. Gingham, tweed, or even an unexpected velvet texture injects personality into otherwise “safe” outfits. And please, for the love of fashion, one statement jewellery piece is enough; your pendant doesn’t need a fan club.
  1. Develop a Signature Scent
    Scent is the ultimate style statement: invisible but unforgettable. Chanel No. 5 may be classic, but consistency transforms fragrance into a subtle declaration of identity.
  1. Boots Matter
    Short boots in brown are versatile, approachable, and charming; long black boots are imposing, confident, and excellent for stomping through metaphorical or literal academic battles. Chunky heels are practical without being pedestrian. When in doubt, think contrast and statement.

Fashion is not just about clothes. It’s about individuality, confidence, and the quiet assertion of identity. A thrifted coat, a pop of colour, or a signature scent can transform how you feel and how the world sees you. So next time you hesitate over brown versus black boots, remember: fashion is a conversation. Choose boldly, wear proudly, and never let anyone tell you your shoes aren’t doing the talking.

“You’re going to make mistakes”: Katie Robinson on fashion and sustainability

0

Katie Robinson is a sustainable fashion journalist, content creator, and campaigner, with experience working in fashion marketing. Her videos delve into the existence and effectiveness of marketing trends, and the development of sustainability in fashion. 

I (virtually) sat down with Katie to discuss hot topics in fashion – ranging from the fashion of Formula 1, Victoria’s Secret’s ‘inclusive’ new fashion show (neither secret nor inclusive), to the many ways that AI is rapidly taking over the fashion industry. 

Cherwell: How do you decide what your videos will be on? Are they usually about what current topic angers you the most?

Katie: It really varies! Sometimes it will be something that I’ve noticed happening in the industry – maybe other people are talking about it in magazines and I feel I have an angle on it. Or maybe there’s a trending topic on social media, and I’m like “Oh, this could do with a sustainable fashion spin.” As much as I want to yap on and on about my interests, I need to make it accessible to the most people, which is something I’ve really had to learn whilst making my channel. 

Cherwell: Since the quality of clothes is getting worse all the time, is there a way to identify higher quality pieces at lower prices?

Katie: It’s a hard one, and I say this all the time in my videos – I am not a materials expert! There’s always this argument of ‘polyester is good’ or ‘polyester is bad’, and I don’t have a definitive answer…  

Personally, I try to avoid a high percentage of polyester – I’ve read all the articles about health concerns, and obviously it’s bad for the environment. That’s scary, but some people say you do need polyester, especially for things like activewear where there aren’t a lot of attainable solutions. It’s hard to avoid, and so I try to go for second-hand options (maybe 75% of my wardrobe is second-hand). When I shop firsthand, I try to invest in something I really believe in.  

Cherwell: You mentioned in a recent video how brands are also aware of how we interpret certain words like ‘polyester’, and so try to deceive us by using other terms we won’t recognise. It’s funny how we really don’t know what we’re buying…

Katie: I know, and it’s so dependent on what brands think – and they’re getting smarter all the time. They’re taking genuine concerns from consumers and trying to warp that into getting us to buy their products. It’s so, so hard to navigate. No one is perfectly sustainable; you’re going to make mistakes.  

The one thing I always focus on is the garment itself. Do I love it? Do I think I’ll care for it? Will I keep it in my wardrobe? That, to me, is better sustainability wise than buying a piece from the most sustainable brand that you’re never going to wear.

Cherwell: Since so much of sustainable impact is up to the brands to control, is there anything that we as consumers can do?

Katie: I do believe we can make a difference. When you talk about how much brands are producing, and how there’s this massive issue of recycling, it feels like, “Okay, well what can I do, this is a massive industry issue.” But I do believe that everyone doing something tiny makes a massive difference. Wearing your clothes to death and recycling on your own may not seem like you’re making a difference, but I think it does. It makes me feel better as a consumer. But I know it’s overwhelming, so imperfect sustainability is absolutely fine. A tiny step is still a step.

Cherwell: Given your experience working in the fashion industry, do you think that companies actually take sustainability as a major part?

Katie: I worked for a very small brand before, that championed their sustainability, and I do think they were doing some very interesting things. But it’s hard to be a fashion brand. You need to put profit above all else in a capitalist society – that’s just unnegotiable. There aren’t many examples of brands that you can look at that are sustainability first and profit after. I do think there are a few that are choosing a balance and it’s working – I always talk about GANNI. I think their sustainability marketing is good and really clear for consumers. Whether they’re at the forefront of the industry I’m not sure… But as a consumer of them, I do feel informed. There’s also Stella McCartney, which pushes a lot of innovation in the industry. I saw some brands put ‘the planet’ on their list of shareholders, and I think that’s a really cool technique – I would love to be a fly on the wall in these meetings and see if there’s actually this impact.

Cherwell: What do you think should be done about the amount of fast/ultra-fast fashion (Shein, Temu) that is in charity shops? Should charity shops just throw these clothes away?

Katie: Such a good question. The first thing that pops to mind is no; we don’t want to be throwing stuff away. But we also don’t want to be giving this stuff away. Immediately, you might think that well, giving away all this fast fashion is a really good use for it. But it’s about the psychological aspect of giving – for lack of better words – crap clothes to people. That’s just not nice for anybody; it’s not a solution.  

I think the first thing has to be turning off the tap – regulating these companies to stop producing so much. The second thing is to make sure that some of the money going to billionaire companies is turning into fashion recycling, so when it gets to the inevitable point that no one wants to buy these clothes, you can use them to make more clothes, packaging, or fillers for sofas. That might be a better life than what they have now, without throwing them away across the world or giving them to people that don’t want them. 

Cherwell: With the rise of TikTok fashion, do you think that fashion nowadays is really self-expression if we’re all just dressing the same?

Katie: No (laughs)! This is something I could yap about all day. Fashion and trends have become symbiotic – it’s not about self-expression, it’s about consuming. Fashion influencers have become shopping influencers. We have lost the meaning of why we buy clothes in the first place (but obviously there was always the aspect of having to clothe ourselves). If you think about ‘90s/2000s fashion, compared to what we would define as 2020s fashion, there’s nothing you could give as a defining moment other than microtrends that already feel cringy. I think it’s so interesting how everything feels outdated. 

Cherwell: You made a video about how Hailey Bieber’s Rhode company leaning into the use of food in their marketing is likely related to the rising cost of daily essentials. Do you have any future marketing trend predictions?

Katie: I think that everything is going to revolve around this new type of influencer that we’re starting to see – brands are now wanting influencers that stand for more than just a shopping recommendation. They want people that have jobs in the real world and a following outside of fashion that they can tie their industry to. This is for credibility, because fashion right now is flailing. Also, brands will push influencer relationships more, especially with sponsored influencer community events like the Lyas fashion watch party in Paris. It’s insane, but such a good example of how brands are now going to people rather than bringing people to them. Overall, consumers are looking for more substance from the people they’re watching.  

Cherwell: You’ve discussed new companies that are being driven by AI trend predictions in your videos before. Do you think that AI can take over fashion – in place of human designers?

Katie: If we’re talking about the fashion industry in the last 5-10 years, and how it’s devolved into trends and consumerism, then yeah. I do think that AI can rule most of that. But if we’re talking about fashion as an art form, then no, I don’t think you can remove the human aspect of that at all! There has to be someone creating something and someone seeing and connecting to it for it to still be called fashion and not ‘shopping’. Already we’re seeing AI take over so much of the fashion industry. There are so many jobs being replaced that we’re not aware of. What is the point if fashion isn’t human?’

Cherwell: You shared a post in an ‘AI in Fashion’ video recently that noted how there were AI models before plus-size models in Vogue. Do you think there’s a future of inclusivity for body types in fashion, or is it inherently exclusive?

Katie: Oo, that’s a hard one. Again, it comes down to whether fashion wants to go for the shopping only route, or if they’ll listen to consumers that want to see fashion as an art form. In the art case, they can’t ignore body and size inclusivity –people are sick of seeing fashion on skinny models. 

However, the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show just came back. People were like “Oh, it was inclusive this time” (which they aren’t usually), but I don’t think it was all that inclusive. I have to say, I didn’t watch all of it, because I wasn’t that interested (chuckles). It’s another case of the same body type wearing polyester clothing. People did seem to like it online… Maybe this goes against my point of brands having to stop being deaf to size inclusivity. I’ve seen all the Vogue reports for this season (and the prior ones) that size inclusivity is steadily going down. It’s a known issue, and people are picking it up, but fashion just doesn’t seem to be responding! As much as I think that consumers don’t want this, and it will get in the way of profits, fashion seems to think something different. We had a sweet spot in the 2010s-2020s where it was really improving on the runway. Plus-sized clothing was obviously not developed enough, but still trending upwards. And they just threw all that out the window.

Réhahn: “Photography, at its best, is an exchange of respect”

0

Réhahn is an award-winning French photographer, based in Vietnam and known for his portrait, lifestyle and impressionist photography. His most famous photo, The Hidden Smile, was gifted by Nguyen Phu Trong, former Secretary of Vietnam’s Communist Party, to President Emmanuel Macron in celebration of 45 years of diplomatic relations between the two countries. Réhahn’s photography has won a variety of accolades and his work Best Friends is the most expensive photograph ever sold in Vietnam.

How I came to interview Réhahn is a peculiar story. It was early September when I visited Vietnam and met a German-Irish backpacker who would, in the most literal sense, change the course of my journey. We met fleetingly and, having travelled through the country in opposite directions, exchanged advice for the next part of our journeys. On my bus ride the following morning, I was surprised to find that she had slipped a note into my bag. It explained how, late in the night, she had thought of one final recommendation: Réhahn’s Precious Heritage Museum. One memorable visit and two emails later, I found myself interviewing the world-famous photographer.

I began by asking Réhahn about The Precious Heritage Project, the namesake of his museum. He described how, like all his works, the project was one born out of curiosity. He first visited Vietnam in 2007 with the French NGO Les Enfants du Vietnam and, in the north of the country, met members of the Hmong and Dao ethnic groups. Through further research, he learnt of Vietnam’s 54 ethnic groups as well as their respective languages, traditional crafts and clothing. Realising that no complete cultural record existed, he set out to document the country’s diversity through photography, giving rise to The Precious Heritage Project. He explained how “it felt natural to include portraits of tribespeople in their formal dress, to give a sense not only of the craftsmanship but also of the people themselves”. We then discussed his nearly decade-long journey pursuing the endeavour.

Cherwell: What was the most significant challenge you faced during your travels to complete the project?

Réhahn: Many of these journeys were physically demanding, involving long drives or hikes on remote mountain roads, unpredictable weather, and language barriers. But the greatest challenge by far was finding people who still possessed their traditional garments. In many cases, the outfits had been buried with the older generations or replaced by ready-made clothing from China. I was searching specifically for handcrafted textiles that carried the generational knowledge and traditions of each group, and those were often difficult to find.

Sometimes I would visit one village where no traditional garments remained, only to discover many in another village belonging to the same ethnic group. It was never about meeting each group simply to check them off a list, it was about finding the most authentic representation of their cultural heritage.

Another major challenge was obtaining permission to enter certain areas where ethnic groups live. A few communities near border regions are under government regulation, and it took me as long as three years to receive approval to photograph there. The administrative side of completing this project was, in many ways, as demanding as the physical one.

Cherwell: Each photo in your Precious Heritage Collection represents one ethnic group. What was your creative process like trying to portray heritage through photography?

Réhahn: It’s impossible to capture an entire culture in one image, so I never even tried. Instead, I simply tried to represent the person in front of me in the most honest way possible. I hoped that these photos could represent several layers (not the entirety) of the cultures: the personality of the tribesperson in the portrait, the craftsmanship of the garments they wore, the embroidery, beading, and textiles acting almost like signatures for those who had created them and the generations before who had passed down the skills. I never imposed direction; I let the person’s dignity and presence lead the image.

I feel close to early portrait photographers like Nadar, who saw photography not as mechanical reproduction but as a psychological encounter. He believed that the lens could reveal something of the soul, and I think that remains true today. My goal is to create a visual connection that carries emotion, identity, and respect across time.

Cherwell: You have previously talked about the idea of “mutual exchange” in portrait photography – could you explain a bit what you mean by this term and how it shapes your process?

Réhahn: For me, every portrait must be based on balance. The subject gives me their image, but I give them something too, such as prints, friendship, or in some cases continued support in education, essential needs, healthcare etc. Many of the people I photographed have become close friends; some I still visit every year. You can’t take a meaningful portrait in five minutes. You have to sit, drink tea, listen, share your story too. Photography, at its best, is an exchange of respect. The kind of portrait photography that is just about snapping photos of strangers without speaking to them, isn’t my style. I love learning from others, especially the elders in these communities, who have lived through so many historical events. That exchange keeps the photograph alive. It’s an act of sharing.

Cherwell: What do you think makes a good photographer? What advice would you give to someone trying to make a career out of photography?

Réhahn: A good photographer is, above all, a good observer. It is not about equipment or even raw talent; it is about patience, empathy, and curiosity. My advice would be to learn how to truly see, and to slow down and notice what others overlook.

It is also important to create your own rules and not become trapped by convention. Stop imitating and start inventing.

Cherwell: You’ve now lived in Hoi An for over 20 years. Have you learnt much Vietnamese since moving and how has it shaped your interactions?

Réhahn: I speak Vietnamese now, which helps me connect with people. However, in the ethnic villages, many people don’t speak Vietnamese. The languages are totally different, so there’s no way for me to be able to communicate fluently everywhere.

In the early years, I made a lot of mistakes, some of them quite funny. But that often helped me to connect with people. Language, like photography, is about intention. People feel when you are trying sincerely and they tend to meet you halfway.

Cherwell: In recent years, you have been experimenting with impressionist photography, particularly through your series Memories of Impressionism. How did your interest in this photographic technique arise and in what ways is Impressionism significant to you?

Réhahn: After years of portrait and lifestyle photography, I began to feel the need to go beyond documentation, especially after officially completing The Precious Heritage Project in 2020. I have always admired painters such as Monet, Cézanne, Degas, and Renoir for their courage to question how we perceive light and movement. During the lockdown, I finally had the time to study them deeply.

That enforced solitude during the pandemic, in many ways, mirrored the voluntary isolation chosen by so many great artists. Cézanne left Paris to return to Aix-en-Provence, where he painted alone before the Sainte-Victoire mountain. Van Gogh, in the South, also experienced long periods of solitude that became the crucible of his work. Monet, at the end of his life, withdrew to Giverny and found in his garden an inexhaustible world of motifs and reflections. Like them, I found that solitude can be a creative refuge. My Impressionist photography continues the questions these artists began rather than imitating their answers. I’m inspired by the way that Degas’ close cropping, Monet reflections, and Cezanne’s moody colour palettes, among other things.

Each image is an experiment in what a photograph can suggest rather than what it shows. I feel I could spend just as many years exploring this style as I did with The Precious Heritage Project, which says a great deal, considering I spent more than a decade researching Vietnam’s ethnic groups.

The research into Impressionism is twofold. I spent years studying the philosophies of the movement and even wrote a book about my discoveries, Impressionism: From Photography to Painting. At the same time, I have been developing my own techniques, since creating the idea of the ephemeral in a photograph is entirely different from doing so in a painting or sculpture.

Cherwell: Could you tell me a bit about the different methods you use to achieve an impressionist style and the process of developing them? When I visited your gallery in Hoi An, the staff told me about the use of smoke, reflections and wind to create different effects.

Réhahn: Yes, I use natural elements such as reflections and heat distortions to soften the image directly in-camera. The wind and smoke are part of it but they actually make it more difficult. If there is too much wind, for example, the distortion is too strong. The smoke makes it hard to breathe and can cover-up the line distortion from the heat.

In the right conditions, the heat distortion creates an effect that resembles brushstrokes. It adds a kind of three-dimensionality to the photographic surface, which from a distance appears to have the texture of paint. I find it fascinating how this distortion changes not only the way we see the image, but also how we perceive the very structure of the surface itself. When I photograph reflections in water, the effect is slightly different. The movement of the water still mimics texture, but it creates something more dreamlike, with softened colours and diffused light. My idea is to capture an image that will never return, and to explore the effects of light on these fleeting moments.

I don’t rely on digital manipulation; I prefer to work with chance. The process requires patience, because the scene exists only for a moment before it disappears. I could never capture the same image twice. That impermanence is precisely what I seek, and it aligns closely with the explorations of the Impressionists.

Perhaps more importantly, this work pushes back against a different kind of temporality, the temporality of the internet and digital images in general. The majority of images are instantly uploaded, shared, liked, and then almost as instantly forgotten. My goal is almost the reverse. I capture a scene that is fleeting in real time, something that changes within a breath, a reflection, a gust of wind, then arrest it in a photograph. In that tension lies the power: the scene disappears, the image stays. It becomes something you have to look at twice to understand what is real and what is imagined.

Cherwell: How do you perceive the relationship between fine art and photography? Do you think there is growing exploration of this overlap and, if so, why?

Réhahn: The boundaries between fine art and photography are dissolving, and I think that is a good thing. Both ask the same questions: how is our vision different, and how can we distinguish ourselves from the flood of smartphone images and now AI-generated works? As artists, more than ever, we should avoid building walls between mediums and instead embrace one another as peers exploring the liminal space of creativity.

My Impressionist work exists somewhere in the in-between. It is rooted in reality but transformed by imagination. I believe more artists are exploring this overlap because we are no longer afraid to blur definitions. Art evolves by testing its limits.

Perhaps that tension, between what is seen and what is felt, is where photography begins to become something else. Whether it still belongs to photography or moves into fine art, I’ll leave for others to decide.

Cherwell: Finally, what is the most important lesson photography has taught you?

Réhahn: That the most satisfying work lies in both connection and the courage to invent new rules. That’s how you become not just a photographer, but an artist. Photography has also taught me that the story doesn’t end when I press the shutter. It continues in the eyes of those who look long enough to see what I saw.

Find out more about Réhahn and his works at www.rehahnphotographer.com