Tuesday, April 29, 2025
Blog Page 447

A Phenomenology of Lost Cinemas

0

Every time I frantically peruse my notes, I find the keystone unlocking the bliss of unbridled writing flow by way of recalling. I remind myself of how stepping into an ethereal film theatre imprinted itself in my internal memory, shepherding me hic et nunc. I was in my second semester of undergraduate studies, planting my roots abroad, in academia, and, tentatively, in tipsy adulthood. In other words: I was utterly and foolishly open to possibilities. 

Amsterdam, end of March. The day after my birthday I moseyed up to the Eye Filmmuseum: an experimental exhibition held by local filmmakers excavated its way into a raw, uncultivated facet of the self that I did not yet know was so close to the core. An epiphany. I felt like a novel St Paul on the cinematic road to Damascus realising that I needed, almost vocationally, to call art – the most synthetic of the arts – to the centre stage of my academic endeavours. This way only could I feel whole, authentic to my aspirations. 

Oxford, end of March. Four years later. The day before my birthday, I nostalgically fathomed that I didn’t know when I could return to the MOLT, the cinema auditorium at St Anne’s College where Film Aesthetics students spend afternoons relishing screenings and unpredictable heating. However, that in this quarantine of grief a film student would also mourn the closure of cinemas should have not come as a surprise. A more subtle, unanticipated chord was struck instead by many non-cinephile friends reminiscing, missing, and even dreaming about going to the movies. A collective phenomenology of the lost cinemas started to claim irrefutable urgency.

As soon as I launched my little informal survey I was submerged by a cluster of familiar, yet unexpected voices invoking cinema’s place as an institution of empathetic sensibility, an aesthetic panacea, and a precise landmark in their social geographies of feelings. “It’s like being on a plane; you’re locked in for a certain amount of time away from the world. You succumb to it fully” wrote C., and I cannot help but wondering whether in the neurosis of multitasking, cinemas reconfigure themselves as sites of healthy suspension. But behind the passivity that cinematic immersion seems bathed in, lies a trusting commitment to the unfolding moment, a total presentness, a full-fledged embracing of the cinematic flow. 

Indeed, most interviewees took pains to punctuate all the ritualistic legs from “vacating my own environment” to entering a whole other realm, as J. puts it. Driving long ways in anticipation, liturgical walks, rushing through shortcuts delusionally taken to be only theirs, secret. Ticket checks, excited smiles. Tearing the velvety veil onto the solemn darkness. The smell of popcorn. The infamous search for the seating. Lights out, world gone.

“I love that moment, like I’m about to go on a ride”. Freed from the entrapment of  notifications, “at the cinema stories fly high”. D. and N. make me smile for their fitting use of the vocabulary of juvenile emotionality. Larger-than-life, the engrossing physicality of the moving image enraptures, making one abdicate themselves: a sacrifice in the name of the mystique of wonder. “Cinema began in wonder”, Sontag[1] writes, recalling the faces of the first audiences erupting in stupor while watching the Lumiere brothers’ The Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat Station. Indeed “all of cinema is an attempt to perpetuate and to reinvent that sense of wonder”. It then becomes easy to sympathise with D., who during oppressing times went every Sunday to the cinema “because real life wasn’t enough”. The devotion to that very sense of alive wonder made me envision cinemas as places of aesthetic worship, with the MOLT as the latest simulacrum of that first Dutch encounter. 

Sometimes a refracted rainbow graces the staircase as you leave the MOLT cinema auditorium at St. Anne’s.

The faith in cinematic wonder is a strange kind of faith, since it demands its disciples to abide by a sole, strict requirement: opening up to the possibilities of your feelings, and to strangers. Taking up the risk for the film to be underwhelming, or of enduring an annoying neighbour. In other words, it’s the only faith that doesn’t promise you any sacred land, but asks you to be a sensitive, appreciative traveller. The creed unravels through visual meditations, reimagining temporal and spatial coordinates. The experience of contemplation becomes on a par, and at times even superior to its object. “Whether I do or do not understand the film, ‘the eye licks it all up instantaneously’ all the same”, S. remarks, quoting Wolf’s[2] famous essay on cinema.

However, aesthetic solace is also to be found in observing the observing: G. loves witnessing how the film speaks to the ethereal space of the dark theatre, the relationships that it creates with the audience and intersubjectively, between the viewers viewing. In doing so, the audience becomes part of the sublime: “You didn’t write the film. But [..] you contribute to the story that we’re telling because suddenly when you hear this song, it’s your emotions, it’s your sensibility [..] you become a writer of the film and we’re writing it together”, recounts film director Xavier Dolan[3].

Hence, it is no mystery that philosopher Stanley Cavell[4] titled the first chapter of his systematic study of film, “An Autobiography of Companions”. In his introductory enquiry on the consciousness of film experience Cavell elevates empathetic engagement as a psycho-social condition inscribed in the very metaphysics of the filmic medium. Intentional and embodied sharing of intimacy makes the external forms of life of the screen personal, and the personal reactions external. A sense of community. “I’m at one with the audience”, all my friends have reported. 

Seen this way, the film theatre experience becomes the aesthetic offspring of the Ancient Greek storgé, the instinctive familial affection, but voluntarily gifted to strangers. But families need not be only metaphorical. Indeed, for P., going to the movies elicits childhood memories of joyful family gatherings, reunited for the occasion. At the end of his contribution, he also writes, somewhat furtively: “Now I bring to the cinema only “serious” dates”. It might be naïve, but since then I can’t help but asking whether he uses film theatres to see if his date would fit his picture of affective happiness. As for me, in the museum of loved paraphernalia, cinemas would not be an object. They would be the museum itself.


[1] Susan Sontag, “The Decay of Cinema”, New York Times, last modified Feb 25, 1996, https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/00/03/12/specials/sontag-cinema.html

[2] Virginia Wolf, ‘The Cinema’ in Selected Essays. ed. by David Bradshaw, New York, Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 172.

[3] Xavier Dolan, ‘Xavier Dolan on Blink-182, Bottoming, and Being the World’s Biggest Kate Winslet Fan’, last modified Dec 8, 2016, https://www.vulture.com/2016/12/xavier-dolan-on-his-new-film-critics-and-more.html

[4] Stanley Cavell, The world viewed: reflections on the ontology of film, New York, Viking Press, 1971, pp. ix, 9-12.

Friday Favourite: Crush

0

When I was a kid, I would re-read the books I found exciting, and which had characters I ‘got on with’ – a lot of Enid Blyton and Eva Ibbotson. The main reason I re-read things now is because I have to sit an exam on the text(s) in question; a process of revising plot and picking out quotes to memorise. It’s rare that I read anything twice for pleasure … yet, I’m not sure that pleasure is the reason I come back to Crush. I think I keep re-reading these poems because I’m still trying to understand them.

Crush won the Yale Series of Younger Poets award when it came out in 2004 and author Richard Siken was 37. The following year Siken received the Lambda Literary Award for Gay Men’s Poetry for it. It’s a small collection – the copy I have is 62 pages – but it’s not a light read. The 21 poems are dark in character and panicky in structure, falling somewhere between the dual meanings of “crush” as compression and as an infatuation. 

The opening poem is called ‘Scheherazade’, and its first lines do a good job of capturing the mood of the collection: “Tell me about the dream where we pull the bodies out of the lake / and dress them in warm clothes again.” The “Tell me” is a recurring phrase in this collection, reminiscent of the call for Scheherazade’s storytelling in One Thousand and One Nights. It’s also worth noting that many of the poems here have grown from the death of Siken’s boyfriend in the early 90s; sometimes they seem to be speaking to a ghost (or perhaps a body pulled from the late). Often it’s pretty explicit: the line “I don’t really blame you for being dead but you can’t have your sweater back”, from ‘Straw House, Straw Dog’, is typical in its black humour. In my personal favourite of these poems, ‘Seaside Improvisation’, Siken writes “You wanted happiness, I can’t blame you for that, / and maybe a mouth sounds idiotic when it blathers on about joy / but tell me / you love this, tell me you’re not miserable.” The frequent use of the second-person pronoun throughout these poems creates such a degree of intimacy that it almost feels as if you, the reader, are the lost lover. Line breaks that run all over the page present a visual version of Siken’s often highly intense tone.

It’s understandable if this isn’t sounding like the type of escapism you need right now; you may well feel plenty compressed already, and if mentions of mental ill-health, self-harm and suicide are triggers for you, I probably wouldn’t recommend this one. On the other hand, I’ve always found Crush a thought-provoking rather than depressing read. For me, its effects are comparable to being awake in the early hours of the morning, on your own; it feels a bit dangerous and difficult to decipher, but the emptiness also brings a form of peace. It’s not just about the crush, in whatever sense of the word, but also about the escape with it, the idea of calling on someone to take you away. To return to the story of Scheherazade, whose tales were designed to put off being killed by her husband, there’s a sense also of poetry for survival. Scheherazade succeeded and escaped her fate, so why can’t we?

The final line of the last poem in Crush, ‘Snow and Dirty Rain’, is “We are all going forward. None of us are going back.” Siken is clearly going through something in these poems, but in taking us on the journey with him he shows himself to ultimately come through it. I re-read these poems, still not fully understanding them – but I’m not sure they’re really meant to be understood. Their identity is so specific and intimate that their individual images are often elusive. As a whole, these are poems that are themselves still trying to work out how to talk about the loss of a person, how to cope in general, and how to keep going forward. If you’re going through something yourself – and who isn’t? – this collection may be the catharsis you need. 

Oxford Union falls short on Michaelmas reforms

0

Union staff have failed to complete diversity and equality training, and committee training in Hilary term was not attended by the full committee.

In Michaelmas, blind Ghanaian student Ebenezer Azamati was violently removed from the debating chamber of the Union, and had his membership temporarily revoked. This led to impeachment proceedings and the resignation of the President and subsequently, the Union implemented new standing orders for the training of staff and committee members.

Standing Order E15 states: “The President shall each term approach the University Training, Mentoring and Advisory Services to arrange for: a) An implicit bias workshop b) A race awareness workshop c) A disability awareness workshop to take place for all members of staff and committee.” These workshops, however, took place for students, but not staff, in Hilary term.

Staff training has not yet occurred, despite it being mandated by the standing orders. Rule 59.a, concerning staff, in particular staff supervision, states that “general oversight” for the Society’s staff lies with the Bursar, who is part of the Society’s permanent paid staff.

Training sessions for the student committee were held in first week of Hilary term, but were not attended by those who had “valid reason” (clarified in an announcement to committee as ‘a tutorial that can in no way be moved’). While there was supposed to be “another [session] for those members of committee who did not make the first one”, this session did not occur.

Sara Dube, the ex-President, told Cherwell: “Organizing the training was a priority for me in Michaelmas, after I brought the Standing Order change to TSC. I was well aware that everyone’s schedules would fill up quickly once term began, so wanted to get the training dates and times in as soon as possible.

“I booked two sessions for the first week of Hilary, one with the University Disability Advisory Service and one with OUSU, over six weeks in advance. I made it clear to committee that the training was compulsory, and was glad to see the majority of committee attend both sessions (those who couldn’t attend had an immovable academic commitment at the same time).

“When the possibility of arranging a second training came up in Access Committee a few weeks later, I agreed. However, the initial trainings were booked over six weeks in advance and it wasn’t possible to find a suitable date for us until the last couple of weeks of term. I suggested to Access Committee that it may be more practical to have the next session at the start of Trinity, and they agreed.

“To ensure ease of arrangement of training for all future Presidents, I left all correspondence regarding the arrangements on a folder in the President’s inbox.” 

In a comment to Cherwell, current Union President Mahi Joshi, said: “In accordance with the Standing Orders, all members of committee were required to attend two compulsory training sessions at the beginning of Hilary Term 2020. The first of these sessions covered Disability Awareness, facilitated by the University’s Disability Advisory Service, and the second was an Equality Training workshop, covering both race and disability awareness.

“A large proportion of the committee at the time attended, actively participated in and engaged with both of these training sessions. Since these sessions were organised by the President at the time, Sara Dube, with no record passed on to myself or the current committee, I am unable to provide exact attendance figures, or details of logistical arrangements.”

In relation to staff training Dube stated, “I booked both training sessions with the intention of them being held for both staff and committee. Before the first of the sessions, myself and the Head of the Disability Advisory Service (who was running the session) were informed that the staff already had access to online training covering the areas of both the scheduled sessions, which would be completed.”

Joshi said, “It is my understanding that staff training was to take place in Week 8 of Hilary Term, but could not, due to changes to staff schedules resulting from the COVID-19 crisis, to which the Union was having to adapt.”

She added, “The training was to take place online, and the provider had beenidentified by the member of staff in chargeof overseeing it. I am told that, due to the frequent turnover of staff in the Union, the training was to be undertaken by members of staff once the shifts for TT20 had beenidentified.”

Some staff have been trained prior to Michaelmas, but exact numbers were unavailable. The Union was unable to comment on whether the security staff involved in events in Michaelmas had received training, due to it being an ‘ongoing disciplinary matter’.

In a Standing Committee meeting in first week of Trinity Term, after questions from the Access Officer about commitment to staff training, the Bursar stated that she was “still investigating it.”

Staff and committee for Trinity Term have not yet been trained, due to the closure of the Union as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and ensuing lockdown restrictions. Staff have now been furloughed. 

In relation to the Union’s staff and their training Joshi stated: “The majority of the Union’s staff members work with us on a part-time basis, with wide-ranging hours. In order to work around this, provisions were being made for staff to partake in online training, which could be accessed in their own time, overcoming the logistical and contractual challenges of gathering all the staff in one place at any given time. The vast majority of the staff has since been furloughed due to the pandemic, naturally bringing opportunities for training to a halt.”

Concerning the future training of both student committee and paid staff, she said: “In spite of the unprecedented circumstances, the Union remains committed to training both its committee, and its staff. Had it not been for the pandemic, and had the Union continued to have in-person events, we would have ensured to train committee at the very beginning of term, before commencing their logistics, press and other term-time duties, which involve interacting with the membership, and members of the public. 

“However, given that no members of committee will be interacting with the membership this term, the Access Officer and myself have taken some time to research alternative sources of training to the University services, and have approached a few training companies to see what they might offer, and how this might suit us. We have also reached out to the Disability Advisory Service, and the Student Union, to check what they might be able to offer us remotely. We remain committed to ensuring that the requirements stipulated above are met by the conclusion of the term. 

“In Michaelmas Term 2020, when the Union will hopefully be in a position to resume in-person events, my successor will be committed to ensuring that the new committee is trained at the beginning of the term, before commencing their duties. We are also committed to ensuring that provisions for staff training are in place for when they return to work from furlough.”

Image credit to Kaihsu/ Wikimedia Commons

SIMONE, WHOSE HAIR IS THE WORLD

0

Once was a girl who so long lying slept
Into the pastures, and the roots beneath,
Her hair extended and became one with them
In its way.

Her golden plumage shivered to a mane
That grew the stalks and limbs of flowers and trees,
And mired the rivers and oceans with its weeds,
And scantily drew the fire-tufts of the arctic.

Where now it lasts there nestles a bird, or fox,
And berries loom; yet, should Simone asleep
Be found, and stirred, by a single man awake
Shall not she cease to live in that man’s mind,
And grow her hair from him into his works?

What follows is an apology

0

You must forgive us.
Some of us lived in denial, but others of us tried –
and failed. Mother said

it was different back then; we didn’t know, didn’t understand…
but her lips trembled,
and her voice was like frosted glass.

Now you trace ash-trodden footsteps and wonder
where it was we faltered and went adrift
into pathless territory, like rayless stars. Please

forgive us. Some of us prayed
on doorsteps, in gardens, the classroom, the cliff-edge, whilst
others spun fairy tales of eternal-economic-growth.

Empty words. They said ‘net zero’ by 2050,
food waste halved by 2030,
12% woodland cover by 2060.

They called us dramatic,
deluded, deceived,
Unplugged.

But this is our legacy:
More plastic than fish in the sea.
More fluorescent shop-light than star-light.
And more ocean microplastic than all the stars in the Milky Way.

There’s no quick-fix solution. You already know this.
You say
What kind of person___?
You say
What kind of generation___?
You say
What kind of society___?

And we say
it was different back then.

Image credit: NASA

wintercaerig

0

i would have shown you the meadow today;
frost turned the grass to wastes of grey

made its blades stand sentinel and straight,
made the lock stick on the kissing gate

made the sky melt in a sea of pink
and gentle blue, that made me think

of skin pigment and childhood sleep;
of circles rippling on a creek;

even the oxbow lake froze, hard,
a sheen of broken mirror shard;

even the swans seemed confused,
seem to lose

that elegance of the neck, the spine-

the chapel bells chimed nine

as i left; i thought perhaps
their hands had frozen over, time elapsed;

i would have shown you this, and more;
i would have, but i did not, for

it was only the care of a winter day,
yes; only care of winter; only wastes of grey.

Behind Every Great Country is a Great Woman

0

Taiwan, New Zealand, and Germany differ greatly in size, resources, and culture, yet they all have two things in common: female leaders and internationally praised responses to COVID-19.

As of 29 April, Taiwan has just 429 confirmed cases and 6 deaths. President Tsai Ing-wen has led Taiwan’s response to the virus, swiftly implementing protocols to prevent coronavirus from spreading. As early as January, Tsai banned travel from many parts of China, increased face-mask production, and introduced island-wide testing for the virus. Tests are free, as Taiwanese citizens have universal healthcare. There are daily briefings with medical officials and legal consequences for spreading misinformation about the virus, so citizens are up to date and well informed. Tsai’s policies have been so successful that Taiwan is now contributing to the global prevention of the virus by sending masks to the United States, Italy, Spain, and several other countries.

The government of New Zealand chose to work towards eradicating the virus instead of simply slowing it. New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern instituted a strict, country-wide lockdown on 26 March. Ardern communicates with New Zealand citizens in daily briefings and Facebook live sessions, allowing time for the press to ask questions as well. The New Zealand government created a four-level alert framework which helped citizens understand the stages of what was happening. Their initial lockdown had level four restrictions, meaning only grocery stores, pharmacies, hospitals, and gas stations could open. They are currently down to level three restrictions. Ardern has announced that the virus has been eliminated from New Zealand, though they will continue prevention methods until there is a vaccine. New Zealand is the only ‘Western’ country that chose elimination over mitigation. Ardern and her government made it clear at every step of the way what was happening, by speaking to the public daily, answering questions from the press, and creating an easy-to-understand system to contextualise stages of virus elimination.

Unlike New Zealand and Taiwan, Germany was hit hard early on by the virus. In Germany 100,000 people have been infected, but the percentage of fatal cases is far lower than in other European countries. Chancellor Angela Merkel has imposed strict social distancing measures, expanded hospitals, and introduced widespread testing. Germany began widespread testing early on and has performed far more tests than any other Western country. This allows authorities to slow the spread of infection and doctors to treat patients before they deteriorate. This testing is free for patients, a measure that encourages people to come in and get checked. Chancellor Merkel has communicated clearly and frankly with German citizens throughout the epidemic, stating early on, “It’s serious. Take it seriously.”

All of these successful responses share three traits: early action, communication, and empathy. Tsai, Ardern, and Merkel all put their countries in lockdown at the beginning of the crisis and all supported mass testing. They have each put an emphasis on communicating with the public and updating people on their respective prevention plans. These women publicly acknowledged the challenges and severity of this situation. They have also worked to bring people together while still apart. Testing is free in these countries and people are not prevented from seeking treatment by financial barriers. All of these politicians currently have high approval ratings. Compare these responses to countries with leaders who downplayed the virus early on, have unclear prevention plans, and regularly argue with the press. Countries with leaders who are covering up early mistakes or continuing to minimise the severity of the coronavirus threat have faced a large number of cases and higher mortality rates.

Despite the different circumstances of their respective countries, Tsai, Ardern, and Merkel are using similar tactics and finding internationally noted success. They are proving the political value of communication and empathy. Sociologists have found that people associate such characteristics with female leaders and tend to underestimate their value politically. The lesson from this is not simply to elect more women, though that wouldn’t hurt. The lesson is to appreciate traditionally feminine problem-solving techniques in a crisis. Female leaders are often pressured to fit a specific, inherently impossible concept of womanhood which includes upholding patriarchal, male leadership structures. These successful responses are evidence of what happens when we give women real power, instead of tokenising them or pressuring them to adhere to masculine leadership techniques.

A continent divided: How COVID-19 will change the face of South America

0

A quickly mounting death toll, hospitals on the verge of collapse, industrial-scale burials in cardboard coffins, relatives unable to bid farewell to their loved ones… Descriptions like these, horrifying though they may be, will have no immediate resonance for the average Brit. In our minds, such images are reserved for TV coverage of war or catastrophic natural disaster. For Brazilians in São Paulo and Manaus, however, this has suddenly become a tragic and sobering reality.

Brazil, the largest country in South America, is rapidly emerging as the new global hotspot for the coronavirus pandemic. At the time of writing, only the United States is reporting more daily fatalities, and the total number of cases has soared to more than 190,000. Estimates suggest that the official number of deaths, which currently stands at just over 13,000, merely constitutes the tip of the iceberg, with data reviewed by Reuters suggesting that the death toll of the worst-hit area in the state of Amazonas could be three times the registered figure. They also allude to significant numbers of fatalities attributed to “pneumonia, severe acute respiratory syndrome and other respiratory failures” which are most likely related to COVID-19, raising fears that the true extent of the crisis is worse than meets the eye. Arthur Virgílio, the mayor of Amazonian city Manaus, has sent letters and video messages to 21 world leaders pleading for urgent assistance as its coffin supply runs short and its vulnerable health service becomes overwhelmed. “We aren’t in a state of emergency – we’re well beyond that. We are in a state of utter disaster,” he told Tom Phillips, Latin America correspondent for the Guardian.

Meanwhile, in the capital Brasilia, President Jair Bolsonaro announced his plans to invite thirty friends to his palace for a barbeque. “We will chat, perhaps play a little soccer,” he chimed to journalists, later joking that he may extend the invitation to thousands of his political supporters and members of the press. The retired military officer, a political outsider whose far-right policies saw him storm to victory in the 2018 general election, has incited worldwide outrage in the face of his response to the pandemic. Since dismissing the virus in a national public address as nothing more than a gripezinha (“a little flu”), his flagrant disregard of lockdown measures and underplaying of the crisis has only worsened along with the death toll.

“So what? What do you want me to do?” Many would struggle to distinguish Bolsonaro’s response to growing fatalities with that of a petulant teenager talking back to their parents. Aiming to bolster his chances of re-election, he presents himself as the champion for Brazil’s impoverished workers, insisting that the chokehold placed on the economy by social-distancing measures is more damaging than the virus itself. Despite eleven members of his political delegation testing positive for the virus after a trip to the US and reports that he himself may have fallen ill, he was pictured coughing and spluttering as he addressed crowds on the streets of the capital in March, shaking hands and taking selfies with protestors demanding the closure of Brazil’s Congress and Supreme Court. One Brazilian newspaper calculated that Bolsonaro had direct contact with 272 different people and handled 128 mobile phones given to him by members of the public during the event. It is little wonder, then, that The Lancet medical journal has branded him “perhaps the biggest threat” to Brazil’s ability to combat the spread of the virus.

Opposition to the president has not just come from abroad, however. Outcry from prominent figures across the Brazilian political spectrum has become deafening as a crisis of health is quickly becoming a crisis of faith in his leadership. Rodrigo Maia, president of Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies, described the president’s behaviour as “an attack on public health”, and his decision to fire his health minister Luis Henrique Mandetta for supporting social-distancing sparked widespread condemnation from all sides. The governors of Brazil’s 27 states have openly rebelled against him, implementing their own quarantine measures to compensate for the lack of federal response. The latest blow to Bolsonaro came on April 24th, when justice minister Sérgio Moro resigned in response to his sacking of the head of federal police, accusing the president of “political interference” on television and demanding an urgent investigation into his conduct. Discontent is rising as angry citizens bang furiously on pots and pans, with chants of Fora Bolsonaro! (“Bolsonaro out!”) filling the streets of cities across the nation. As calls for his impeachment begin to grow louder and the impact of the virus tightens its grip, Brazil finds itself hurtling headlong towards disaster.

Cross the border into any of Brazil’s ten neighbouring countries and the pandemic is presenting a similar threat to its citizens. A continent known for its vast political, economic and cultural divisions, the extent of variation in government response in Latin America to COVID-19 has been no different. #Quédatteencasa (“#stayathome”) illuminates motorway signs in Argentina, one of the multiple countries following European precedent in imposing a strict lockdown on its citizens early in the outbreak. Peru’s reaction is also a far cry from that seen in Brazil, with its government imposing a nightly curfew and controversially limiting movement by gender. Other countries, such as Chile, have turned to more flexible strategies, only implementing lockdowns in viral hotspots and temporarily nationalising their privatised health service to flatten the curve of infection. According to the Pan American Health Organisation, the continent is currently approaching 300,000 cases and is expected to enter the peak of the pandemic in May, six weeks behind Europe.

And yet, despite the growing number of infections, Peruvian president Martín Vizcarra announced plans to begin reopening the economy. Colombia’s leader Iván Duque has already given the green light to the construction and manufacturing sectors, as well as setting out stages for a controlled return to normality over the coming weeks. The idea of relaxing lockdown measures before receiving clear evidence that it was safe to do so was scarcely entertained by any European government, all of whom kept the overwhelming majority of their citizens indoors until well beyond the peak. Developed countries such as Italy, Spain and France saw the decision to prioritise lives over livelihoods as an obvious one, introducing generous rescue spending packages to keep their economies afloat. Whilst the decision to grind their countries to a halt will undoubtedly pose significant financial challenges for many years to come, the relative strength of their economies means that the strict measures that are needed to control the spread of the virus can be sustained for as long as is deemed necessary.

Across the Atlantic in the comparatively underdeveloped nations of Latin America, the matter is not so black and white. Despite the shocking disregard for life demonstrated by the nonchalant Bolsonaro, many will concede that his concern for his nation’s economy is in no respect unfounded. On a continent where over half of all workers are informal, living hand to mouth and reliant on daily cash takings for survival, long-term lockdowns are not merely a trying inconvenience, but rather a complete impossibility. For millions of poorer citizens, the luxury of being able to socially distance is nothing more than a pipe dream, with the threat of death by starvation ultimately looming larger than that of the virus. Although generous aid packages have been pledged by governments across the continent, the sheer scale of the region’s informal, often unregistered workforce has meant that emergency payments are often failing to reach those who need them most. In the poorest neighbourhoods of Colombia’s capital, Bogotá, residents have resorted to tying red rags to their windows to signal an urgent need for food, whilst tensions are boiling over on the streets of major cities such as Lima.

For the many millions of Latin Americans living in sprawling, overcrowded urban settlements such as the favelas in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, COVID-19 is a ticking time bomb set to explode at any moment. In these densely populated, heavily impoverished areas, where residents lack access to basic sanitation facilities and are more likely to suffer from chronic health problems, the spread of the virus has the potential to accelerate at a dizzying pace and lay waste to entire communities. As the first case clusters begin to show themselves on the urban fringes of the continent’s largest cities, there are fears that scenes in the Ecuadorian city of Guayaquil – where the hospital and mortuary systems have collapsed and infectious corpses are lying in the streets – may soon become a widespread reality across the continent. Given that the Inter-American Development Bank believes generalised lockdowns in Latin America cannot be sustained for more than two months, many of its political leaders find themselves faced with a catch-22: keep citizens under quarantine and risk potential economic collapse or move to restart the economy and risk devastating already unstable healthcare services. 

There is no doubt that the pandemic struck the continent at a very bad time. Even before the virus pushed the region into economic freefall, Latin America’s economy was growing at an annual average rate of less than 1% per year, making it the slowest growing region in the global south. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) predicts an economic contraction of 5.2% this year, warning that the continent looks set to plunge into a recession deeper than that seen during the financial crisis of 2009. With prospects of economic recovery weakened by rising public debt, the impact of the oil price crash and falling commodity prices, the number of people in poverty is set to rise from 185 million to 220 million this year alone. In a region marred by structural vulnerabilities that exacerbate severe economic inequality, the head of the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean worries that COVID-19 will set the continent back more than a decade in its fight to overcome these obstacles. There are growing concerns that the dramatic scenes of social unrest in 2019, fuelled by anger at endemic inequality and stagnating growth, may soon become the new normal once more. For most nations on the continent, the immediate future looks to be one marred by both social and economic crisis.  

For some experts, however, the pandemic need not be the final nail in the coffin of Latin America’s economic prospects. Whilst the forecast for 2020 is undoubtedly bleak, many are looking to the possibility of significant rebound in 2021. The World Bank estimates growth on the continent to register at 2.6%, with the IMF forecasting an even more optimistic 3.4%. In particular, Peru, Chile and Colombia are all estimated to be in a stronger economic position by the end of next year than they are now. Although the short-term response of these nations lies very much in the spotlight, the continent’s journey to recovery from this crisis will ultimately be a marathon and not a sprint. Anna Grugel Smith from openDemocracy sees this pandemic as an opportunity to address some of the widespread structural failures that have given rise to unequal growth in the region, suggesting that the route out of this crisis should seek to heal the damage done whilst also “mov[ing] the region away from the economic ‘normal’ towards inclusive development.”

The worst of the crisis is yet to come, however, and the true extent of the pandemic’s impact on Latin America will remain unclear for quite some time. Regardless of how the situation unfolds in the months and years ahead, there is little doubt that this deeply divided and structurally vulnerable continent will shoulder an overwhelming part of the global burden. With suggestions that Latin America faces the prospect of another ‘lost decade’ of progress akin to that caused by the 1980s debt crisis, or perhaps even a full-scale humanitarian crisis, eyes across the globe will be turning to its political leaders and the steps they decide to take next. Will those who pursue tough lockdowns or those who prioritise the economy ultimately win the day? If global precedent is anything to go by, president Bolsonaro may come to regret his barbecues and jet-ski outings much more deeply than he anticipates.

Image credit: Ellie Wilkins

Now do I belong?: The effects of early-onset impostor syndrome

0

As Hilary Term drew to a close and we sat in my friend’s room, anticipating a final night out, we reflected on how we’d adjusted to Oxford life since arriving only six months ago. One said, in a tone somewhere between light-hearted and truthful, ‘I had such bad impostor syndrome when I arrived.’ I was surprised by the mixed reactions this comment was met with, yet there were some correlations in response to my friend’s compelling honesty: those from minority backgrounds agreed, whilst those from ‘status quo’ backgrounds either silently acknowledged or were blissfully unaware of what the term meant.

In case you fall into the latter category, impostor syndrome can be typified as wrongly feeling that you do not belong in your environment. Often used in relation to work settings, symptoms include anxiety and self-doubt about one’s intelligence and aptitude. Victims discount any achievements as either the result of luck or excessive effort, failing to recognise the extent of their own ability. These feelings culminate in the overarching fear that they are a fraud, an impostor, on the cusp of being exposed. The cycle is unforgiving, as the denial of one’s own value can be severely debilitating. Impostor syndrome often leads to low self-esteem, sustained anxiety and depression.

While the range of reactions surprised me, I was perhaps most taken with my own: I became aware of the distance I felt to those emotions, which had once drastically shaped my sense of self-worth. Admittedly, I’d had my moments of feeling like I didn’t belong. There was a particular low point in one of my first tutorials where the quality of my tute partner’s essay far exceeded mine, and another where my tutor laughed at my comparatively poor analysis. But the truth is, on the whole at Oxford, I hadn’t felt like an impostor. Despite being of mixed racial heritage, I had overcome any questions I had about deserving a place and whether I ‘belonged’ with relative ease. I knew that studying here would be challenging, but I had faith I was up to the task. Considering this, it disappointed me to realise that I hadn’t recognised how lucky I was to feel comfortable here, particularly given it hadn’t always been the case.

I initially grew up in Wembley and attended the state primary down my road. It was a typically diverse London school, which reflected the community we lived in, and I naturally meshed with the other children, most of whom hailed from complex ethnic and similar socio-economic backgrounds. My parents are both teachers, and while we don’t struggle financially, they would have never been able to afford a private education. However, my Dad, who worked at a private school, would receive a hefty discount if I passed the exams to enrol there – an informal access scheme that, in itself, was part of the attraction of his job. At seven years old, I began my private education, meaning my family had to relocate so I could be closer to school. I remember instantly thinking that I stood out – the way everyone spoke, dressed and acted in my new milieu was so foreign that it felt unattainable. Immediately, I shifted from being a high-achiever to a serial underperformer: I was bottom of all my sets and my behaviour was erratic. My shortcomings in academia felt matched by that in identity.

Through prep school I always felt that despite making close friends, I didn’t fit in. I didn’t believe I was intelligent, and my academic record seemed to prove it; on the rare occasions I did well, it was to the surprise of myself, my teachers and my parents. I remember feeling like a fraud because I couldn’t make sense of my identity: when I was at home in Wembley with my cousins and half-brothers I would drop my ts and use slang, then on the drive back to our school accommodation I could feel my consonants solidifying as my accent adapted again. I spent many flute lessons crying, admitting to my teacher that I didn’t feel good enough or that I really belonged. I felt alone in my confinement to a liminal identity. 

I couldn’t tell you what broke the impostor cycle. It wasn’t until the end of year 10 that I started to achieve results academically. This was in part a result of some amazing teachers, but I also wanted to make good on the sacrifices my parents had made for my education. I remember telling my Dad I was going to try for Oxford when I was 16. He told me I didn’t have to – a reaction of surprise, conditioned by my history of underachieving which did not manifest into overwhelming expectation (though one we look back fondly on now). I suppose what changed is that with time I came to accept that I wasn’t an impostor but that I was different, and slowly carved out a space between the lines for myself. 

Coming to Oxford wasn’t overwhelming like starting private school had been for seven-year-old me. There was familiarity in its stone walls, peculiar traditions, academic excellence, and the people who believe it is their birth-right to succeed, which nonetheless still seems at odds with me. Familiarity allows for stable footing and feeling like you belong, but cultivating still remains an exhausting task. It can be accelerated however, by seeing people similar to you. This is just one amongst myriad elements which make access schemes so important: beyond stating in no uncertain terms that your background doesn’t make you undeserving of your place, access schemes also provide an avenue for familiarity. It really is invaluable to see someone of similar heritage and identity to you at Oxford, a visual reminder that you have a right to study here, that you are not an impostor even if you constitute a minority. 

Unfortunately, access and representation are yet to reach an acceptable level at the University. Private school students still dominate the student body, many ethnicities remain underrepresented in our community, and we still have to deal with abuse of minority students as exemplified by the Oxford Union’s abhorrent treatment of Ebenezer Azamati in Michaelmas. Feeling at home amongst the ‘dreaming spires’ is one of many privileges that many public-school students have at Oxford; they shouldn’t feel guilt for their belonging here, but ought to recognise how fortunate their position is, and be sensitive to the fact that others might not. For those of us who feel imbalanced on cobbled streets, remember that you earned your place here – it wasn’t pot-luck. Whilst difference in identity may feel like a weakness, it is a strength to have a unique perspective that offers insight to your distinct and valuable experience, which others can learn from. Just your being here empowers people of similar heritage to push themselves in the realisation of excellence. Certainly, it is a challenge to establish your place, but we should remind ourselves that already getting to Oxford is a success, and one that ultimately, we deserve.

If you’re feeling anxiety and depression surrounding studying at Oxford, resources are available at Oxford Nightline (https://oxfordnightline.org) and SANE (http://www.sane.org.uk/what_we_do/about_sane).

More profit-interest than philanthropy in new Twilight prequel ‘Midnight Sun’

0

Confession time: I was a Twilight fan. It’s not as damning as the image that probably comes to mind – I honestly don’t remember much of what happened and I certainly never cried over Edward or Jacob. However, I did read all the books and watch all the films (more times than I’ll put in writing). When Stephenie Meyer’s website updated with a countdown, I checked out a few speculative articles but didn’t think much of it – it was probably nothing. Every few hours, though, I would refresh the page, just to see if anything changed. Any ex-fangirl (or fanboy) will know the intoxicating feeling of being part of something exclusive. It feels good to be the first to know.

The eventual announcement, Midnight Sun (a retelling of the saga from Edward’s perspective), was no surprise to long-time fans. Twelve chapters were leaked in 2008. Meyer described it as “a huge violation of my rights as an author, not to mention me as a human being”. Meyer’s roles as an “author”, creating work for profit, and “human being”, suggesting writing as a form of personal fulfilment despite its widespread reception, are equated. This replicates two understandings of such expansion within a fictional world – is Meyer exploiting nostalgia for profit or trying to bring joy to fans? Unless she’s had a change of heart, it doesn’t seem to be a passion project. Meyer told Variety in 2013 that Twillight was not a “happy place” for her. Repeatedly revisiting it, then, with The Short Second Life of Bree Tanner, Life and Death: Twilight Imagined (featuring Edythe Cullen and Beau Swan) and now Midnight Sun seems bizarre. Does a changed perspective add much from a literary perspective? The narrative is fixed and Meyer’s characters were criticised as superficial. However, E.L. James followed a similar route – leading to critical disdain but massive sales. This popular appeal highlights the contradictory relationship of prestige and pleasure within the reading experience.

The upcoming prequel to The Hunger Games trilogy, The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, has sparked similar controversy. It will describe the events of the tenth Hunger Games, where the eighteen-year-old Coriolanus Snow must mentor a girl from District Twelve. Despite Scholastic ordering an unprecedented print run of 2.5 million copies, receptions have been varied. Part of this stems from its role as a prequel – it’s set over sixty years before the events of The Hunger Games, so we aren’t going to return to Katniss. However, we previously met Snow as the tyrannical President. According to The Guardian, one fan wrote that “you mean to tell me … I’ve waited years and preordered the Hunger Games sequel for it to be a President Snow origin story … about a rich white boy becoming an authoritarian who loves *checks notes* genocide?” It’s hyperbolic but a common sentiment.

While it might seem like an easy way to make money, previous expansion has backfired. After J.K. Rowling’s factoids went too far she lost scriptural authority. Adding to this the controversy surrounding The Cursed Child with back-dated diversity and her interactions with trans-exclusionary groups, Rowling found herself displaced. Instead, fans created their own canon with some of Rowling’s ideas firmly excluded. Her interjections were even mocked through a new meme format. As the Washington Post puts it, “she is no longer their distant, omniscient god”. There don’t seem to be many financial consequences for Rowling. She’s still profiting from Potter merchandise, attractions, films (even if their future is looking grim…), and probably much more. Instead, it’s cultural capital and a defined canon at stake. Rowling’s attempts to sue fanfiction writers show how much she values such authority and her ability to define the experience of reading Harry Potter.

Meyer, Rowling and Collins certainly aren’t benevolent gods, scattering down books as gifts to their worshiping fans. However, a depiction of them as money-hungry wolves, devouring naïve fans, is overly sceptical. For readers, it comes down to your level of investment in their respective fictional worlds – have you yearned to know Edward’s thoughts as he gazes at Bella? Do Rowling’s opinions have value to you – even if you disagree? Do you want to reminisce on the days you desperately attempted to learn how to do Katniss’ braid? Reading should bring joy, not shame through policed texts or exclusionary fandoms. Just as prequels or other extra texts can’t be divided easily into profit and philanthropy, neither can the reading experience.