Thursday, May 8, 2025
Blog Page 461

Productivity fanatics: A society that’s forgotten to press pause

0

There’s a wonderful irony to the fact that the mediums we turn to so frequently for procrastination are the mediums that shame us the most for doing so. A three-minute scroll through your Twitter feed at the moment is enough to remind you that Isaac Newton’s period of isolation led to his discovery of the theory of gravity, or that William Shakespeare used the plague outbreak of 1606 to pen dazzling works such as King Lear. Your Instagram feed is no better, plastered with cute graphics urging you to ‘Hustle from Home’ and telling you ‘Don’t Count the Days: Make the Days Count!’. Hoping to find some respite, you switch to TikTok, only to be bombarded with hundreds of healthy eating recipes and home workout plans. Having spent the vast majority of the day binge-watching Netflix in bed, you can’t help but feel increasingly aware of the hours and days slipping through your fingers.

This lockdown could be career-defining for a budding writer, revelationary for a researching academic, game-changing for a training athlete… and yet here you are, having spent a month at home with no magnum opus, ground-breaking discovery or personal best to show for it. If you’re anything like myself, this realisation came with a wave of guilt, shame and frustration. But here’s the thing: those feelings are not a result of any failing or intrinsic character flaw on your part, rather they are a toxic by-product of the all-consuming hustle culture that seems to have our entire generation under its thumb. 

We’ve become hooked on the idea that every minute of ‘empty time’ in our lives must be filled with productive activity, that any action not geared toward self-improvement has no value (or even place) in our day-to-day existence. This isn’t even remotely possible to achieve in normal circumstances, and yet as the entire world comes to an enforced standstill, this mindset seems to be tightening its grip more than ever. Whether it’s attending a Zoom meeting whilst working out or learning a new language whilst cooking a healthy dinner, the pressure to ‘get shit done’ is becoming more acute and inescapable by the day. 

I was one of the many who fell into this alluring trap. Stripped of all my usual excuses not to be productive (*cough* the pub *cough*), I initially felt thrilled by the idea of this vast expanse of free time and vowed to use it to do all the things that my social life had ‘held me back’ from doing. I was finally going to lose all the weight I’d gained from eating out every week, take the time to learn Russian, master my favourite Beethoven sonata on the piano, upload to my YouTube channel twice a week, get ahead on my university work… the list went on and on. 

But it turns out that setting that monumental expectation for myself was precisely my biggest mistake. Within days, the sheer number of possibilities had gone from exciting me to crushing me, leaving me overwhelmed to the point of complete inactivity. I was faced with an entirely empty calendar, and yet I am sure that even 8-year-old me was achieving more with her days than I was after a week in lockdown. I found myself paralysed by two very conflicting thoughts, with one voice telling me that ‘I’m never going to have this much free time again, I should use it wisely’, but the other reminding me that  ‘I’m never going to have this much free time again, I should use it to finally relax’. When added to the aforementioned guilt-tripping on my social media, the expectations of my viewers to live up to my reputation as a “Studytuber” and the University’s assumption that the academic year should continue as if nothing had changed, it soon became a very dangerous combination. 

I couldn’t bring myself to do anything other than eat, sleep and complete the most basic tasks. The sense of panic that I had fallen behind everyone else was rising, mingled with guilt that I was whiling away so many hours without any meaningful achievements to show for it. So began a vicious cycle of failed productivity and frustration. 

The situation I found myself in seems to be far from uncommon at the moment – friends and family alike have expressed similar concerns as they try, like myself, to clutch desperately at some sense of normality amidst the confusion by ploughing through their to-do lists. But I soon came to a realisation that changed my perspective entirely: nothing about this situation is normal, so what is the point in attempting to continue as if that were the case? We are not lesser beings for failing to thrive under these conditions. If anything, we should be seeing merely surviving as a remarkable achievement. There is simply no logic in expecting ourselves to be hyper-productive machines in the midst of one of the largest crises we will see in our lifetimes.

That’s not to mention the fact that we live in an age that makes productivity a trying task at the best of times. Yes, Shakespeare may have produced some of his best work whilst shut away in his home, but he didn’t have to navigate a constant barrage of online information about the status of the pandemic or battle the temptation of various online sources of entertainment. The same can be said for Newton: the significant intellectual strides he made in quarantine are impressive, but he didn’t have to worry about responding to hundreds of emails from his professors or sitting an entire term of his Cambridge degree remotely.  

Our frantic desire to avoid ‘wasting time’ points to a dangerously backward way of thinking, and it seems to me that hustle culture has distorted our perception of what constitutes ‘meaningful’ activity beyond recognition. If you manage to come out of this period fluent in a foreign language or well-versed in a new topic, that’s fantastic, but if you come out of this having done nothing more than paying attention to your own needs and the needs of the ones you love most, there should be no shame attached to that. There is no right or wrong way to spend the coming weeks and months, nor should there be any benchmark for what constitutes a ‘successful’ pandemic. 

Personally, I’ve found that setting some manageable goals to work toward has been both helpful and grounding, and so I’ve settled for a degree of ‘productivity’ much lower than my normal levels but enough to offer me some structure. Regardless of how you choose to get through this pandemic, however, it is important to remember that the hustling you see on social media is nothing more than a highlight reel. For every fancy desk set-up and 10k jog you see there will be a Netflix binge and a late-night snacking session that you don’t. Practising compassion, avoiding comparison and not expecting consistency in your levels of motivation will all help to alleviate the sense of guilt that hustle culture has hardwired you to feel. 

If one thing’s for certain, it’s that this crisis has exposed a glaring truth to the light of day: the fact is that our priorities as a society are in urgent need of a reset. Rest, relaxation and socialisation aren’t holding us back, rather they are enriching and essential activities that contribute to our wellbeing just as much as any new skill acquired or piece of knowledge gained. Whilst striving for self-improvement should by no means be frowned upon, it should also not be seen as the only way to lead a meaningful existence. 

Productive or not, no-one should be defined by what they achieve during this period of limbo. It seems that in a society that places so much worth on forward progress, we have forgotten how to press pause.

Food waste apps: small difference or meaningful change?

0

One-third of all food produced for human consumption globally is wasted and this is problematic for a number of reasons. First, waste almost always ends up rotting in a landfill, where it produces greenhouse gases. Food waste is responsible for 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to the ever-worsening state of climate breakdown. Second, this wasted food could otherwise help sustain those living in food poverty. In fact, less than one-quarter of the food wasted in the UK, United States of America and Europe alone, would be enough to feed the world’s 1 billion most hungry. And third, food waste costs money. Annually, global food waste amounts to 1.3 billion tonnes of waste, which amounts to $1 trillion.

One way to help eliminate food waste is the use of food waste apps like Too Good to Go. This app allows food retailers to offer-up any surplus food in ‘magic bags’ at discounted prices. Hungry punters purchase said bags and receive an allocated timeslot in which to collect their food. Since its set-up in 2015, the app has saved 35,921,167 meals from waste globally – which has prevented 89,803 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) from being released into the atmosphere. To put this in perspective, this is the same amount of CO2 saved by taking 19.5 cars off the road for one year. So, while this does help, it is not eliminating a lot of waste. Or something like that?

Too good to go is also actually only available in 11 countries. In the UK it is only available in 120 towns and cities. As there are 195 countries in the world and tens of thousands of towns and cities in the UK, this highlights a limit on the widespread influence of the app. Its effectiveness in reducing food waste is further diminished by other factors. You need a smartphone, and one which you can check regularly in order not to miss any available ‘magic bags’. You then need to be able to pick-up your bag during the allocated timeslot. Also, adding any dietary requirements or allergy filters limits your choices further. There is also the risk that you might get food you don’t like, as what’s in the bag is always a surprise.

This perhaps explains why the app is not really that popular. Only 2.8 million, out of 67 million, UK residents use the app. Generalising cynically, these users probably have enough money to buy take-away food anyway, do so regularly and are getting a hot bargain. No-one really seems that fussed about the environmental impact of the packaging involved or any food already in their fridge at home. In fact, the £4 saving on an already over-priced Paul’s cheese and ham croissant might be enticing people to buy food they don’t need.

So, while I can’t dispute the fact that Too Good to Go does help combat food waste, it is nowhere near popular, widespread or efficient enough to make a true difference. 

However, there are other food-waste apps out there. City Harvest and Food Cloud distribute surplus food to the homeless and food-bank charities. Approved Food and Clearance XL let you buy cheap foods online that are past their ‘best before’ date, but not their ‘use by’ date. There is also Olio, which connects you with people in your local area who want to give away their excess food for free! This may be great if you live in London, where there are 50 items within a 5km radius. However, as an adult vegan in the Scottish borders, the only item within walking distance that I could collect was a single pouch of Ella’s Kitchen ‘Spag Bol’ baby food. 

The main issue with these apps is that they address only the tip of the food waste iceberg, as consumers actually only represent 20% of total global food waste. Europe and the Americas are responsible for three-quarters of this consumer waste, so it is important that food waste apps are predominantly used in these countries. However, 64% of all food waste actually occurs during harvest or in subsequent storage, with 50% of this waste occurring in Asia. In Asia and Africa, very little waste occurs at the household, consumer level. These figures highlight a key fact: the main responsibility for dealing with food waste lies with the food and agricultural industries. This means, especially in developing countries, we need more efficient harvesting and better subsequent storage. However, there is still an imperative to address food waste at the consumer and household levels in developed countries.

Food waste apps are good, but only to a small degree. The popularity and widespread influence of food waste apps like Too Good to Go is constrained by many socio-geographical factors, meaning that the power of such apps to reduce food waste and its negative effect on our environment is minimal. These apps also do nothing to combat global food poverty. In the wider scheme of things, consumer waste is only a minor offender and efforts should really be focused on addressing waste at the industrial level of production. 

But it must be said that the apps do genuinely incentivise people to make more conscientious decisions to avoid food waste. This is making a positive contribution, albeit a small one, and is a step in the right direction. However, here’s some solid advice for the individual: make packed lunches, share food, get creative and compost properly. Also, any warm glow you may need from saving food from the bin can be had at the reduced section at the Magdalen Street Tesco’s, 3 p.m. Sunday. 

Public Enemy Number One: Cancel Culture and its Targets

0

TW: Depression & Suicide

Cancel culture is an unavoidable and complex phenomenon. Whilst ultra-rich and powerful celebrities are somewhat of fan favourite when it comes to online outrage, others are plucked out of relative obscurity. Several individuals have already been placed under intense scrutiny during the COVID-19 crisis, when people are at their most anxious and their most bored. Is it fair to say then, that the public revels in the punishment of a common enemy? You’ve given us your opinions below.

Luke Roberts discusses pseudo-martyrdom during the COVID-19 crisis:

There is a man, N, in my local ‘Covid-19 Mutual Aid Group’, that typifies the country’s general response to the current pandemic: a form of communal self-flagellation, borne out in individual acts of pseudo-martyrdom and witch-hunting. Without doubt, it is a source of intense gratification: a way for the public to entertain itself in moral lust.

N has in the last month turned his righteous gaze on a child playing alone in the park (“do [the parents] really have a clue what we are dealing with… get a grip”), a group of dog-walkers, and finally, in response to a general invitation for the street to come out and sing happy birthday to a man in self-isolation: “No sorry unessential travel but happy bday”. Of course, N’s vitriol may in some instances be justified and well-directed – his various attacks on members of the community, doctors wasting PPE, and the inactivity of the government really do serve to cover all possible ground – but what this response does is obscure complex solutions and practices. Indeed, its aim is not at all to bring an end to the crisis but is instead simply to bathe in a moral certainty that is in normal times unavailable.

Orwell noted (in 1944) that there is a peculiar Englishness in assuming that “against the law” is a synonym for ‘wrong’, so when Boris instructed N to stay at home, his moral code was affirmed to an extent greater than ever before. As has been noted, this is the Boomer’s War: The War They’ve All Been Waiting For. For perhaps the first time, N has a captive audience for his social commentary, and intends to make the most of it: our proto-sadomasochist will inflict his wrath on as many possible, and simultaneously revel in his own enforced suffering.

During an actual war, Sartre noted the indignation amongst those called up (N) towards those shirkers at home (the woman inviting people to celebrate her husband’s birthday). Rather than allowing their outrage to rise to its appropriate target, they turn upon those positioned most like themselves. It is far easier to take aim at the neighbour down the road, partaking of his second walk of the day, than it is to abstract to those in positions of power who did not take the threat seriously and provide our healthcare services with the resources necessary to protect the population. “In this sense, wishing war for their fellows, they’re indeed fit to wage it: they deserve it.”

Obviously, nobody would wish illness upon N, but it is hard to escape the sense that he has earned this opportunity to thrust his moral outrage out into the world. He’s waited a lifetime to demonstrate his uniquely English capacity for self-perceived martyrdom, and who are we to take this perverse pleasure away from him.

Lily Kershaw explains why some are hit harder than others:

Currently, if you have internet access, you are probably more than aware of the existence of public enemy number one, Carole Baskin. From Twitter to Instagram, it’s almost impossible to escape the barrage of memes about ‘that bitch Carole Baskin’, with the Instagram page @carole.baskin.memes, an account with incredibly low quality memes, boasting over 18k followers. As somebody who was introduced to the Carole Baskin hate-train long before I actually watched Tiger King, I initially believed that a woman so widely abhorred must have done something to deserve this response, yet, this global disdain seems to be more complex than it first appeared.

Upon delving into the deluge of hate aimed at the American zookeeper, there appears to be a sense of community around it. Everyone loves to hate Carole Baskin: man or woman; rich or poor; young or old – usual social divisions do not appear to apply. This, of course, is not unique to Baskin’s case, as, often cancel culture allows internet communities to form.

This has been seen countless times; another recent example being the criticism of celebrity responses to lockdown. From Ellen comparing self-isolation in her multi-million-dollar home to prison or Gal Gadot and a host of other celebs singing ‘Imagine’, many have taken to Twitter and other media platforms to share their frustration at these tone-deaf reactions. Hatred has enabled thousands of people to become connected in a world where, thanks to self-isolation, many are feeling more cut-off than ever. It’s easy to unite and feel a sense of community when you have a common enemy.

The reality is that hate is fun, particularly when it’s aimed at a group or an individual who has become abstracted by media attention. When people hate Carole Baskin, they are not hating an individual, they are hating what she has come to represent. It is no coincidence that the only woman to regularly feature in Tiger King is demonised, while Joe Exotic, a man who allegedly kept both of his husbands addicted to substances such as meth and has admitted to shooting some of the tigers in his care, is treated by many as some sort of folk hero. This is not a defence of Baskin, but rather a criticism of cancel culture and the role of the court of public opinion in online communities.

Unfortunately, cancel culture is totally ineffective at its end goal. While today Elon Musk may be cancelled for calling “coronavirus panic […] dumb”, being a billionaire celebrity means that, to some extent, he escapes criticism. When these super-rich celebrities are cancelled, they, for the most part, get over it because they have the wealth and recognition to do so. In contrast, Carole Baskin does not, and, in time, when most people have forgotten who she is, she will be left with nothing but a ruined reputation and no credibility. The true victims of cancel culture are those who are not equipped to deal with fame.

Natalie Vriend points out cancel culture’s biggest flaws:

As I’m sure we’ve all noticed as we’ve watched our screen time slowly creep up into the double digits with dread, being stuck at home for weeks in isolation has driven many of us further than ever before into the wonderful world of the Internet. In lieu of real-life social interaction and with no real way to differentiate between each passing day, watching the lives of celebrities, as so kindly documented for us on their daily livestreams and reality shows on Netflix, can provide some much-needed relief from current everyday life.

Without the excitement of real-life interactions, however, our dependence on the lives of these public figures, not just their shows and podcasts, for primary sources of entertainment has grown an extortionate amount, satisfying our cravings for drama and gossip. The release of the docuseries Tiger King on Netflix perfectly encapsulates that: its core impact on pop culture has been the emergence of memes vilifying Carole Baskin, a woman who has spent decades campaigning against the very animal cruelty that Joe Exotic, who has somehow become a kind of antihero as a result, promotes, due to baseless allegations that she murdered her husband. Rather than focusing on the hugely important moral issue of breeding and selling tigers, the general public, encouraged by their boredom, has chosen to turn Baskin into a public enemy for their own entertainment purposes.

This fits into the wider pattern of cancel culture, a relatively recent trend. What began as a way to give the general public a voice, the power to boycott powerful yet ‘problematic’ people (where ‘problematic’ ranges from homophobic and racist to not having the ‘right receipts’, from present-day to 10 years ago) has quickly become ineffective, as people turn it into a spectator sport for their own entertainment. Tweeting #____isoverparty has essentially become a type of performative outrage, something done for brownie points to make it seem like you care about social justice when really you just want praise and approval.

Not only does this encourage a mob mentality without room for people to grow and redeem themselves, but it means that ‘cancelled’ celebrities rarely face any real long-term repercussions because the public have moved onto their next victim for entertainment. Although Kevin Hart, after being cancelled for a series of homophobic comments, was unable to host the Oscars, less than a year later, his stand-up specials on Netflix were a major success.  

Cancel culture’s evolution into a cathartic release of short-term anger to entertain ourselves has poisoned it. We can’t expect something which functions as both a social justice movement and a means of entertainment for us to be effective. Holding celebrities accountable is important and they deserve to be called out from time to time, but we need to find a way to express our anger in a more reconciliatory way: allowing them to learn and change if possible, without allowing certain behaviours to go unchecked. As for healthier forms of entertainment during the lockdown, maybe go make some banana bread and run 5k.

Elizabeth Bircham looks for voices of reason among the ‘mob’:

COVID-19 has dominated discourse for so long that it seems an age since tributes were pouring out for Caroline Flack. The image of the presenter, who passed away on February 15th, became a mirror in which we were all forced to gaze. Who were we as a society, and what had we done to the vivacious woman who featured in so many of our childhoods? It seemed like a moment of reckoning. Caroline’s ordeal was perhaps just as much about tabloids and courts as it was about Twitter – there is never a simple reason for suicide – but it was on social media that soul-searching took place, and here where the promise to “Be Kind” emerged. Here, we hoped, there could be redemption.

If anyone had been looking for a sign this promise was void, Sam Smith’s trial by Twitter was perhaps it. Little over a month after Caroline’s death, the singer had posted photos of themselves during “stages of a quarantine meltdown”, and social media retaliated. Responses ranged from the purely vitriolic (“name a worse person on this terrible planet than Sam Smith”) to those criticising Smith for behaving in such a way inside a £12m mansion whilst others risked their lives on the front line. Public punishments were abolished in most US states by the 1800s, but now, in March 2020, Smith found themselves in the virtual stocks.

The “Twitter mob” trope has now found its way into common parlance. There were indeed users carrying pitchforks – some ablaze with misogyny and homophobia- as they called for Flack and Smith to be destroyed. However, not all of the so-called “mob” were mindless trolls. Whilst Smith’s post was seemingly made in jest, it was rather blind to their own privilege. Many angry Twitter users were key workers understandably upset by their tastelessness. Meanwhile, Flack had been accused of a serious crime, and people took the opportunity to remind others that domestic violence is gender-neutral; after all, movements like “Me Too” have much to thank in social media. Is it wrong to ask for accountability?

The problem is that both reasonable and extreme comments will be made in any mass discussion, and Twitter exposes the object to all of them, throwing proportionality out of the window. It is revealing in itself that analogies can be drawn between the treatment of Flack and Smith, given the drastic difference in what they were accused of. It is a reminder that in the Twitter court, there is no due process. Furthermore, we might question our outrage at celebrities on Twitter when the societies we live in fail to hold our most powerful leaders to the same standard. Of course, this does not mean we should stop holding anyone to account; it has never been more important to do so. However, there is something odd about a society that “cancels” people for less than we put others in power for, and whilst both practices continue, there is something democratically adrift. ​

A City Without Music?

0

When you walk down Holywell Street on your way to ATS, you may not know it, but you’re walking past the world’s oldest purpose-built concert hall. The Holywell Music Room, built-in 1748, helped to popularise the music of Joseph Haydn (1732-1809), who was crucial in the development of the chamber music played within the walls of the concert hall. George Frideric Handel (1685-1759) played there himself. The Sheldonian, now used for both concerts and drama, was built as a separate venue for matriculation and graduation. It saw the performance of Handel’s Athalia, to celebrate the commencement of the colleges. Now music as diverse as Mahler’s Ninth Symphony to Cowley’s own indie band Stornoway have performed there. Here we can also enjoy many performances by the musical groups associated with the University, keeping orchestral music alive—and cheap for students too!

Perhaps one of Oxford’s most celebrated musical exports is Radiohead, though they really met at school in the Abingdon area. However, they performed at the Jericho Tavern in Oxford, leading to their signing by the managers they retain to this day. Radiohead have developed their sound over the years, from 1993’s ‘Nirvana-lite’ Pablo Honey, through to 2000’s electronic, haunting Kid A, and into 2016’s stripped back, piano-accompanied A Moon Shaped Pool. That same school also produced some members of the band Foals, and the other members were incidentally in a cult math rock band called The Edmund Fitzgerald—also from Oxford. You could say that the city has produced several great rock bands.

However, here’s the problem. The jump from Haydn to Radiohead cannot really be bridged by any significant composers from Oxford. Handel and Haydn were never even ours in the first place, but German (then British) and Austrian respectively. Perhaps this is symptomatic of the relative dearth of major composers in Britain during this period.

It might instead be productive to look to those who propelled day-to-day musical life at Oxford. There is Philip Hayes (1738-97), organist at New, Magdalen and St John’s. Prior to any of these composers were John Taverner (1490-1545), organist and choirmaster at Christchurch, and Daniel Purcell (1664-1717), the prolific younger brother of the more famous Henry, and organist at Magdalen. Certainly, Oxford’s college choirs are a significant legacy, spawning recordings and concerts. Yet a leap from Haydn to the late 19th century is fairly easy to make nationwide, with the Germans in 1904 calling us ‘Das Land ohne Musik’ (‘The land without music). Is this particularly representative?

Honestly, it’s not too harsh—if not completely fair. Some of the most famous composers of the day (if not necessarily our time) actually studied at Oxford. John Stainer (1840-1901) was the youngest ever successful Bachelor of Music at Oxford and eventually the Heather Professor of Music. During his lifetime, he was hugely popular, with his oratorio The Crucifixion still performed today. Hubert Parry, who set William Blake’s poem ‘Jerusalem’ to music in 1902, attended Exeter College, though he studied law and history; this is an iconic and internationally known piece. Though not an Oxford student, the real breakthrough in English music came with Edward Elgar, particularly with his internationally recognised, continentally inspired Enigma Variations (1899). Oxford then offered up George Butterworth, a friend of Ralph Vaughan Williams (1872-1958), and who set fellow Oxford alumnus A.E. Housman’s poems from ‘A Shropshire Lad’ to music, but he was sadly killed in action in 1916. In 1923, Christ Church’s William Walton, another prodigy and young entrant to Oxford, performed his relentlessly modernist Façade, which set Edith Sitwell’s poetry to music as it was spoken through a megaphone; in 1931 he composed his Belshazzar’s Feast. British music of the 20th century was not exactly propelled by Oxonians, however: Vaughan Williams went to Cambridge, Elgar had no formal musical education, Benjamin Britten (1913-1976) studied under Vaughan Williams at the Royal College of Music, and Michael Tippett (1905-1998) studied there too.

Nevertheless, Oxford has produced several successful and well-respected composers and bands, and also renowned college choirs and organists. Its relative dearth of composers from the mid 18th to late 19th centuries echoes that of the country at large: a city without much music in a country without much either. Oxford has plenty of venues, from the O2 Academy to the Jacqueline du Pré Room, and there exists a thriving musical scene today. We’re lucky to live in a place with such easy access to the music of the past and present, and yet Oxford isn’t exactly the most iconic musical city in the country either. At the same time, our city occupies a noteworthy place in English musical history: a city ‘mit Musik’.

The Star Wars Prequels: Too Easily Dismissed?

0

These days, with nowhere to go and no-one to see, movie-watching is as good a way as any to pass the time: suddenly a film with a two hour plus runtime doesn’t seem so bad. This isolation period also provides a chance to consider movies independent of the opinions of others, to sit quietly and critically reflect in new ways. It could mean revisiting old classics that we haven’t watched in a while.

But for me, this took the form of revisiting the Star Wars prequels. 

These days, liking the prequels isn’t the controversial crime it once was. In fact, many people admit to enjoying and even respecting what they bring to the saga. But in general, and historically, they have received their fair share of animosity. I wasn’t introduced to Star Wars by my parents, so I avoided the fate of being raised with a prequel-hating mentality. I’ve always had a soft spot for Revenge of the Sith in particular, perhaps because I’d been so invested in Darth Vader’s character in the original trilogy. This would be my first time revisiting the prequels after the release of The Rise of Skywalker last year, which I enjoyed to the extent I did mostly due to the instant liking I took to Kylo Ren. But in revisiting the prequels, I was reminded that it was Anakin Skywalker who was really the origin of such a complex and emotionally fraught character.

Anakin exhibits tragic flaws found in the best of Shakespeare’s heroes: ambition, pride, arrogance and obsessive love. The prequels trilogy also depicts the classic tragic fall from happiness to misery, with a sense of fatalistic inevitability characteristic of the best tragedies; all the more so when the audience experiences the original trilogy beforehand. Anakin’s fall to the dark side is a foregone conclusion, simply because these are prequels.

But whilst admiring the narrative maturity, fault can still admittedly be found with the execution. Overused and outdated special effects, moments of stale acting and a pod race scene in The Phantom Menace that seems to last a lifetime all help to justify the hate that the prequels receive. Even I can admit that they get better as they progress.

Despite some faults however, I do find cinematic credibility in these films. The death of Anakin’s mother in Attack of the Clones is genuinely moving, more so because it catalyses Anakin’s journey down an irreversible and tragic path of violence that leads him to the dark side. It also serves as a reminder that the Star Wars films succeed when they’re about family – a universal theme that grounds and defines the fantasy.

Across all three movies I always love the way Darth Vader’s recognisable anthem creeps into the soundtrack as Anakin moves progressively closer to the dark side. This often marks moments of poignant foreboding, beginning with prophetic mentions of Anakin’s great power, and the potential danger he could pose to the Jedi. It is largely accepted that the trilogy improves as it develops, with Revenge of the Sith redeeming much of the damage done by the previous two instalments. It contains some of the best lines, and the climactic moments of Anakin’s tragic fall.

When Anakin and Obi Wan fight Count Dooku in Revenge of the Sith, and Anakin claims his powers have doubled since they last met, to which the Count responds: “Twice the pride, double the fall”. Such a line echoes Milton’s Paradise Lost, where Anakin resembles the prideful Satan, with a fall from grace to match. 

The political uncertainty that has been brewing over the preceding two movies finally reaches a tipping point in Episode III. Every moment of Palpatine’s rise to power is a lesson in the pernicious danger of dictatorships and the fragility of democracy. As Padmé watches Palpatine create the Empire, she comments: “So this is how liberty dies – with thunderous applause”. Such a line is cutting, and endlessly topical.

But it’s not all politics and tragedy – after all the Star Wars films are meant to be fun. And the prequels are fun, featuring arguably some of the best lightsaber battles of the saga, the usual droid antics, and the humorous dynamic between Anakin and the long-suffering Obi Wan. All of this serves to lighten the mood within the wider tragic arc of the narrative.

Concluding with the re-homing of Luke and Leia with their new adoptive parents, Episode III succinctly harkens back to the original trilogy – a filling in of the gaps replicated with similar effectiveness in Rogue One. With the final shot of Tatooine’s sunset, we feel safe in the knowledge that the Jedi will return. 

So if not quite a masterpiece, I find the prequel trilogy to be a moving and poignant addition to the saga – and well worth a fresh viewing for those who aren’t too quick to dismiss them.

‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’: Big Read

‘The guests are met, the feast is set’ and the Ancient Mariner Big Read has begun. On 18th April, the project released its first instalment: the opening moments of “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” read by actor and activist Jeremy Irons.  Over the next forty days, forty writers, actors, performers and artists will continue Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s poem — and their performances can be found free for all online.  

Coming up will be readings by the likes of Iggy Pop, Tilda Swinton, and the acclaimed author and Devon resident, Hilary Mantel.  Amazingly, I have also been afforded the opportunity to read alongside these monoliths of film, music, art and literature as well as contributing my own fiction to the project.  

It’s an honour.  As a winner of The Foyle Young Poets of the Year Award in 2016, I’ve found myself in unbelievable company with poets Kathleen Jamie, Lemn Sissay, Max Porter, and even the Poet Laureate, Simon Armitage, who is also a contributor.  Also featured in the project are unique works created by a plethora of international artists in response to the poem and indeed, a reaction to our strange times, even though the project has been in development for three years, hosted by The Arts Institute at University of Plymouth.

The poet himself is one of the greatest Romantic artists  — and a personal hero of mine.  “The Rime” features some of the most famous lines in poetry – so famous that many people quote them, having no idea who wrote them.  ‘Water, water, everywhere / Nor any drop to drink’;  ‘He prayeth best who loveth best / All creatures great and small’.

And “The Rime”, a fable centred around the striking image of a shot albatross, long seen as an emblem of our disconnection from nature, has much to tell us about loneliness.  Writer and fellow opium-addict, Thomas de Quincey said of Coleridge’s drug-induced isolation:  ‘Where is the man who shall be equal to these things? Is, indeed, Leviathan so tamed?  In that case, the quarantine of the opium-eater might be finished’.  He went on to add admiringly ‘Whenever he spoke it was as if he were tracing a circle in the air’. But Coleridge’s meditiations now have a new relevance.  He could not have precisely foreseen our current situation but his words on loneliness can never have seemed more applicable.

As we lie in our beds listening to the celebrated artists that have entertained and reassured us so often, we hear a voice that has never be forgotten, a man whose poetry speaks through us and shows the way.  In these days of isolation, the transportive force of Coleridge is a welcome escape. His mariners find themselves stranded in open water; so do we, caught in our very own doldrums.  I have spent the last month secluded in my bedroom, my garden and on my sofa trying to convince myself that we will return to the equilibrium we knew.  As the world changes unimaginably, Coleridge stands as our guide past this anti-social virus.  The stranded Mariner experienced enforced self-isolation.  Art can allow us to deal with ours.

Author Philip Hoare is curating the project, alongside Cornish-based artist Angela Cockayne and Sarah Chapman of the Art Institute at University of Plymouth.  The South West is intrinsically bound to this project and to the poem itself.  Coleridge was born in Ottery St Mary – my reading was recorded, along with Dame Hilary’s, in the same parish church where Coleridge himself was baptised by his father, who was minister at the church.  It was strange to think we read in a space in which the infant poet may have cried over the baptismal font.  As a boy, Samuel floated his paper boats down the Otter past the jigsaw church that overlooks East Devon. The harbour at Watchet in Somerset is supposed to be a key inspiration for the poem, itself written in Somerset.  As a resident of Tavistock, where I spent my own childhood, I feel proud that my region has not only inspired this project, but supplied the modern voices to create it. 

The forty days of the Big Read will not be a desert wilderness, but be filled with the many voices of Coleridge himself.  The Ancient Mariner Big Read has been inspired by the same team’s previous project, the Moby-Dick Big Read of 2012, in which I was also lucky enough to take part, reading a chapter with a former teacher at Tavistock College and providing my photography to the project. The Moby Dick Big Read has gone to have international coverage and over 10 million hits on its website.   

Listeners to the new recordings can collect them, daily, building up a sound mosaic of the poem which will then be released as the complete work. At the end of those forty days, “The Rime” and its ancient mariner will emerge, like a ghost ship out of the internet mist – a digital tribute to Coleridge’s 200-year-old art.  As the water and wind of the high-seas stretch our sails, I hope these readings will give us all a sense of the wide-open and free ocean that, I hope, lies ahead. 

Cyrus Larcombe-Moore, who lives in Tavistock, is Foyle’s young Poet of the Year Winner and has been longlisted for the National Poetry Award. Go to www.ancientmarinerbigread.com this Friday to hear his extract of ‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’ .

Study music: ambience over annoyance

0

In the library, there sits two camps: those who listen to music, and those who don’t. As you tour around the tables, you might catch an ear of each person’s music, overhearing the stray thud or an odd vocal. The people who prefer silence always remind those in the other camp of this, proclaiming that they ‘just can’t focus unless in total silence’. That said, the chair scrapes, the hushed library gossip, and that coughing person still plagued with Freshers’ Flu do not exactly constitute silence. Admittedly, scientific research does suggest that music is not as conducive to productive study as silence—but neither is hearing about a drunken one-night stand from the other side of the room. And so I turn to music.

That specific anime girl, sitting at her desk against a Japanese bedroom scene, has accompanied me through my studies to the extent that I feel like we’ve grown up together. For those who don’t instantly recognise this description, she is the cover of many YouTube videos of lo-fi hip hop beats, one of which has been live-streaming non-stop since I discovered it years ago. Chilled jazz, soft melodies and the occasional looped vocal, punctuated by the ever-repeating hip hop beat, defines the genre, its mild monotony allowing the music to be conducive to study, minimising distractions. Once I had found myself immersed in the genre, I soon discovered Shiloh Dynasty, a singer who posted several voice clips on Instagram in 2016 but obscured every identifiable detail about themselves to the extent that their gender is uncertain and some speculate about whether they are still alive. Despite the mystery surrounding Shiloh Dynasty, their melancholic vocals have been sampled by countless lo-fi artists, as well as the ever-controversial XXXTENTACION. The sombre notes of their voice and the rawness of the emotion within it transports me into a calmer headspace. Studying then feels calm.

But lo-fi hip hop is not where study music ends for me. Since coming to Oxford, I have inevitably encountered Techno music through events at The Bullingdon, nights at Plush, and, of course, conversations with Londoners. I realise now there is a surprising crossover between what I’m able to listen to when I study and when I go out. The intensity of the techno that I listen to when I study depends on many factors: the time of the day, the urgency of the deadline, and just how close I am to throwing my laptop across the room out of boredom and confusion. For a casual morning library session, I find in Four Tet’s music a luscious brightness which makes something like learning German grammar a more enjoyable experience. If I have a deadline in the next 30 minutes, I find that a strong coffee and Mall Grab make a perfect motivational pairing with the heavy consistent beat, mirroring rushed typing and my own caffeinated heartbeat. And then sometimes it’ll be 9 o’clock, pres are about to start and I’m trying to finish off my last bit of work. I feel the coming night looming, tantalisingly dangling just beyond my desk. In these moments I know that whatever I choose to listen to will probably lessen my productivity, but I still click play and surrender to the inescapable thuds in order to smash out some more French vocab on Quizlet, tapping the keyboard and bopping my head to the beat—before alerting everyone around me that I’m done for the day.

These two genres are my personal favourites when it comes to studying. Some may prefer to go down the classical route (although the study that asserts the benefits of listening to Mozart is questionable). Others may enjoy a simple instrumental playlist to focus them. I listen to music when I study simply because I love listening to music. Granted, it may reduce the effectivity of my study in some way, but it also motivates me to keep going, prevents me from getting bored so easily and makes studying an overall more pleasurable experience. The pressure to optimize productivity in everything we do constantly invades students’ lives to the point of toxicity; listening to my favourite music while I study is, in turn, a sort of resistance to this.

And for those aforementioned people who don’t listen to music as they study and have been torn away from the imperfect silence of the library because of COVID-19, Oxford’s ‘Sounds of the Bodleian’ may help fill that library-shaped hole.

The 2020 NFL Draft: analysis following the success of online format

0

The spectacle that is the NFL Draft, due to be hosted in Las Vegas, successfully happened entirely virtually this week. A rare sporting distraction from the quarantine most of the world is enduring, the draft went off without a hitch while maintaining its high level of excitement.

Many felt the draft should not have gone ahead given the circumstances, both out of fear of diverting resources away from the front-lines, and because the lack of personal contact would undermine its appeal. However, they were proven wrong by the overwhelmingly positive reaction to the event. The balance of attention between the pandemic and the draft itself was well struck, and Microsoft Teams stood in for Las Vegas’ strip amazingly well.

While the location may well have changed, the hype was by no means diminished. With the help of fan involvement, cameras in players’ living rooms, and a view of Commissioner Roger Goodell’s home life, the excitement of the occasion remained. As pundit David Samson put it, “the NFL successfully made lemonade out of lemons”.

In terms of headline selections, the draft very much went as predicted (See the predictions Tristan Varakuta made for Cherwell here: https://cherwell.org/2020/04/04/the-2020-nfl-draft-who-should-we-be-looking-out-for/). Joe Burrow is set to become the Tiger King in the Queen City, going first overall to the Cincinnati Bengals. Burrow grew up in Ohio, the same state as Cincinnati, and was last year’s Heisman trophy winner, given to the best player in college football. His unbelievable season at LSU, culminating in a victory in the National Championship game, made him too impressive a prospect for the Bengals to pass up on.

Chase Young’s selection second overall was also unsurprising, with many seeing him as the best prospect in the draft, only being passed at Number 1 because of the relative positional value of a quarterback such as Burrow, compared to Young’s role on the edge. Jeff Okudah rounded off a top three of ex-Ohio State players, going to the Detroit Lions as a replacement for cornerback Darius Slay, who was traded to the Eagles last month.

The Dolphins’  Tua Tagovailoa fifth, and the Los Angles Chargers’ subsequent selection of Justin Herbert, also followed the path many had predicted. Both teams lack the much coveted ‘franchise quarterback’ and these two were widely ranked as the second and third best options at the position. Andrew Thomas’ selection at 4th by the New York Football Giants was less anticipated, but his pedigree and the Giants’ need to strengthen their offensive line are widely accepted.

The draft was not without surprises, however. CeeDee Lamb falling to 17 was not expected for a player rated by many as the best wide receiver in this packed draft. The Dallas Cowboys did very well to snag someone of his calibre without trading up. The biggest shock of the draft was Jordan Love going to the Green Bay Packers. The Packers have one of the best quarterbacks in the game in Aaron Rodgers, and so selecting a quarterback in the first round was a bold move, one designed to secure the team’s long-term future. However, it is a move that has worked for Green Bay before, with Rodgers himself being taken while Brett Favre was still at his peak, and the handover between the two of them allowing the team to remain a contender for an extended period.

Over recent years, the NFL draft has become a key moment in the sporting calendar, with the spectacular nature of the ceremony, the emotional displays of the draftees, and the gambles of the selections making it unmissable reality television. Recent highlights include Aaron Rodgers’ painful wait in the green room and Eli Manning’s beautifully uncomfortable posing with a Chargers jersey.

In keeping with the theatrics of the draft’s history, this year’s ceremony was due to be hosted on a floating platform in the Bellagio Fountains in Las Vegas. Players were to be ferried to the red carpet-clad stage by boat when drafted, living up to the increasing extravagance of the event.

The success of this videoconferencing extravaganza suggests there’s hope for the future of such spectacles in this pandemic-centred reality. Microsoft Teams’ stock as the basis of our future interactions was also boosted, with the platform hosting each team’s virtual ‘war room’. The NFL also made great use of the platform to host a ‘Draft-A-Thon’, raising money to help the response to the global pandemic.

Few knew whether such an ambitious event could be held entirely virtually, and this draft was not what it would have been without COVID-19. However, it is fair to say that the NFL pulled off its 2020 Player Selection Meeting amazingly well given the circumstances.

Image credit: Maize & Blue Nation under Creative Commons Attributions 2.0 License

Coronaland: Where commercialism does public service

0

Earlier this month, the Holiday Inn Express in Stevenage had five homeless people removed as a result of abuse of staff and damage to the hotel’s property. Along with 18 other single homeless people and one family, these five were placed in the hotel in March by East Herts District Council as part of the government’s attempt to solve the spread of the virus among the homeless by moving them into private accommodation. As yet, the hotel has not commented on what happened, but what is obvious from the very inception of the idea is that its staff were in no way equipped to deal with the situation placed upon them. They have no training in social care, they are hospitality industry workers.

Likewise, the homeless community was not prepared either. Living rough takes a brutal psychological and physical toll, it requires adaptation to a completely different, alien way of life. This adaptation must in many cases take a huge amount of rehabilitation to overcome and without it, faced with the hotel environment and interaction with the staff, it is unsurprising that what must have been an uneasy accord eventually broke down. The bitter irony is that the homeless are the people that a market economy has left behind, and yet it is commercialism – private enterprise – which is being asked in this time of pandemic to take on the responsibility of their care.

The case of the Stevenage homeless community is an extreme example of a phenomenon which we are now witnessing as the UK wrestles with the virus. That is, that a number of private companies are being asked to perform tasks for the public good and have essentially formed a kind of pseudo-state, a back-up in a time of overcapacity. Imagine BUPA but the doctors are not qualified. 

This is perhaps most visible in the case of the supermarkets, which are, of course, continuing to provide the quintessential essential service of keeping the population fed. While ultimately carrying on with their commercial reason for being, they have had to implement similar kinds of policies on a micro level to those the government is applying to the nation at large. They are regulating the numbers of people going into their stores, directing their staff to make sure rules of social distancing are enforced and altering their product range to the effect that need trumps choice.

Listening to the Heart radio advert breaks, you will notice that the government’s coronavirus broadcast and Aldi’s own announcement are so similar in tone, content and even the voice of the speaker that, if you had not listened till the very end of each, you could be forgiven for not knowing which was from the state and which was the supermarket. In their role as mini-states, the supermarkets are actually doing very well. For example, they have freed up their home delivery slots in order to ensure that the elderly and the vulnerable get the essentials they need, thereby becoming an unwitting arm of the UK’s welfare system.

But what has gone unacknowledged is that providing a service to the public is not the ultimate goal of these firms, and therefore the current tendency to view them within a framework of heroism and sacrifice is something we should be wary of. In a consumer economy, the demand of the population for goods and services results in the formation of firms to satisfy that demand, but they do so to generate profit. The fact that a service is being provided is, to the cynical eye, incidental. In times of stability when the market is functioning as normal this, despite a number of faults, is not a bad way to do things. Company and consumer rub along alright, happy with what each takes away. But what happens when the government expects, and the people need the firms to prioritise their service?

The UK has already had one nasty shock, as everyone realised that when Virgin stepped up to act as intermediary between the NHS and donations from individuals it was allegedly taking a cut. As far as Virgin was concerned it simply saw a market in the social media challenge nomination and donation craze which has been saturating our Instagram feeds in lockdown and responding to fill a void. Virgin has always done this for everything under the sun including trains, planes and even space travel. But in this case, there was no void to be filled, you could always donate directly, and then the public began to see that commercialism and crisis response are not necessarily compatible.

Right now, companies providing essential services are working in overdrive. They form a crucial part of the system which is keeping the UK economy and the consumer society it underpins on life support during the lockdown. We should be proud of the way our firms are responding – because maintaining confidence in the economy is going be crucial – and be particularly thankful to their employees for the jobs they are doing. But we must ask, when commercialism fails in the public service duties now being expected of it, will the state step in? So far, in the case of the homeless people told to leave the Holiday Inn in Stevenage, it has not. They are back on the street.

STOP USING MAX RICHTER’S “ON THE NATURE OF DAYLIGHT” IN EVERYTHING

Our favorite songs are fecund pleasures, increasing in affectivity and growing with us over time, like a reliable friendship. But, if you dilute the potency of a precious song through overuse, that is overuse without innovation, good songs get worn out. One of my fecund favorites, Max Richter’s “On the Nature of Daylight”, is dangerously close to becoming trite in this way, and it is lazy filmmaking that’s to blame. 

(I’m betting that you’ll recognize it, but in case the name of the piece hasn’t rang any bells, go ahead and give it a listen here while you read on.

Now, it’s not unusual for certain inspired songs to earn places on a variety of movie soundtracks. In fact, songs like Lynard Skynard’s “Sweet Home Alabama”, Katrina and the Waves’ “Walking on Sunshine”, and James Brown’s “I Feel Good” frequently find themselves on lists of the most overused songs in film. As far as classical pieces go, loads of films capitalize off of audiences’ familiarity with Wagner’s “Ride of the Valkyries” (most famously in Apocalypse Now) or Luigi Boccherini’s “Minuet” (usually used to make fun of classical music) But, these pieces are decades if not hundreds of years older than the cinematic medium itself and, like the pop songs, they already have distinct reputations.

Wagner’s “Ride of the Valkyries,” originally written for an opera about epic norse mythology, is repurposed in Apocalypse Now to score a helicopter attack on a north Vietnamese village. The callous bombast of the music juxtaposed with the mundane silence of the unsuspecting village creates a sickening dissonance that exemplifies the power of music to work with (and against) visuals to communicate theme.

What does constitute a unique phenomenon in film music history is the existence of a contemporary piece of classical music exerting such ubiquitous influence over the industry. It’s nearly unheard of and yet, that’s exactly the sort of hold Max Richter’s “On the Nature of Daylight” seems to have on modern film and television. Proving the point, at a pub quiz I attended last September there was a film music themed round where we had to say which movie certain music belonged to; bonus points were awarded if you could name the song itself.  As expected, the round featured some well-known scores and a few pop songs, which were for the most part pretty easily identified, if not named. Still, when the soft postminimalist melody of “On the Nature of Daylight” began to swell in the air, I was surprised to see that the eyes of six members of my eight-person team lit up in recognition– three of them knew Richter’s work by name.  

Most everyone knew the piece from its use as sonic bookends in Denis Villeneuve’s Arrival, but chances are most of us have heard it a number of times. “On the Nature of Daylight” also features in such films as Stranger than Fiction (2006), Shutter Island (2010), Disconnect (2012), the documentary Jiro Dreams of Sushi (2012), The Face of an Angel (2014), The Innocents (2016), and Togo (2019). In terms of television, the track also plays at the end of an episode of Hulu’s Castle Rock titled “The Queen”, and was used very recently in the 35th anniversary episode of Eastenders. Perhaps most tellingly of all, a music video for the song starring Elisabeth Moss was released in 2018. I ask you, reader, how many pieces of classical music get their own music video?  

Now, Hans Zimmer performed at 2017’s Coachella, so in terms of high art mediums infiltrating pop culture spaces, stranger things have happened. But whereas Zimmer’s most famous music comes from the scores of popular multi-film franchises like Pirates of the Caribbean or The Dark Knight trilogy, Richter’s song wasn’t written for film at all, making its popularity even more startling. “On the Nature of Daylight” is the second track off of Richter’s 2004 album The Blue Notebooks, which the composer produced in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq as a work of protest art. The album was a critical success, but certainly not a commercial one: Richter has even gone on record saying that he and his family were forced to leave their home due to poor album sales (https://www.popmatters.com/192773-max-richter-the-blue-notebooks-2495537909.html).

Hans Zimmer putting on a performance that’s half recital/half gig, and totally full of bangers.

Thankfully, Max Richter is no longer an obscure musician, but the fact remains, the overuse of “On the Nature of Daylight” has become grating. One the one hand, I’m immensely happy to see a genre of music that typically carries connotations of elitism appreciated by such a wide and diverse audience. Moreover, as a fan, I’m delighted that Richter has become well-known and that his work has become lucrative. But, “On the Nature of Daylight” now has such a formidable cinematic reputation that I’ve begun to wish filmmakers would be a bit more discerning when selecting the track for use in one of their productions. 

The song’s immaculate slow build, the melancholy of its minor keys, the exuberance of the string section at the song’s peak, all of this allows “On the Nature of Daylight” to lend poignant emotional resonance to any scene in which it’s used– at least the shadow of it. See, the trouble is, most productions don’t earn this payoff, and when the narrative reaches for a release it hasn’t earned, it cheapens an exceptionally potent piece of music. In fact, given the track’s popularity, its use can almost feel cliched, which is particularly damning for pieces like “On the Nature of Daylight” because it has no distinct pop culture reputation to fall back on outside of its use in the industry. This means that the industry has the power to ruin it, and as someone very much attached to this song, it’s hard to watch the movies bleed Richter’s work dry.

None of this is the composer’s fault; he has every right to grant the use of the song to paying production teams, but it’s a bad look for filmmakers who appear to be taking emotional shortcuts. Boring cinema gets made when filmmakers attempt to adhere to recipes for successful movies, instead of leaning into the spirit of innovation that birthed the medium in the first place. You don’t know what all you can do with a film until you try it and it works. “On the Nature of Daylight” worked in Arrival, and I actually think it works in a few things, but that doesn’t make the song a catch all for conveying melancholy every time a cinematic narrative calls for it. 

The way the slow crescendo of “On the Nature of Daylight” peaks right as the protagonist’s dead wife disintegrates in his dream, leaving him utterly alone, makes Shutter Island an excellent example of a film that uses Richter’s work precisely and with intention. (You can watch the scene here if you’re unfamiliar).

So, I’m making a very serious, probably selfish, and likely ineffectual plea, that the film and television industry stop the use of “On the Nature of Daylight” in their productions. I realize making this request roughly translates into shouting “Hey, all of showbiz, stop ruining my favorite song!” into the void, but my personal taste and investment aside, the industry really would do well to go back to scoring films with specificity. It really is a beautiful thing when a score becomes synonymous with certain film visuals, forming an exclusive and symbiotic relationship. Plus, this method gave us Hans Zimmer shredding on the banjo in Coachella Valley, so there’s that.