Friday 17th April 2026
Blog Page 467

La vita davanti a sé: Sex, death and Sophia Loren

0

Long time, no see! Sophia Loren, Italian star of ‘60s classics such as 1963’s Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow and 1964’s Marriage Italian Style, commands the screen in her son, Edoard Ponti’s new Neflix film, La vita davanti a sé (The Life Ahead) after a decade’s well-earnt rest from the camera.

It is clever casting. Loren is a renowned sex symbol, but her acting career has approached the female body and issues of sexuality with nuance. In the anthological Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow she portrayed an overrun, working-class, Neopolitan mother of many (many, many) children; an elegant member of the Milanese bourgeoisie engaging in a marital affair; and a Roman prostitute, all in the same film, but her Academy-Award winning performance came in a lesser-known, grittier release several years beforehand.

La Ciociara (1960 ‘Two Women’) centres on the rape of a Roman businesswoman and her teenage daughter. They flee to the mother’s rural home from the bombing of Rome in the Second World War, to find that violation rather than refuge awaits them there.

So Loren has depth. Her profile spans female sensuality, yes, but also the fierce protectiveness of motherhood and the brutality of trauma.

All these elements unite perfectly in her depiction of Madame Rosa, an Auschwitz survivor and retired prostitute, in Edoard Ponti’s adaptation of Romain Gary’s 1975 novel, La vie devant soi. A photograph of the iconic young Loren features in La vita davanti a sé, but Loren’s weary, wise Madame is far more arresting.

La vita davanti a sé is streaming on Netflix after Covid concerns prevented its release in cinemas. Ponti’s decision to shift the French story to an Italian setting and context is an interesting and risky one. Holocaust survival is a more frequent theme in French artistic culture than it is in Italy. La vie devant soi was first adapted as a French film, Madame Rosa (1977, d. Moshé Mizrahi), and these resonances continue in the recent Italian release.

But the shift works. As does the concept of Madame Rosa’s creche for the children of local prostitutes, transferred from post-war Paris to Bari, a coastal town in the southern Italian region of Puglia.

The film is a meeting of traumas rather than the retelling of the aftermath of a singular experience. Madame Rosa’s presumed PTSD from her imprisonment, accompanied by a decline into old age (perhaps Alzheimer’s), is preceded and juxtaposed by joint protagonist, Momo’s, history.

Newcomer Ibrahima Gueye is spectacular as the Senegalese orphan who turns to drug-dealing for a sense of autonomy and community after being shunted through the Italian care(less) system. His mother, another prostitute, is implied to have been murdered by Momo’s father after she decided to stop her sex-work.

We are not kept in the dark about these tragedies, but La vita davanti a sé’s timeline tracks the period of reconstruction following loss, rather than the dreadful grind towards crisis. It draws here on the key principle of Trauma Studies: that trauma is first processed, and therefore experienced, after the event has occurred. The understanding that Madame Rosa and Momo build together after a rocky start embodies Cathy Caruth’s message that history ‘[…] is never simply one’s own […] history is precisely the way we are implicated in each other’s traumas’. The same statement could, in fact, be applied to La Ciociara.

It would make sense, then, that Ponti’s creation is heavily Freudian. Lost and rediscovered parents crop up all over the place. Momo has lost his mother, but finds an alternative in Madame Rosa; as does Iosif, the child of another prostitute who endures a long separation from his mother before she comes back for him; Lola is a prostitute who is reunited with her estranged father after he asks to meet his grandchild, Babu. It is through allowing Momo to finally be a child that, ironically, the parent-child roles are reversed and Momo cares for Madame Rosa in her decline.

That’s not all. Sex and death structure the film, with its framework provided by prostitution and the looming threat of Madame Rosa’s demise. Madame Rosa retreats to tunnels underneath her apartment block in order to reflect, using them as a safe space. Ponti suggests that the character feels most secure in her subconscious, the place where most of us fear to go.

These structural Freudian elements are elegant: but some other features are overdone. It seems too much of a coincidence that (the presumably Jewish) Dr. Cohen bears more than a passing physical resemblance to Sigmund Freud. Momo’s subconscious desire for affection and protection is symbolised by a CGI lioness; in the leagues of computer-generated clumsiness, it is second only to Katniss Everdeen’s horrific baby closing Mockingjay: Part Two.

La vita davanti a sé’s strength lies not in its subtlety, however, but in its simplicity. The cast shines brighter for being small. At a time when the future is particularly uncertain, and the longer-term psychiatric effects of Covid-19 are receiving more media coverage, the film’s emphasis on trauma, and on that which lies ahead, strikes home. Covid does not feature at all in the film, so it is an interesting overanalysis to point out that the two protagonists are elderly (Madame Rosa) and Black (Momo) respectively, representing two of the demographics most at risk of contracting the virus.

We close on the image of a pathway and the tones of Laura Pausini’s song, ‘Io sì’: ‘Non lo so, io, che destino è il tuo’, ‘I do not know what your future is’.

Cheesy? Absolutely. True? Completely. As is the major take-away: that we are by nature connected, and we cannot help but rely on each other as we go on surviving.

The HAPPIEST SEASON to be queer

0

With Christmas comes family and with family comes movies. It’s that time to cuddle up cosy on the sofa and watch yet another Reese Witherspoon or Emma Thompson Christmas movie and wonder how they are still churning out Santa-centric plotlines after so many years on the big screen. These movies are classic because they hit home right when we’re in our homes drawing on themes of family, fights, food and friends. But the most common, most cringe worthy and most nostalgic theme, is that of romantic love. 

But romantic love for who?

Love Actually, the most famous of Christmas films, presents us with ten different “complex” romantic love stories. You have your hopeless romantic in Colin Firth, you have your interracial relationship in Kiera Knightley and Chiwetel Ejiofor, you have your nostalgic young love story in Thomas Brodie-Sangster and we mustn’t be forget your inappropriate arsehole who we love anyway romantic in Hugh Grant. The movie, supposedly, presents us with ten different pairings from all walks of life. Accept, of course, from those walks of life happen to not be *gasps* heterosexual.

The invisibility of LGBTQ+ romance stories in Christmas movies is another theme which links them all together. Whether it’s Kate Winslet’s straight romance in The Holiday or Emilia Clarke’ in Last Christmas, a non-straight person would be lucky if they saw themselves portrayed as an extra trailing behind Reese Witherspoon when she’s running away from a various cheating boyfriend in one of the classics. We have been living in a cinematic reality where it has been deemed more palatable to watch an oversized, magical elf-man who grew up in the north pole come home for Christmas for the first time and fall in love with Zoe Deschanel, then it is to see a same sex couple as the protagonists in a romantic festive story.

That is until the release of Happiest Season this Christmas. Happiest Season takes place in Pittsburgh. The plot revolves around Harper Caldwell, played by Mackenzie Davis, bringing home her girlfriend Abby Holland, played by Kristen Stewart, for Christmas. Abby is considering proposing to Harper this holiday season. It sounds pretty typical so far: romance, food, family… until Abby learns that Harper has not yet come out to her family. And so Abby spends Christmas at Harper’s being shoved back into the closet, only this time it’s a closet situated in her girlfriend’s childhood bedroom.

The movie taps into the complexities of being in a homosexual relationship at a heterosexual holiday time of year. Christmas is about family, but when your family doesn’t know who you really are it’s about deceit and the choice between self-acceptance at the potential cost of familial love or continuously spinning lies that you’ve wanted for so many years to be true.

Unlike much of cinema, the Happiest Season does not settle for having an overtly, stereotypically gay couple as the side characters, but it rather depicts a lipstick lesbian (femme presenting) romance. Much like Santana and Brittany in Glee or George in the show ‘Feel Good’, Happiest season is expanding the representation of Lesbianism to mean something more than the ‘Butch’ archetype. Movies like Happiest Season and TV shows like Feel Good are additionally challenging the determinist idea that people are stuck with, and know for sure about their sexuality from a young age. Instead it introduces the concept of sexuality being a spectrum, with Harper in Happiest Season and George in Feel Good growing up liking boys and then getting serious with a girl. The movie therefore introduces a protagonist who is flexible in their sexuality, a direct challange to the older generation’s fixed conventions.

Christmas time serves as a daunting, periodic reminder for us to think about who we were “Last Christmas” and who we have become this Christmas against the static backdrop of a family Christmas dinner. We are therefore forced into reflection over what we’re doing with our lives and who we’re doing in our lives. There is a reason that so many movies and TV shows either premier, end or centre around Christmas. In Emma Thompson’s film Last Christmas this translates as Katarina reassessing her attitudes towards her job and life. In the coming of age movie Let It Snow a range of teenagers have to confront their romantic intrigues. Life queries at Christmas dominate cinema and have traditionally promoted the conventions of nostalgic hetero-sexual nuclear family dynamics. Happiest Season is working to change that convention. 

Cinema has always served as a type of socialisation, guidance to our subconscious as to what is acceptable and unacceptable behaviour and what is acceptable and unacceptable love. Therefore, Kristen Stewart has certainly outdone herself in re-guiding our subconscious away from the Team Edward or Team Jacob dichotomy and towards an organic twenty first century romance that many need to be exposed to. Thank the gay gods that she is no longer entertaining that scary vampire-werewolf Twilight romantic triangle but is in fact engaging in something which, in cinematic history, has been seen as far more scary and unnatural then kissing a werewolf: a lesbian relationship.

Perhaps, after watching Kristen Stewart and Mackenzie Davis’ love story develop, that 16 year old girl questioning her sexuality in Liverpool will not ask Santa to be straight for Christmas for the tenth time in a row. But, instead, with Kristen Stewart’s side-parting in her subconscious, will rather ask Santa for something just a bit more scientifically sound, something just a bit more achievable, something that is love, actually.

A Worm on What If

0

A little worm slimes its way through the grass and the bracken, and looks up to the sky. Learned in the classics and, indeed, abreast of current ‘pop cultural’ events, his little brain cycles around his slimy head. A delicate chain bobs around his neck (his neck being the whole length of his body, which is just one long neck really); he bought it after watching Normal Worms. Maybe if he looked like worm-Connell, he imagines, things would have been different. Maybe worm-Sharon wouldn’t have left him for worm-Darren. But, he reflects, there is no point in ruminating on the what-ifs. After all, worm-Darren will have to put up with worm-Sharon’s obsession with true crime documentaries now, not him. Still, though, what if?

What if, when the leaves turn green in the spring they brought with them a scent of fresh apple, and the dappled light through the green leaves was apple-dappled green? Wouldn’t the stream that ran through the rocks that your grandparents showed you, with the stones that hop across like a passage to Fairyland, smell beautiful if it was apple-dappled in the growing light of a pregnant spring? If the beams of great Phoebus lit up apple-green leaves and when the moon rose the smell lingered like a beautiful pre-Covid breath on the air, wouldn’t you look back on the apple-green spring days and covet them in your head when you were forty-years-old and tired? 

And what if, when Orpheus went to the underworld, the age-old ague of uncertainty had not plagued him because he could smell, so very close to the surface of the world, the apple-green smell of Persephone? Wouldn’t the nights (apple-scent lingering but fading) feel far safer if his lover was not, as she is as we speak right now, in hell?  

But what if, when every year at apple-time (as spring would come to be known) the apple-smell appeared, everyone would feel sick and would moan at the apple-smell and the dappled-appled light? Would people sneeze and would their noses drip when the apple-smell stung their eyes? Would we curse those apple-smelled months and wish the dappled light of the green-leaf springtime were un-appled? 

Such is the nature of a haunting what-if. Conjecture is the bane of a life lived in the world: we must, like Orpheus, live in a now that is dappled by the strength of what is. 

The worm shakes his slimy little head. ‘But what do I know?’ he asks, and utters the age-old maxim: 

‘I’m just a worm’.

Artwork by Amir Pichhadze

The perfect vegetarian Christmas

0

British Christmas dinners tend to be quite meat heavy, and can cause a lot of tension for vegetarian family members as the festive season rolls around. The discovery of the Macsween Veggie Haggis (which is in fact vegan) has entirely revolutionised my experience of roast dinners. A source of consistent deliciousness, a veggie haggis leaves nut roasts in its wake. Made primarily of oats, seeds, kidney beans, carrots, onions and lentils, a veggie haggis is free from any unmentionable cuts of meat which understandably put people off traditional haggis.

Waitrose seems to be the only shop that consistently stocks veggie haggis, but don’t be put off by a reputation for bougie prices; a Macsween Haggis usually costs less than £4 and can feed three to four people. As a vegetarian roast it seems almost insulting to refer to the veggie haggis as merely an ‘alternative’ to traditional meats. The veggie haggis should indeed gain a position as a roasted staple around the British dinner table; cheap, healthy, easy to cook and universally delectable. 

Paired with a caramelised onion gravy, roasted potatoes and veg I find myself free of a yearning for tender turkey or pigs in blankets at Christmas time. Haggises (haggi?…) can be cooked easily in the oven and even microwaved, making it a cheap and easy option for plant-based roasts. 

Gravy at the Christmas dinner table is, of course, absolutely vital. Since becoming a vegetarian I have made it my mission to perfect a vegetarian gravy. Though I firmly believe that no two gravies should be the same, below I’ve laid out how I usually throw together a gravy in what can loosely be described as a recipe. 

Emily’s Idiosyncrasy Gravy

Ingredients – don’t worry if you don’t have some of these things, gravies can be somewhat made up as you go along!

  • Onions (1 or 2, finely chopped) 
  • Mushrooms (a large handful, finely chopped) 
  • Sugar
  • Butter
  • Veggie gravy granules
  • Marmite
  • Garlic 
  • Salt
  • Ketchup 
  • Wine 

Method

  1. Soften the onions and mushrooms in the pan with some butter and a little sugar.
  2. Mix a couple of teaspoons of gravy granules with some boiling water (I find a big mug is good to do this in) and add in a teaspoon of marmite, pour this in with the caramelised mushrooms and onions.
  3. Add in crushed garlic/garlic powder/garlic paste and season with salt and pepper. 
  4. Add in a little ketchup and some wine (red, white or even pink works!) and leave to boil for a while.
  5. You can use a hand blender to make the gravy smooth and add in more granules/water mixture if the gravy needs to be thicker.
  6. Other tasty things that can go into gravy include mustard seeds, fruit jam, vegetable water – basically whatever yummy bits are laying around the kitchen!

I’d always recommend making large amounts of gravy, not only because it’s completely scrumptious, but also because it is the perfect condiment to Boxing Day haggis potato cakes. Mash up any leftover potato and mix with any veggie haggis you didn’t scoff on Christmas day, add an egg if needed to bind the mixture together and shape into little potato cakes. While you fry the haggis cakes some of the seeds and lentils can pop and jump in the pan like tiny pieces of popcorn. 

Emily’s favourite veggie Christmas dinner

In Conversation with Colin Wilson

0

In September, it was announced that in the journal Nature that phosphine had been discovered in the atmosphere of Venus, sparking a debate about the possibility of life on the planet. Dr Colin Wilson of the Oxford department of Physics cautions that the question of life on Venus is not necessarily a simple one. 

“Its interpretation needs to be somewhat nuanced. And it’s never as simple as the presence of phosphine means life.”

Phosphine is a biomarker, which means that it is considered a sign of possible life. This is because, on Earth, much of the phosphine in the atmosphere is made via biological processes. “Most of the phosphine, almost all the phosphine found in the atmosphere comes from biological sources. So because it’s from anoxic environments, you get it formed in the gut. You get it formed in swamps, away from the air.” 

Still, “there are lots of other ways you can get phosphine. So other sources of phosphine in the Earth’s atmosphere include the breakdown of phosphorus containing dust and minerals, possibly some kinds of volcanism. You can also have lightning breaking down atmospheric phosphine containing molecules and having phosphine as a by-product.”

“It’s only by eliminating all other abiotic forms of production of phosphine that we would be able to conclude  that phosphine [on Venus] is produced by life.”

“Even eliminating all the abiotic forms of producing phosphine wouldn’t be enough because life as we know it cannot exist on Venus either. So before saying it must be life, you’d have to find the kind of life which could be producing it.”

Even the presence of phosphine on Venus is contested. “One of the first things we have to do as a science community is follow up on that detection to try to see whether it’s repeatable as a detection. Lots and lots of corroborating observations are going on as we speak from various telescopes on Earth.” So far, the researchers have already found a processing error in their original data. They say that while the phosphine signal is still present, it’s fainter than before. 

Dr Wilson’s work focuses on the three primary candidates for life in our solar system: Venus, Mars, and Titan, one of Jupiter’s moons. Atmospheric physics, his field of science, is one filled with both potential risks and challenges. 

“I did my PhD here in Oxford working on the wind sensor for Beagle to Mars Lander, UK Mars Lander, which went to Mars in 2003. Unfortunately, that Mars Lander crashed and I managed to get that same wind sensor on the next European Mars lander, which went in 2016. And unfortunately, that crashed as well. So this illustrates certainly some of the high risk nature of planetary exploration.” 

“There’s a limit. Fundamentally, it’s a spatial resolution limit. It’s what you can tell. So we can tell sort of large scale weather patterns. But a lot of the details of what’s going on on the planet can’t be sensed from ground.”

The next step for many planetary scientists is to send an orbiter to the atmosphere of the planet, but often chemistry and composition still can’t be fully understood from that vantage point. The ultimate aim for scientists, then, is to get landers, rovers, and balloons onto the planets that they are studying. 

The Titan Dragonfly mission, which Dr. Wilson is developing a wind sensor for, is aiming to do just that. The Dragonfly is a nuclear powered rotorcraft which is capable of flying to a new site on the moon every few weeks, and is currently set to launch in 2027

“Titan is a world like no other. It has. It’s the only moon we know of in the solar system with a substantial atmosphere and the atmosphere is mostly nitrogen. So the only nitrogen rich atmosphere, which we know is the earth, really. And so Titan is another body like that.”

“It’s also [got] lots of organic chemistry. It’s got huge amounts of methane and ethane. You may raise your eyebrows thinking, you know, where do hydrocarbons come from on earth? It’s sort of fossil fuels, decaying ancient forests. So we don’t think that’s where Titan’s hydrocarbons have come from.”

An area for investigation, then, is the origin of these hydrocarbons. “In some ways, this is an ideal laboratory for understanding sort of prebiotic chemistry, the organic chemistry stages you go through before you get to life.”

Other bodies in our solar system are often gateways to furthering our knowledge of things here on Earth. Dr. Wilson has also been involved in a proposal known as EnVision Venus, which sets out to explore the geological character of the planet. In the past, he worked on the Venus Express, an orbiter focused on the atmosphere of the planet. “But actually, some of the most intriguing and tantalising results it sent back were about current geological activity on the surface”

“It’s covered in volcanoes. There may be a million volcanoes or more on Venus and lots of rifts and signs of tectonic activity. We have a global map of the surface showing all this, but it was effectively a static picture obtained in the early 90s by one of the first planetary radar missions. And we don’t know whether any of these volcanoes are active today.”

“Why do we care about this? Well, it’s like a parallel earth. It’s the same size as Earth, made of the same sort of materials formed around […] the same amount of time ago. But it’s evolved really differently with this huge greenhouse effect.”

“The science is split […] between whether Venus used to be Earth-like and inhabitable with liquid water oceans in the past, or whether its evolution bypassed that stage of being nice and clement and inhabitable. And so our investigations of its geological state should tell us that difference, whether it was once an earth-like planet.” 

Coming back to the question of life on Venus, it is some of these very conditions that make life on the planet a complex issue. “The surface of Venus is up at four hundred fifty degrees centigrade or so. So nothing, nothing is going to survive there.”

“Even life adapted for other environments is going to have difficulties because really most life as we know it, or as we can conceive of it, needs liquid to mediate the interactions between different parts of the cell and so on.”

Life on Venus, then, would not necessarily be life as we’re used to seeing it. “People have been talking about life surviving in the clouds, because as you go up in altitude, as on earth, the temperatures drop. And by the time you’re 50 to 60 kilometres above the earth, above the planet’s surface, you have environments which are rather pleasant, rather comfortable even.” 

“I don’t think anyone [is] suggesting that you’d have birds or condors soaring around because it takes great big evolutionary processes to get to that stage. So we’re probably looking at bacteria.”

“Some of the very, very earliest rocks we can find on Earth already bear the signs of life having evolved very soon after the Earth became habitable as an environment for billions of years. […] So that tends to suggest that it’s maybe it’s quite easy to create single celled, single cellular life, relatively easy.”

Still, Dr. Wilson seems to think that the most likely version of Venus with life is one that no longer exists. “I think that the places most likely to form some sort of life would be possibly ancient Mars and ancient Venus, because there are strong suggestions that both of them were once more habitable in their climates.” With no orbiters currently able to confirm phosphorus directly from the planet, it might be a while before we hear more on the subject. 

‘Buying Myself Back’: Emily Ratajkowski and the Male Gaze

0

Emily Ratajkowski’s essay published in September, entitled ‘Buying Myself Back: When does a model own her image’ is a beautifully written piece tracing her increasing awareness of and struggles with the stark insistence of others in holding a claim to her image. A claim to their own version of Emily, as she calls it, asserted by photographers, artists, and ex-boyfriends alike. In the essay, she details her sexual assault by photographer Jonathan Leder, at her first and only shoot with him in 2012, when Ratajkowski was 20 and Leder was 40 years old. Leder later published several books of her nude Polaroids without her consent, and without informing her.

There was one detail that stuck with me long after reading Ratajkowski’s words: her innate feeling of being visible. She writes that, when Leder picked her up from the bus station to go to his house for the shoot, she remembers “feeling watched, aware of our proximity and my body and how I might appear from his driver’s seat.” The exhausting feeling of being watched is one that I believe is familiar to most women. In 1972, sociologist John Berger published ‘Ways of Seeing’, a book based on his BBC television series, where he explored what it means to see, and the relation between the art of gazing and the establishing of our place in the surrounding world. He writes:

“To be born a woman has been to be born, within an allotted and confined space, into the keeping of men…A woman must continually watch herself…Whilst she is walking across a room or whilst she is weeping at the death of her father, she can scarcely avoid envisaging herself walking or weeping. From earliest childhood she has been taught and persuaded to survey herself continually…And so she comes to consider the surveyor and the surveyed within her as the two constituent yet always distinct elements of her identity as a woman…Her own sense of being in herself is supplanted by a sense of being appreciated as herself by another.”

Is my shirt rumpling up as I sit down? Do I look sloppy as I eat my sandwich on the tube, eyes to the floor, shameful, for daring to do such a thing in public? A distinct picture of the tiny wrinkle that appears between my eyebrows when I frown, emerges in the back of my mind almost simultaneously to the frown flooding my face. Such images, questions and checks accompany women almost constantly throughout the day, myself included, until I reach home and shut the door – and even then, I am somewhere dimly and instinctively aware of my silhouette as I hunch over, head bowed, to make an evening cup of tea.

The problem with feeling so visible, with a constant running stream of scrutiny in your head, is that it leads you to start doubting your credibility. I am female; I am different; therefore, am I wrong? Ratajkowski in her essay describes wanting to “impress” her disdainful photographer. She describes explaining to him that modelling “was just about making money” for her, an insistence that she wasn’t “dumb”, that she knew “modelling has its expiration date”, and that her true intention was to save money to “go back to school or start making art” – an explanation that she “was used to defining myself with…to men especially.” When Leder dismisses this ambition, stating that she would never be able to save enough money as “you girls always end up spending too much money on shoes and bags”, Ratajkowski doubts herself and starts believing him despite not even in the habit of buying expensive bags. “What if he was right? What if at the end of this I really would have nothing?” This is symptomatic of a society that ridicules women for being women, that insidiously makes women insecure simply for assuming the connotations that come with being a woman. Leder, at another moment in the shoot, also sneers at Ratajkowski for being “’obsessed’” with Instagram when she turned to open her phone. How ironic, then, that he first posts his prized Polaroids of her on that very same medium.

When the feeling of self-consciousness and visibility is synonymous with experiences as a woman, this opens the door not only to doubting your own credibility, but to allow others to also doubt it for you. If a woman commits the crime of being ‘sexy’, her sexuality becomes all-defining, the essence of her very being, and consequently is used to perversely negate her capacity to ever be sexually assaulted. When Leder heard of Ratajkowski’s allegations against him, he dismissed them not by defending himself but by describing the ‘type’ of girl she supposedly is: “You do know who we are talking about right? This is the girl that was naked in Treats! Magazine, and bounced around naked in the Robin Thicke video at that time. You really want someone to believe she was a victim?” And here, I think, is the most devastating aspect of this lived ordeal: existing as a woman in a patriarchy, where the male gaze intrudes on all areas of life, completely delegitimises your experience in favour of any man’s definition of you. This toxic undercurrent to issues of consent is what leads to police confiscating phones of sexual assault victims in order to pass judgement on their private life, and to female and male commentors alike on Instagram claiming that the fact that Leder published a book of nude Polaroids without Ratajkowski’s consent doesn’t matter, because she could have just kept “’her clothes on’”.

And this is pervasive throughout society: I am reminded of Jimmy Kimmel’s 2009 interview with Megan Fox, another woman revered and reviled for being ‘sexy’, where she shares her experience of being sexualised and sexually exploited as a 15-year-old on the set of Bad Boys II. Kimmel responds with a crass joke and the insinuation that all men would have sexual fantasies of an underage Megan Fox. Another reminder is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s ‘scandalous’ leaked video, intended to humiliate her as she was sworn in as the youngest ever US congresswoman in 2019, which depicts her simply dancing on a roof in college. Writer Rebecca Solnit relates that such acts are intended to give a stark warning to any woman wanting to publicly achieve: “You thought you were a mind, but you’re a body, you thought you could have a public life, but your private life is here to sabotage you, you thought you had power so let us destroy you.

What can we do to remove the male gaze from our lives and imagination, and move forward into a world where being attractive, working, or dancing on a roof, whilst simultaneously a woman, are not inherently offensive? I’m not sure. Ratajkowski wonders: “what does true empowerment even feel like? Is it feeling wanted? Is it commanding someone’s attention?”

She describes Leder publishing the book of her revealing Polaroids without her consent as a “violation”, the “using and abusing” of her image for profit. In a tweet at the time, she decried the act as a perfect example against what she stands for: “women choosing when and how they want to share their sexuality and bodies”. What is striking is her emphasis on the amount of attention she naturally paid to her violation as it happened. She staged a “very public protest” at the book’s publication, and shares how she looked him up occasionally thereafter, checking in on a part of herself, the part “he now owned”: “it was intoxicating to see what he’d done with this part of me he’d stolen”.

With time and distance, Ratajkowski recalls feeling a “deep twinge of shame” at her “posturing” and her desire to impress the photographer with highbrow talk of art-making and culture, as he subtly and disdainfully dismissed her. By promising herself that she “wouldn’t look him up anymore”, she begins the work of reclaiming her image. Despite the multiple reprints of his book, posing as high art so long as it bears his name as the creator, and despite contemplating the possibility of draining herself to entangle him in a legal lawsuit, she concedes that expending her resources on Leder would not be “money well spent”. Perhaps this is what real empowerment is: a focus, however taxing to maintain, on one’s image as whole, and not on the fragment that was stolen long ago. Whilst Leder will run out of his “crusty Polaroids”, Ratajkowski will forever remain as the “real Emily”.

As you consider these questions for yourself, read Ratajkowski’s essay. Here is an example of a woman who has sought to reclaim her image, deafen her quiet inner second-guessing by speaking out loud, and as she puts it, “carve out control where she can find it.”

Artwork by Emma Hewlett.

Teddy Hall technical issues cause election confusion in the JCR

0

St Edmund Hall JCR held an emergency meeting on 23rd November after it became apparent that “at least 15” students, “primarily freshers”, had been unable to vote in the election to choose key JCR roles due to technical issues. 

The initial vote was conducted through the Oxford University Student Union website between 04:26 on Wednesday 18 November until 14:00 on Thursday 19 November. During that time, two students contacted the JCR IT Officer reporting their being unable to vote. One JCR member who reported technical issues described in the emergency general meeting that it had taken “seven hours” to resolve and included sending screenshots. 

The results were released on 19 November at 18:59. An email sent on 21 November at 13:09 by the IT Officer to ask if there were others who were unable to vote due to technical issues revealed that “at least 15” students had encountered similar problems. 

Two of the contested positions, JCR President and JCR Female Welfare Officer, were won by victory margins which fell within the amount of people who had been blocked from voting due to technical issues. The position of President was won by 13 votes while the position of Female Welfare Officer was won by 12. 

On 22 November, the JCR President announced an emergency general meeting scheduled 24 hours after its announcement, as per the minimum constitutional requirement. In the email, the President admitted that “15 students came forward and reported this issue to us, and with this number being roughly 10% of those who did vote, there is belief that this is significantly large enough for a re-run of the elections to occur.” However, he stated that a call for a new election was not an opinion “held unanimously” by the JCR Committee, and therefore it was decided that an Emergency Meeting to vote on whether to hold a new election was “the fairest and most democratic action to take.”

Cherwell was able to view the election minutes, in which JCR members on both sides of the argument made opening statements. The statement opposing the calling of a new election stated: “To open the election again is basically saying that we want to open the election because certain students weren’t happy with the results. 

“There will be no material change to the way the JCR conducts the election. Getting in contact with [the IT officer] to say that you’ve struggled to vote, couldn’t figure out the system or couldn’t find the button literally takes less than a minute.”

The statement continued: “To say that there were unreasonable factors preventing JCR members from voting is ludicrous since they had plenty of warning and it takes no time at all to get in contact with [the IT officer] or literally anyone on the JCR committee and ask them to help you.”

They also cited the welfare of candidates and that a new election would potentially become a “popularity competition where the person who can get the most people to speak vocally in their favour has a large advantage.”

The statement arguing for a new election read: “This was obviously not [the students’] fault and meant that they were unable to voice their opinion. This is almost equal to about 10% of people who voted for the JCR President (160 votes counted) and is therefore by no means an insignificant proportion of people and could have made the difference to a number of results.”

It continued: “Some are arguing that they should have contacted the IT Officer or the JCR President. This is an unreasonable and dangerous argument. As a democratic principle, all those who are eligible to vote should be able to vote with the same ease as others and to expect these people to have to jump through a series of hoops to record their vote is unfair. It is known that one person did contact the IT officer and it took several hours for them to record their vote, furthermore it seems an individual contacted the SU who were not able to resolve the issue in time for the end of the polls [sic]. 

 “These experiences might have put other students off and go to show that it was not an easy process to get their vote counted. Furthermore, the confidence required for a fresher who may have never spoken to or met either the IT officer or the JCR president is underestimated, particularly as they might have believed it was a problem of their own doing.”

The statement emphasised that the motion was not “a retrospective attempt to change the outcome of the election” and “is merely an attempt to ensure that we have a fair election.”

One member was recorded as having said: “The point made saying that it is unfair to expect freshers to get in contact with the committee about voting problems does not make sense. Everyone here is an adult and that’s not unreasonable to expect someone who wanted to vote to do that.”

A JCR member then responded: “I think it is a base level principle. Individuals may not have wanted to hassle people or message people who they have never met. They tried to log in and as a basic principle it is unreasonable to get people to go through all of those hoops. For some people the barrier of vote should not be higher than for others.”

Members expressed concern about a re-election being unfair as the results of the first election had already been published: “I think it is completely unfair to say you can void the first election because everyone has seen the votes now. You can’t change that by voiding the first one, there’s no way that they will be treated separately. It will create completely different incentives for people which will make it completely unfair.”

In response, another student claimed: “I’ve heard people saying that they would vote for someone they didn’t vote for before because they wouldn’t want that person to lose now. Also I have heard the other way round. I think it would be viewed as another election and if we do another one that last election would be void.”

The vote at the emergency meeting saw 50 votes against the motion to have another election, and 47 in favour. As such, the motion failed.

The JCR Committee had earlier this term agreed to extend the period of voting in regards to a referendum about the role of the social secretary, as people had reported issues with voting. When asked why the same protocol was not being followed in the JCR Committee elections, a member responded: “The reason we extended the referendum voting at the time was because we knew there were a few issues at the time. The reason it wasn’t the case this time was because we were unaware that there were all of these issues as only two people got in touch with [the IT Officer].”

Cherwell can report that the St Edmund Hall JCR Committee did not follow the guidelines of the constitution when organising voting times for the election. The Constitution states that the dates and times of the election must be announced seven days in advance, which did not take place. Teddy Hall’s Constitution does not provide for a specific Returning Officer and instead this is a role undertaken by the IT Officer, who is appointed by the JCR President in consultation with the Committee.

The St Edmund Hall JCR President has been contacted for comment.

Image Credit: Grayswoodsurrey // Wikimedia Commons. Licence: CC-BY-SA 4.0.

I like what you like: lockdown albums and decision fatigue

0

When an Instagram video of Taylor Swift sitting at the end of her bed in jeans asked me to “check out” Folklore, I waited until it got dark. Only after another day of remote work, filled with homecooked dinner, did I build a campfire and allow myself to press play. We listened through in silence, gazing up at the gap in the trees. 

I can remember exactly when I first heard each album drop this seasick summer: I listened to Little Simz’s Drop 6 watching the rain outside my window at 4am; Charli XCX’s How I’m Feeling Now was on a three hour drive to the ocean; during Lady Gaga’s Chromatica I stared at fish through the slits of a dock; and of course, I squealed to my current flatmate the moment Ariana Grande’s Positions flashed up on Spotify. 

Online hysteria surrounding Folklore was nothing short of extreme. It was streamed 80.6 million times in the first day, making Swift the fasting selling artist in 2020 and the fastest selling female artist of all time. Twittersphere even compared Folklore to King Lear, which Shakespeare wrote during an outbreak of the Bubonic Plague. 

Lockdown has heightened our collective experience of album drops. In a time of physical separation, bonding over a shared auditory experience is a privilege we haven’t taken for granted. The buffet style of Spotify and its competitors have given individuals the ability to build up larger music libraries than traditional pay-as-you go records or CDs would ever allow – I’m sure we’ve all heard parents or grandparents talking about saving up to buy that hot record. If you can only acquire a limited amount of music, you’re going to choose what everyone else is listening to.

The growing trend of anti-mainstream music snobbery has been met with a renewed gratefulness for anyone who is creating right now. Obscurify is a plug-in that strips data from Spotify to calculate the percentage of how basic or obscure your music taste is in comparison to the general population. This summer my score was the lowest it had ever been, but somehow I didn’t mind. All it meant was that I had listened to the music my real-life, and social media, friends were listening to at the moment, allowing me to participate in a global movement. 

We’ve had to put in an unusual amount of work to find what to listen to this summer. Gone are moments of random exposure such as Top 40 pop radio blasted at you in high street stores, Drum and Bass Father on a night out, or whatever is oozing out of the person’s earphones next to you on the bus. However, more work does not necessarily mean we have had more choice. Scrolling through TikTok is probably the place where we have been the most exposed to the greatest variety of music, but we are at the mercy of an algorithm. 

The result is the Spotify playlist Viral Hits, a franken-mesh of high grossing big names and alt-bedroom-pop one-hit wonders shot to the top thanks to a certain 15 second section of their song. Perhaps the extreme popularity of this summer’s big album drops along with Tiktok hits indicates decision fatigue more than anything else. In a pandemic, maybe we can be excused for liking what everyone else likes. 

Making Queer Cinema history: Victim (1961)

0

TW: Two mentions of suicide

It is sometimes said that the historical narrative of Queer Cinema has been applied retrospectively. Many of the arguments which dispute positive views of films of the past are quick to point to undue focus on characters or storylines with hints of LGBTQ+ themes which might not have been recognised at the time. Despite this, there are some films whose contribution to the overall history of LGBTQ+ rights in this country is undoubtable. ‘Victim’ is one such film.

It tells the story of Melville Farr, on the surface a successful London lawyer in a happy marriage, yet who conceals the secret of his sexuality from all. When his former lover, ‘Boy’ Barrett contacts him asking for help to pay off blackmailers, he ignores his requests. Barrett has stolen money from his employers and is caught by the police. Aware that his sexuality would soon become clear, he commits suicide in his cell. Farr, racked with guilt, resolves to take on the ring of blackmailers, yet each of their victims that he talks to refuses to help, prefering to pay the money in order to keep their private lives secret. Finally, he resolves to help the police catch them, knowing that it will most likely destroy his promising career.

There is little fanfare in the 25th minute of the film when Detective Inspector Harris, investigating Barrett’s suicide, admits that he suspects he was “homosexual”, the first known use of the word in an English-language film and a landmark moment in the history of Queer Cinema. He explains to his naive deputy that 90% of blackmail cases had a homosexual element, and this led the laws criminalising homosexuality to become known as the ‘Blackmailer’s Charter’. For the viewers of the day, this would have been intimately linked to reality, after a clutch of high-profile cases in the 1950s brought the issue back to the forefront of public conscience. Most notably, the Lord Montagu of Beaulieu’s imprisonment in 1954, which partly triggered the foundation of the Wolfenden Committee, delivering the recommendation that homosexuality should be decriminalised in 1957. Eventually, after a long period of struggle in both Houses, the Sexual Offences Act 1967 achieved this in England and Wales. One of the major sponsors of the Act was The Earl of Arran, a Tory Peer whose elder gay brother had committed suicide in 1957, who once reportedly told director Basil Dearden that ‘Victim’ had been the film which finally secured a majority for his Private Members Bill in the Lords.

The film, of course, does not live up to modern standards in its progressive attitudes. Almost all of the primary characters are either blackmailers or gay men, and there was some criticism at the time that this diluted its message. There is little suggestion of the potential for bisexuality, with the audience left sympathetic to Farr’s wife, who resolves to stay with him through the prosecution of the blackmailers even when a homophobic slur is painted outside their house. Nor is there any discussion of gay women, and it is only the working-class Barrett that pays the blackmailers with his life. Nonetheless, ‘Victim’ illuminates an important moment in the history of LGBTQ+ rights, primarily in normalising the existence of homosexuality and encouraging empathy. Much of the language of Inspector Harris, one of the few heterosexual characters in the film, is of “poor devils” with “abnormalities” in search of a “magic cure”. This is indicative of the mentalities of audiences at this time, with a 1965 poll run by the Daily Mail finding that 63% of its readers were in favour of decriminalisation, but 95% still believing in the need for treatment or help for gay men.

‘Victim’ is made all the more poignant from a retrospective point of view with the knowledge that Dirk Bogarde himself lived his life as a closeted gay man. His struggles in the film were real, and it was often said by those who knew the industry at the time that his refusal to enter into a ‘marriage of convenience’ limited his chances of a Hollywood career. You cannot fail to view this film with this in mind, as well as the knowledge that the blackmail element would partly cease, although not end entirely, just seven years later. It is also important not to underestimate the positive effects of this film for gay men, many of whom had lived their lives in denial, and for the first time saw genuine and credible representations of their often unassuming lives on screen, endorsed by Bogarde, a matinee idol of 1950s British cinema. Relph later wrote of his film that his primary aim was to “show that homosexuality may be found in otherwise completely responsible citizens in every strata of society”. In this he is successful. These are not activists living in the fantasy of the metropolitan ideal of the ‘Swinging Sixties’ but, simply, victims. They are profoundly normal lawyers, actors, barmen and hairdressers, found in all walks of life, that do not demand attention, only sympathy. There was no more powerful message required at this moment in history, and the power of this is as profound to a modern viewer as it was in 1961.

TikTok’s toxic ‘chav’ trend

0

British school parodies are some of my favourite TikToks. From rating the top ten school hymns (Cauliflowers Fluffy got the top spot, if you’re wondering), to pretending to be the popular girl at school, it’s funny – and a little unnerving – to realise that my childhood was the exact same as everyone else’s. But amongst these generally harmless sketches, TikTok users are contributing to the classist ‘chav’ stereotype that has a long history of working class oppression.

I thought we’d had this conversation. In fact, when I first saw one of these videos, I was confused; I checked the likes, not expecting many, and saw they numbered in the millions. The chav hashtag on the app has almost a billion views at the time of writing this. It’s full of teenagers slapping foundation on, streaking bronzer across their cheekbones, and artfully letting a false eyelash hang off in their impersonation of a ‘chav.’ Hooped earrings, chewing gum, and Victoria’s Secret spray complete the look. In many of these videos, the creator acts out a scene as the ‘chav’: a dumb, loudmouthed girl with a rough accent and poor grammar.

A sketch with 2.6 million likes shows a ‘nerd’ transformed into a ‘chav.’ In it, the girl asks for a shower, and is told “Chavs don’t shower.” Another, imitating a character select game screen, describes the ‘chav’ character as “late every day to school”, “bottom set”, and as having “anger issues.” In an uncomfortable display of profiling, one TikTok simply zooms in on a group of pre-teens in tracksuits with the viral sound ‘chav check’ playing in the background.

One user describes Khloe Kardashian, among other celebrities, as “looking chav-ish”, ironically hitting on a key feature of the discriminatory use of the word. ‘Chav’ trends have long been part of the mainstream, but gold hoops, scrunchies, and jogging bottoms on celebrities aren’t considered trashy or cheap. This double standard is the hallmark of appropriation; trendy on the rich and tacky on the poor.

TikTok’s chav character is also undeniably gendered. The vast majority of the videos on the ‘chav’ hashtag involve users impersonating ‘chavvy’ women – coarse, gobby, and aggressive. It seems that talking back at the teacher and getting angry isn’t fitting behaviour for the educated, middle class woman. This feeds into the idea, learnt even in our schools, that a girl is quiet, patient, and polite; God forbid she play class clown or act cocky. Our society thinks aggression is reserved for the lower classes; we know this from Jeremy Kyle’s circus of a TV show in which he would bring in low-income families in order to exploit and aggravate serious issues they faced. This is a serious misrepresentation of the poorest and most vulnerable communities.

It seems the ‘chav’ caricature, which depicts the working class as trashy, aggressive and antisocial, is making a sinister comeback among a generation who appear ignorant of its role in demonising the lower classes.

The etymology of the word chav is unclear, but its harmful associations are obvious from the popular misconception that it is an acronym for ‘council house and violence.’ The media played a large role in legitimising use of the word; ‘chav’ was used in 946 British newspaper articles in 2005. In the same year, Boris Johnson added his unwanted two cents in a column for the Telegraph in which he described the UK’s poorest communities as made up of “chavs”, “losers”, “burglars”, “drug addicts” and “criminals.”

The 2003 TV show Little Britain saw Matt Lucas and David Walliams – two middle-class and privately educated comedians – in velour tracksuits and hoop earrings in an imitation of working-class women. Vicky Pollard, played by Lucas, is a vulgar, ineloquent woman who shoplifts, has a teenage pregnancy and swaps the baby for a Westlife CD, and spends a year in prison. Pollard is often seen shouting in a broad accent littered with poor pronunciation and grammatical errors. The TikTok chav sketches are no more than a modern day reincarnation of this kind of tasteless satire.

There are those who are quick to dismiss this as part and parcel of sketch comedy. But Little Britain, just like the ‘chav check’ TikToks, serves to normalise use of the chav stereotype. They validate the false and damaging narrative, started in Thatcher era, that justified cuts to the welfare state on the basis that an individual is to blame for their poverty.

The chav stereotype has always been political; to pretend otherwise is to ignore an entrenched class system that permeates every level of British society. Politicians have long taken advantage of the unsympathetic portrayal of those of low social status to justify benefit cuts. The myth of the lazy jobless masses “scrounging off the state” was employed time and time again during the post-2008 era of recession. It’s no coincidence that in Little Britain, one of Vicky Pollard’s story arcs involves her trying to get pregnant in order to be eligible for council housing. The cultural representation of the working classes as dirty, stupid, and lazy creates the ideal political climate for slashing public service funding.

Whilst instances of benefit fraud exist and are of course reprehensible, the effect on the economy is grossly exaggerated by the media and by pro-austerity politicians. In fact, comparisons between Jobseeker’s Allowance in the UK and elsewhere in Europe and the US show that our government is one of the least generous. During Cameron’s majority government, £21 billion was cut from the welfare budget; a UN report in 2019 showed that since 2010 child poverty in the UK has risen 7% and homelessness has risen by 60%. The effects of austerity politics have been deadly for some low income families, yet the political and cultural narrative offers little in the way of pity.

It is for this reason that the resurgence of chav-bashing is so dangerous. A society that is compassionate and understanding of the many factors that contribute to poverty is necessary in order to bridge the vast wealth gap between the rich and poor in this country. It might seem amusing to older generations to think of TikTok as a political space, but a new generation who will soon be of voting age are growing up believing that working class steretypes are acceptable forms of humour. Even accounting for the generational gap is giving them the benefit of the doubt.

Teenagers on TikTok are not necessarily to blame for this; a significant proportion of the users making these videos are from the US and elsewhere, and are likely unaware of the history of working class demonisation in the UK. The creator of a ‘chav check’ Instagram filter – disturbing proof that the trend is expanding out of its original platform – is Filipino, and defended the filter by saying: “Since chav culture has become embedded in our meme and pop culture landscape, social media has helped fuel people’s interest in hopping onto trend.” The history of the word has been erased, and now, harnessing the new power of viral internet culture, ‘chav’ is going global. But the phenomenon had to have started in the UK, and there are plenty of British TikTok stars also participating in this new cycle of mocking the working classes.

Just a few weeks ago, over 300 Conservative MPs voted against extending provision of free school meals to children over the school holidays. In a now deleted tweet, one of these politicians, Ben Bradley, linked the provision of free school meals with “crack dens” and “brothels.” The demonisation of the working class lives on, and TikTok is only making it worse – its never been more important to educate yourself on the shameful history of ‘chav-bashing’ in British culture.