Oxford's oldest student newspaper

Independent since 1920

Blog Page 5

St Anne’s College alumni condemn ‘one-sided’ pro-Palestine JCR motion

Image Credit: Francesca Tozzi

Over 60 St Anne’s College alumni have signed a letter in opposition to the recent passing of a JCR motion which condemned “the ongoing genocide within Palestine being carried out by the Israeli government,” expressed support for the Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P) encampment, and demanded that Oxford University and the College make “progress towards full divestment” from companies and institutions with ties to Israel.

The letter criticised the St Anne’s JCR motion for “the absence of any condemnation of Hamas,” claiming that it was “one-sided” in nature and that it did “little more than inflame the already binary views that are so entrenched…at a time when antisemitism and discrimination against Israeli and Jewish students and staff is rife across the University.”

In addition, the alumni called on the College to release a “public statement highlighting that this motion reflects the view of the voting members of the JCR only and does not reflect the view of the College or alumni… college members hold a range of views and that Israeli and Jewish students are welcome at St Anne’s.”

Speaking to the Jewish Chronicle, the Principal of St Anne’s, Helen King, said: “It is neither possible nor desirable for the College to seek to directly control this [JCR motion]… The position of St Anne’s governing body is that it does not vote on and will not debate motions that take a position on political or world events.”

King added: “We also have to ensure that the academic freedom and principles of freedom of speech, which are so core to what a university is, are preserved.

“I am meeting with and listening to individual members of the College who are Jewish… I want to understand any concerns they have, offer support, and assure them that the College is committed to being an inclusive community.”

St Anne’s College was contacted for comment.

Queen’s College Eaglets dining society to return amidst backlash

Image Credit: Éilis Mathur

A formerly disbanded Queen’s College dining society is set to return amidst opposition from the student body. The Eaglets, dissolved in 2019, previously operated as an all-male institution and is planned to return as a mixed-gender society with support from the Dean of Queen’s College. 

The Queen’s JCR and Women’s Society have each expressed concerns that the Society will be exclusionary, and have cited the alleged high cost of over £80 per dinner and lack of name change from the original society as evidence of this. The Eaglets was previously dissolved after refusing to write a constitution, and had been condemned by the JCR for its exclusionary nature. 

The Dean of Queen’s College, Richard Nickerson, who supports the resurgence of the society, told Cherwell: “In the past Eaglets’ membership was inclusive, geographically, ethnically, and in terms of social background and sexual orientation.” In the new constitution of the Eaglets, which Cherwell has not seen, Nickerson has introduced “a mechanism for becoming a member which allowed anyone to join”. The society has become mixed-gender, as well as removing the tradition that members attended public schools.

Concerns around the all-male history of the Society have been been expressed by the Women*’s Society. In a statement, the Women*’s Society has said: “the decision not to change the name in itself signifies to us there has been no shift in its core values or principles, regardless of what its constitution says.” The plan to invite back old members, who were part of the exclusive society, has also caused concern. 

The JCR passed a motion supporting the Women*’s Society statement, with 27 for, 5 against, 1 abstaining. The statement included: “Women*Soc believes that Eaglets will promote a culture of exclusivity. It marks a renewed investment in a historically discriminative society, whilst maintaining discrimination through financially structured elitism. This rejects not only the college’s ethos of inclusivity, but also the university’s commitment ‘to fostering an inclusive culture which promotes equality, values diversity and maintains a working, learning and social environment in which the rights and dignity of all its staff and students are respected’.”

The new iteration of the Society has repeatedly assured the JCR that it is inclusive to all members of college. The current JCR President told Cherwell that “membership to the Eaglets is open to all current members of College.”

Some students have expressed concern that the alleged price of dinners, between £80 and £100, is purposeful to exclude state-educated members of the College. These figures have been denied by the JCR President. The JCR Socio-Economic Representative has commented that the return of the society would “[deter] working class people from applying.” 

In response, the Dean has expressed that the society is based around dining for “those with a keen interest in fine food.” He has told Cherwell: “The club is for those who wish to devote part of their disposable income to this, rather than, say, an evening drinking and clubbing, which might cost a similar amount.” 

The revival comes on the heels of a growing distaste for drinking and dining societies. Oxford University Conservative Association banned Bullingdon members from holding any offices, in an effort to move towards “a more open, welcoming, and tolerant environment for all.” Multiple colleges, including Queen’s, have banned exclusionary societies hosting events on site during term-time, although SCR members have been able to bypass some rules. 

Lack of transparency: Oxford’s known and unknown donors

Image Credit: Joe Walford

What’s in a name?

Today, the names Saïd, Blavatnik, and Rothermere are as prominent in the landscape of Oxford’s institutions as the long-standing names of Rhodes, Ashmole, and Radcliffe, among many others. Until 2022, the Sackler name, now marked by its association with the opioid epidemic, graced the titles of six different institutions, posts, and funds related to the University of Oxford. 

In parallel, but with a much older legacy, the former Codrington Library of All Souls was also renamed in 2020 after the College was forced to reckon with the history of slavery tied to that donor and the funds endowed to them in 1710. Both new and old, these often controversial names are emblazoned across the University’s most important institutions as rewards for the largesse of donors. They continue to stand as a testament to the University’s chronic reliance on external funding to finance its operations and maintain its status as a world-leading university. 

When it comes to external funding, the University has had perennial issues with transparency. All major donations are accepted after an opaque, University-led process of due diligence; some donations – including very large ones – remain anonymous to the public altogether. 

The University assures that “all significant new funders or new gifts or grants from existing funders are reviewed by the Committee to Review Donations and Research Funding (CRDRF).” The CRDRF conducts due diligence to review external funding and donations. The University describes it as a “robust, independent system taking legal, ethical and reputational issues into consideration before gifts are accepted.” Yet the review process isn’t transparent – and approximately 700 entities including private companies are on a ‘Pre-Approved list’ to bypass it altogether. 

The University has been faced with severe scrutiny towards its external funding arrangements, which have recently culminated in repeated calls for greater transparency from academics and members of the student body. 

Scandals, investigations, and reputation laundering.

Since 2022, the University has featured prominently in several investigations conducted by independent outlet, openDemocracy, into sources of external funds and donations received by UK higher education institutions. In March of that year, it reported that sanctioned Russian oligarch Vladimir Potanin “had donated $150,000 to an Oxford University fellowship scheme named in his honour” as a response to a Cherwell report on the oligarch’s £3m endowment for an Earth Sciences fund in the University.

Speaking with Cherwell, Jenna Corderoy, a lead reporter on openDemocracy’s investigations team, said: “I really do think it’s vital and ethical that universities, because they wield such great influence, tell students and the public how they are funded.”

Other investigations have shed light on the extent of fossil fuel donations to the University: “Oxford University also regularly consults fossil fuel companies about FOI requests, having taken between £10.8m and £20m in funding from them since 2016/17.” As well as defence contractors: “Oxford University told openDemocracy that Rolls-Royce gave over £17.5m but said it could provide no further details since it would reveal confidential information.” Finally, in a large-scale investigation into anonymous donations, it found that: “Oxford University alone accepted more than £106m in anonymous donations – the highest amount of any Russell Group university.”

In late 2023, Cherwell investigated the Oxford Nizami Ganjavi Centre, an institution named after a thirteenth century poet and not the donor responsible for an anonymous gift of £10m to the University, and whose real identity still remains unknown. It was reported that Nargiz Pashayeva, sister-in-law of the current President of Azerbaijan sat on the board of the Nizami Ganjavi Centre and was also identified as a key facilitator for the creation of the Centre itself.

Crucially, it was also found that Pashayeva had been quoted saying she “would like to thank Mr. Iskandar Khalilov for his financial support of the Oxford Nizami Ganjavi Centre” in a 2017 article from the Azeri outlet Azernews. Cherwell’s further inquiries into Khalilov as the potential anonymous donor were inconclusive. An FOIA request to the University to disclose the name of the donor was rejected on the grounds of a “breach of data protection principles” and “prejudice to commercial interests.”

PpenDemocracy’s inquiries into the matter have been similarly frustrated; however, it claimed, “that the University is so insistent on keeping the donor out of public scrutiny that it is going to court to block a Freedom of Information request from openDemocracy.” In turn, the University responded that “openDemocracy had taken the Information commissioner to a tribunal after the Commission ruled for the University”.

Recently, Dr John Heathershaw, a Professor at the University of Exeter and a notably active proponent of transparency in university funding, told Cherwell: “in the Nizami Ganjavi case, Oxford claimed to the information officer that there was no risk to reputation laundering because the identity of the donor was kept secret.” Heathershaw is engaged in the research of the global phenomenon of ‘reputation laundering’ defined “as the intentional, minimising or obscuring of evidence of corruption and authoritarianism in a kleptocrat’s home country and rebranding kleptocrats as engaged global citizens.”

Heathershaw elaborated: “This suggests that the University fundamentally misunderstands the nature of reputation laundering and the character of a kleptocratic environment such as Azerbaijan.  It is typical in such a place for key businesspeople to act on behalf of the kleptocratic elite, as a nominee or third party, to launder their money and their reputations. Reputation laundering of the state and society is also a benefit to the elite.”

All roads lead to the CRDRF

Twenty-two years ago, a cash-for-places scandal rocked the University. A Sunday Times reporter, posing as a wealthy banker ready to make a £300,000 donation to Pembroke College, was told his son’s application would be looked upon “extremely favourably.” The Rev. John Platt, a senior fellow at the college, told the undercover reporter that his son would be given “a guaranteed entry,” adding, “Tutors understand. They see the bigger picture.”

The fallout was massive. Platt and another don swiftly resigned and the University opened an inquiry. Three months later, the Committee to Review Donations and Research Funding (CRDRF) was established. It aimed to ensure that all donations accepted by the University were ethical, legal, did not cause any conflicts of interest, and would not do “damage to the reputation of the collegiate University.”

The University describes the CRDRF as a “robust, independent system.” The Committee, made up of ten members appointed by Council, assesses all major donations (above £1m) as well as what an internal report characterises as “higher-risk” donations of any size.

In 2021/2022, the CRDRF declined 12% of potential donations. A CRDRF internal document Cherwell has accessed emphasises that the assessment of funding is “complex,” and much of the language employed in official documents is opaque.

Publicly available criteria against which the acceptance of funding is assessed includes guidance on donations related to illegal activity, the tobacco industry and fossil fuels. With regards to illegal activity, some considerations include that if “the University would be acquiring the proceeds of crime or be otherwise involved in money laundering activity” or “the University would be involved with terrorist financing activity”, funds must be rejected. In contrast, considerations about the “wider interests of the University” include whether funds will “otherwise do harm to the reputation of the university.”

An appendix of the CRDRF’s annual report refers to donors with a “tarnished” reputation, without further defining what exactly is meant by tarnished. They further stipulate: that they will consider donors with tarnished reputations where “the behaviour which led to the funder’s reputation being tarnished has clearly ceased.” 

In 2019, the University introduced a list exempting approximately 700 entities from review. All funding from these entities not over £5 million is accepted immediately. This includes a ‘Pre-Approved List’ of 493 entities described only as “entities with currently valid approvals” whose identity the University chooses not to share. When asked which entities were pre-approved, the University told Cherwell they would not disclose the names of companies on the list of companies and groups “on the grounds of commercial interest and confidentiality.” 

Also not subject to review are approximately 163 ‘spin-out companies’ (in which the University owns a stake), as well as 107 ‘Gold List’ entities – low-risk organisations including UK government departments and EU institutions.

A “significant minority” of major donors, which contributed about £75m between 2017 and 2022 to the University, wish to remain anonymous. For example, the name of the single donor who provided £10m to fund the Nizami Ganjavi Centre is not known. The University has sought to protect donors’ requests for anonymity, stating that “the public is able to debate the pros and cons of different sources of funding to universities without knowing the precise identity of each individual donor.” 

The University’s policies regarding funding have been criticised in the past. In communications with Cherwell, Professor Heathershaw described the CRDRF as “not accountable to the wider faculty, students, and alumni.” Previously, the CRDRF’s predecessor, the CRD, was criticised by Peter Oppenheimer, a former fellow at Christ Church, in response to Len Blavatnik’s donations to the University: “Oxford’s purported mechanism for verifying the ethical acceptability of money that it receives is clearly deficient, if it indeed works at all.”

Why is there no transparency?

Cherwell acquired a response from the University to a request for internal review on the disclosure of the identity of the donor of £10m to the Nizami Ganjavi centre from late 2022. 

It argues that: “the public interest in transparency has to be weighed against the public interest in maintaining the University’s ability to attract private donations, including from those who desire anonymity, which help to support its teaching, research and related activities, such as the provision of bursaries for poorer students. Anonymous donors make a significant minority of donations to the University’s fund-raising.” 

It continues to say that: “fund-raising is a competitive activity. The University is competing against not only other universities (both nationally and internationally) but also other charitable institutions involved in similar activities, such as research. Some of the University’s competitors are not subject to the FOIA or similar legislation.”

Clearly, the University plainly recognises that it has to depend on donations to survive and maintain its global relevance – and that dependence will only increase in the coming years. The University has stated that if it “were to be required to name an anonymous donor, it would deter those prospective donors who would prefer to remain anonymous.” In their view, transparency is the price to pay in exchange for the University’s continued growth.

Top 10 Summer Reads

CC BY 3.0 DEED Attribution 3.0 Unported

Summer, Edith Wharton, 1917

I’m going to start with an obvious pick: Summer by Edith Wharton. I read this for the first time recently, in spring, when I was trying to manifest the onset of summer, and it was absolutely consuming to say the least. Set in the heady countryside of New England, this succinct novel sees seventeen-year-old Charity Royall unearth love and intense passion when the intellectual Lucius Harney descends upon her small home-town. Wharton received backlash for Summer’s unfeigned treatment of female sexuality and passion, but it is this that makes Charity so likeable, even in her moments of naivety. What sticks with me the most from this novel is its ending. Although not catastrophic, nor epic, nor devastating, Wharton’s quiet close to the novel opens up one of the most complex male characters I’ve ever come across. Filled with passion that is only matched by the hot, sticky, crowded festival scenes, this novel promises to ignite your summer reading.

‘An Easy Passage’ (poem), Julia Copus, 2010

Winner of The Forward Prize for best single poem in 2010, Julia Copus’ poem An Easy Passage is an intensely bright, over-exposed evocation of a childhood summer. The two girls featuring in the poem, find themselves perched on an external window ledge, which Copus parallels with their being also on the brink of teenagerhood, desperately wanting to be older and adorning their bodies in an effort to do so. Copus’ use of imagery is striking: ‘the blond / gravel somewhere beneath her’, ‘leaning in / to the warm flank of the house’, ‘the five neat shimmering-oyster-painted toenails of an outstretched foot’. This poem pulses with blistering heat and intense female friendship, that combine to create something akin to the feeling of blurred, dizzy childhood memories. 

Manhattan Beach, Jenniger Egan, 2017

Summer often gives us the free time to wallow in long, indulgent books, and Manhattan Beach by the Pulitzer-Prize-winning Jennifer Egan, is one of those. Manhattan Beach by definition is a historical novel set in 1930s New York and begins amongst the fallout of the Great Depression. Egan’s novel tracks Anna Kerrigan’s love and subsequent loss of her father, as well as the uncovering of his mysterious disappearance. The earlier parts of the novel, when Anna is only eleven, are sensitively written, often hiding things from Anna herself, but revealing them to the reader. The novel flashes forward in time to when Anna is nineteen, fatherless and trying to support her mother and disabled sister, eventually leaving her unpassionate job to become the Navy Yard’s first female diver, working on underwater repairs. What distinguishes Manhattan Beach is a rumbling backdrop of underground, salacious, half-kept secrets and crime. Clocking in at around 450 pages, this is definitely a book for anyone looking for well-written escapism post-exam season.

Tess of the d’Urbervilles, Thomas Hardy, 1891

I don’t think any summer reading list would be complete without Thomas Hardy, and his tales complex tales of countryfolk. Hardy is a bit of anomaly for me in that he is one of few male Victorian novelists that appears to understand and sympathise with women’s experience at the time (Also George Gissing, whose The Odd Women is the best feminist novel of the nineteenth century – Ed). Tess of the d’Urbervilles, for its eponymous countrywoman Tess Durbeyfield, is practically a disaster from start to finish. In being told that the surname Durbeyfield is a corruption of the aristocratic d’Urberville, Tess is sent by her father to claim their ‘rightful roots’. Tess encounters many people throughout the novel – Mrs d’Urberville, Alec d’Urberville, Angel Clare – all of whom eventually fail her. Characteristic of Hardy’s tragic realism, Tess for me is an intensely lonely book, as we see how time and again Tess must face her challenging circumstances alone. I associate this book with summer largely because of how much of the book takes outdoors, as well as its heavily agricultural setting and backdrop. Perhaps not the most light-hearted pick-me-up, but definitely an absorbing read with a fabulously gothic ending. 

Cider with Rosie, Laurie Lee, 1959

‘I was set down from the carrier’s cart at the age of three; and there with a sense of bewilderment and terror my life in the village began’, is how Laurie Lee starts his much-loved ode to the British countryside. Achieving a childhood perception of the abundant Cotswolds, Lee captures the end of the First World War, and the subsequently untroubled moment before the onset of the second world war. In the section Winter and Summer, the long days spent entirely outdoors, when the children gorge themselves on berries, is contrasted with the bitter cold of winter, when boys forage with tins of burning rags to keep their hands warm. The descriptions of the village’s coldest winter only make the summer scenes appear all the more lush and vivid. Although this can easily be characterised as a blissful novel, Lee includes moments of grief, such as the death of one of his sisters, and the illnesses that he also suffered, often bringing him close to death. 

The Country Girls trilogy, Edna O’Brien, 1960-1964

For this next pick, I asked my tutor Professor Rebecca Beasley for her own recommendation. What I loved about this recommendation was that James Joyces’ Ulysses still managed to get a sneaky mention. This is what Rebecca said: 

“My summer reading usually consists of big (I mean physically big), much-lauded books I’ve been meaning to read for years. They pretty much always turn out to be amazing and I kick myself for not having got to them earlier. Difficult to choose one recommendation, but I’ll go for Edna O’Brien’s The Country Girls trilogy, especially the first of the three. If you read Ulysses and wished there’d been more of Molly (or Milly) in it, this is for you.”

‘This is just to say’, William Carlos Williams, 1934 

I have eaten

the plums

that were in

the icebox

and which

you were probably

saving

for breakfast

Forgive me

they were delicious

so sweet

and so cold

Possibly William Carlos Williams’ most famous poem, ‘This is just to say’ makes it on to this list largely because of the sensory experience it elicits. The ‘so sweet / and so cold’ fruit prickles all over with refreshing coolness, and the prospect of having this chilled fruit for breakfast is something I can only associate with hot summer mornings. Even though this is a poem that asks for forgiveness, I think anyone could sympathise with the narrator here, since Williams makes the fruit appear irresistible, even with only a few, judicious words. 

Rebecca, Daphne du Maurier, 1938

This is possibly my favourite novel of all time, and so I’m going to take any chance I can to talk about it. But Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier isn’t on here simply because I adore it, but rather because of one specific description in the novel that has really stuck with me. The novel depicts a young and unnamed woman, who, after meeting and courting Maxim de Winter for only two weeks whilst on holiday, returns to his mansion, Manderley, in Cornwall to marry him. Throughout this book, the sinister past of Manderley is revealed with chilling control, and the narrator often finds respite from the suffocating atmosphere of the house in long walks to the sea. On many such walks, the narrator traverses a valley filled with azaleas which Du Maurier describes wonderfully: 

“There were no dark trees here, no tangled undergrowth, but on either side of the narrow path stood azaleas and rhododendrons, not blood-coloured like the giants in the drive, but salmon, white, and gold, things of beauty and of grace, drooping their lovely, delicate heads in the soft summer rain. 

“The air was full of their scent, sweet and heady, and it seemed to me as though their very essence had mingled with the running waters of the stream, and become one with the falling rain and the dank rich moss beneath our feet. There was no sound here but the tumbling of the little stream, and the quiet rain.”

The Death of the Heart, Elizabeth Bowen, 1938

Portia, the main character of The Death of the Heart by Elizabeth Bowen, is naturally and brilliantly awkward. Having travelled extensively as a child, Portia from the beginning of this novel is characteristically untethered, even when she moves in with her half-brother, after the death of her mother. What strikes me as summery about The Death of the Heart is mostly the section of the novel in which Portia is effectively banished to the seaside. Not only does this mark another geographical move for Portia, but it also marks the moment at which her first attempts at love completely unravel. Even though this novel is set in the 30s, I don’t think I’ve ever read something that reminds me more of being sixteen. 

A Room with a View, E. M. Forster, 1908

To round up this list, I’m picking another classic summer read: A Room with a View by E. M. Forster. The novel opens in Florence where Lucy and her chaperone Charlotte are dismaying over the lack of a view that they have in their rooms at the Pensione Bertolini. This starts an acquaintance with another guest, Mr. Emerson, and his brooding, distant son, George. The romance and beauty of the Italian city is never far away from the background of this novel. Plot-wise, not a great deal actually happens in A Room with a View, but I think this lends itself to the simmering tensions that frequent the character relations. My favourite part of this novel by far is the tryst that happens in a swathe of violets: 

‘She did not answer. From her feet the ground sloped sharply into view, and violets ran down in rivulets and streams and cataracts, irrigating the hillside with blue, eddying round the tree stems collecting into pools in the hollows, covering the grass with spots of azure foam. But never again were they in such profusion; this terrace was the well-head, the primal source whence beauty gushed out to water the earth.’

Spotlight: Swift Soc President, Lola Milton-Jenkins

Image courtesy of Lola Milton-Jenkins.

Out of all the societies at Oxford, Oxford University Taylor Swift Society is one of the biggest, with around two thousand members. Seraphina Evans chats to Lola Milton-Jenkins, the Swift Soc President, about all things Taylor, fandom, and girlhood.

Let’s talk ‘The Tortured Poets Department’. What is your favourite song and favourite lyric?

My favourite song would be ‘Who’s afraid of little old me?’ In terms of lyric, probably “what if he’s written mine on my upper thigh only in my mind” in ‘Guilty as Sin’.

How did you become a swiftie?

I obviously always heard a few songs here and there. I think the first song I remember hearing was probably ‘I Knew You Were Trouble’ or ‘We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together’ on the radio or downloaded on my iPod or whatever. But I didn’t become a Swiftie until 2017 when Reputation came out. I think I heard ‘…Ready For It?’ on the radio which is kind of a more rogue one. I saw people talking about it on Twitter being like “oh my god, she can rap and sing” and I was like, okay. Then I listened to more and I was like, this is amazing. I got into the ‘Look What You Made Me Do’ video with all the lore and all the different eras going on. I was trapped immediately. And here I am now. In my head, I’m still like a newer Swiftie but I guess not really, it’s been seven years, but it feels new for me. 

Why do you think being part of the fan community is important? And then also, do you think that any of your answers apply specifically to Oxford, because we’re under so much pressure all the time-  to have something that’s just kind of fun?

The best part about Swift Soc for me, and which I always say, is the fact that it is a community and it’s so big, but also it’s so tight knit. In a similar way to Oxford, it is a big place, but you have your little communities. There’s a certain type of person who’s a swiftie, who maybe likes similar things to you, or you appreciate similar lyrics or even has similar values. So it’s really easy to meet people. I think especially with the pressure in Oxford, just having an escape is really important. Taylor talks, in one of her songs on the new album- “I hate here”, she says “so I escape to secret gardens in my mind.” I kind of like to think that’s what we do here.

How did you become the President?

So I was events officer last year. My favourite thing was getting to have that creative overlook of everything. I always say, I just get to put on events that I want to just in my life generally, like the Swift Soc ball.

I just decided whilst I was events officer, that it was something I wanted to keep being involved with. I think sometimes people look down on the [Swift Soc] committee or the position — it’s not that deep a concept at the end of the day. In terms of the stuff that we put on, we’re one of the biggest societies, with two thousand members. We put in a lot of effort to just have that safe space for people to come to in Oxford. We’re completely student funded as well, we don’t take any sponsorships or work with any companies. It’s completely funded by students entirely for students, which is great.

What is your favourite thing about the wider Taylor Swift community? 

I think, again, just having something instantly in common with people, wherever I am in UK, meeting friends of friends, it’s always something little that I can talk about or an easy way to get to know somebody. I really like that there’s that lyrical understanding and appreciation. I think that’s definitely been lost in a lot of music, that group listening feel, especially with how rapidly singles are put out or with things like TikTok sounds. Obviously that’s the way the industry is changing anyway, for better or for worse, but I think it’s really nice how the community as a whole can still come together to listen to an album together, to talk about it, to theorise, to have fun with something. Other things like streaming films or TV shows have become so much more segmented, whereas it used to be an event for everyone to join in with and take part in. 

What is your favourite fan theory? Even if its a big reach… 

Okay, there’s a theory at the moment about The Eras Tour. Obviously she’s coming over to us soon, which is gonna be fun! There’s been some random tiny little clips that she’s posted on like YouTube shorts (which, I don’t know if anyone really checks but apparently the Swifties do). [In those] there’s a couple of shots where there’s slightly different props and there’s different choreography to the ones people know, and people think they can see a Tortured Poets Department logo. I think she’s gonna have a new segment, because there’s only one opener for the European tour. So there might be time for an extended section. [Edit: since this interview took place Taylor has started her European leg and she did in fact add a new section!]

What do you think about how there’s been kind of a resurgence of Taylor Swift in the last maybe two years? Alongside last year’s ‘Summer of Barbie’ and the Eras Tour at the same time.

Yeah, I think for sure. I think there’s definitely been a lot of misogyny in music and politics in general. So much of last year was really focused on girlhood and being able to embrace that feminine side, which people sometimes feel they need to put away to get on with life. I think it was really, really exciting. They really went hand in hand, things like Taylor and Barbie. I think you can see it in the way that people are more open and happy to express themselves in that way. People are always surprised when they hear [Oxford has such a large Taylor Swift society]. They expect everyone to be going to some sort of really serious old boys club society, whatever it is. Which obviously, unfortunately, still exists, but it’s really nice to be able to say actually, no, we’re one of the biggest Taylor Swift societies in the country. 

What is your advice to a new swiftie who might feel overwhelmed with all the content and lore etc?

I think just take it bit by bit. I became a full on Swiftie over the years but at the end of the day, like I say often, it’s never that deep. I’m not gonna gatekeep or anything- if you like Taylor a little bit, then go for it, get interested in her, listen to some of her music, get involved in the communities. I just see it as a big, really accessible community. At Swift Soc, we have such a wide diversity of people. We’re really really big on accessibility and affordability as well.

Speaking of ‘you like what you like’, what is your favourite Taylor Swift song at the moment? I’m not going to make you commit to one forever.

I always say August. It just has a special place in my heart. I live in Somerset and getting to drive about through the hills and just screaming August with the sun setting. That is my happy place.

On poetry, prison, and new notions of time: In conversation with Mohsen Mohamed

Image credit: Aleksandra Majak.

Mohsen Mohamed may already be a familiar face for frequenters of Tudor Pret on Cornmarket Street. Stepping into its timbered, softly lit premises, it is not unusual to spot Mohsen, all smiles, striking up literary conversations over breaks from shifts. What most don’t know, however, is that Mohsen is a poet – his inaugural collection,  د يب رقم ش مف (No One Is on the Line), won the Sawiris Cultural Award and the first prize for vernacular poetry at the Cairo International Book Fair – and that his poetic voice emerged during the five years that he spent wrongfully incarcerated. 

The 2013 coup d’état and al-Sisi’s violent ascent to power saw Egypt in a state of increasing turbulence. Police brutality escalated, and the authorities arrested tens of thousands of people in a draconian response to nationwide demonstrations. At one such protest in 2014, nineteen-year-old Mohsen was just “taking pictures of a female student being beaten up at a university protest” that he had not even participated in. “First, I took pictures, then I tried to interfere and defend her. That’s what got me arrested.” 

Recalling the initial shock of his arbitrary arrest and the consequently altered trajectory of his life, Mohsen tells me, “I never imagined myself in this place. It was absolutely unexpected, unimagined. When I found myself in the face of it, I found people who were very old here, staying here for months… My brain didn’t want to believe that I could be like those people [in prison] because I’m just going to university and I’m going back home. It’s fine. Like, I’ll spend the day here, and I’ll be fine. We’ll find a solution tomorrow.” 

The solution never came. Instead, Mohsen found himself amongst countless political prisoners, his youth held on pause. He expresses affection for poetry and literature: his main sources of comfort while in prison. “Everyone in prison has a way to conquer reality,” he notes, and poetry became his. “People would really act meaningfully, because you’re encountering time. You’re not waiting for anything behind time itself. It’s only you, waiting for time to be spent.” Alluding to the healing power of literature, Mohsen confirms that his reading experience in prison was intensified by his search for “existential answers. Because in this reality where you are, your ties are cut and severed from everything that you belong to, and everything that belongs to you, and then you encounter a very different social reality.” His reading journey was not unencumbered – the prison library fell within the State’s iron-fisted control, only possessing titles that were patriotic and aligned with the government. The omission of dissenting voices was a deliberate “political act”, Mohsen observes, and then goes on to tell me about the “moving library” that he and his friends founded in resistance. “For example, you are in a cell, I am in another, and someone is in another one. Then you have five books, I have five books, and then he has five. We just ask everyone and see what books we have, and then we have a list. There was someone whose job was managing this.” A literary community was forged across prison barriers. 

“I found myself in poetry,” Mohsen confesses. “There were some specific poets, like Fouad Haddad who was Egyptian and died in the 1980s, and his poetry was somehow infused in my brain. I’m reciting it all the time, repeating it… I’m memorising it from the heart. The existence of the poems and the meanings of the words are felt inside me.” As for Mohsen himself, he remembers having composed his first poem in prison while in a dream-like state, so “oblivious to [his] surroundings” that he was almost detected by an administrative officer. To elude future detection, he invented a secret language, taking inspiration from the language of trade in his hometown, Mansoura. “In Egypt, it’s not like here. If you go to a shop and ask them for any item, they would say ‘5 pounds’. And then you would try to grapple for it and say, okay, I’ll have it for 2 pounds.” The rhetoric of bargaining poses a fascinating linguistic phenomenon, especially in Mansoura, where as Mohsen describes, vendors “don’t want to lose the customer, […] so they have an argument about [the price] in front of the customer, but they will speak in this [secret] language. They disguise the word ‘how much’ by adding and taking off letters. I borrowed the same actual form of it, and applied it to more language […] to write in a disguised way.”

Our conversation takes a meditative turn as Mohsen shares reflections on what life is like after prison. Freedom does not annul the past, and to return to one’s family and community after being away from them is not without hurdles. The happiness that release brings is accompanied by the melancholy of departure, of being forced to leave behind “people that you shared your life with for years.” In a milieu devoid of privacy, friendships are not formed in the “normal” sense – “it’s a friendship where you sleep next to each other, and know every single thing about each other. How this person sleeps and how this person eats and how this person talks and how this person dreams, aspires, and acts. Everything is visible,” he explains. “All life is just floating into each other.” 

Retrospectively, he no longer perceives his five years in prison as long. “The paradox is that this period was really heavy while I was passing it,” he says, “but once I brought back my normal life, this period was as if it was just a moment, just a station on the train I was riding. That’s what prompted Viktor Frankl to say that a day in prison seems bigger than a week in prison. This is the nuance – time is deceitful and tricky.” In an ironic twist on Mohsen’s already complex relationship with time, I learn that he appealed against his prison sentence, but that it was only reduced after he had already served 59 months in prison – exactly a month before his release. “It was really absurd.” 

Five years have now elapsed since the end of Mohsen’s sentence, and his freedom has prompted questions on how his story should be told. “I have my theory about the experience in terms of telling it or retelling it as storytelling, as a narrative, why should I tell it, to whom, and how? When I tell my story, if I’m victimising myself, what does it mean to be a victim, and what am I demanding? It’s easy to just cry, and that also will make it worse for oneself, because I believe that there are problems in life that are created by the counterfactual nature of telling.” While he prefers not to narrativise himself as a victim, he holds that attempts at objectivity in portraying the prison experience are inherently flawed. “If I’m writing about prison as a scholar who never went to prison, I wouldn’t be sufficient enough to know what prison is and its impact as something that someone experienced. But if I’m in prison, and I have the academic tools, for example, to assess myself and to assess my situation, I also wouldn’t be able to, because I am under the emotional circumstances.” 

Subjectivity itself is no better at capturing the prison experience, because “when a subject speaks about the prison experience, what happens is that it’s as if you’re transmitting light from somewhere invisible, for example, to another visible scene through a broken lens. Everything that will go through will be broken because the lens itself is broken, and this lens is subjectivity.” 

Could a polyphony of distinct voices, each chronicling a unique prison experience, serve as some sort of tertium quid for the appeal to either objectivity or subjectivity within representations of prison life? Mohsen’s current project, a global anthology of prison writing with “prison poems and ideas that are significant from every culture,” explores this very question. 

“Prison is a part of my life; it’s not my whole journey,” Mohsen believes. He is now starting to write poetry in English, applying for a PhD in Refugee Studies, and editing Rowayat, a literary magazine. Oxford, his new home, brings solace and intellectual stimulation – it inspires Mohsen to continue writing his poetry, and his future. 

TIME

In

at twenty

out 

at twenty.

You ask,

“But 

how many 

years inside?”

Sigh– 

“A lifetime confined.”

In

at twenty

out 

at twenty,

with 

new notions of time. 

(from No One Is on the Line by Mohsen Mohamed, translated by Sherine Elbanhawy)

Lost in translation?

Image Credit: vladimix/CC 2.0 Deed via Wikimedia Commons

As someone who is half Japanese, I’ve become accustomed to reading literature in different languages. Some books I’ve enjoyed so much that I’ve read them in both languages, such as Haruki Murakami’s Norwegian Wood. Contemporary Japanese authors like Murakami are often described as being quite dry and direct, with dialogue that sometimes translates awkwardly into English. And while I understand these criticisms of translations, I often feel the essence of the original novel is able to shine through despite these flaws.

Murakami’s writing style reflects his approach to the physical craft of writing. In his book Novelist As A Vocation, he mentions that with novels, there is a possibility that “the reader can be stifled if the screws are too tight”. Murakami leaves room for some passages to be long-winded, convoluted, even, to allow the other free-flowing passages to breathe. As a result, his writing style emerges like a sphygmomanometer, constantly constricting and then relaxing to make those “tightly restricted sections achieve their full effect”. This very feeling is crafted meticulously in their translated counterparts, thanks to the translators’ deep understanding of the source material. Take Scheherazade, translated by Ted Goossen, for example: about a man who is having an affair with an older woman. In between lengthy sections of mundane, almost unnatural sounding conversations about lampreys and breaking and entering, we read vivid details about the protagonist, from the way she undresses herself to the way her house is decorated. The awkward dialogue in all its glorified translated form works in creating a break between heavy sections of pure description.

However, not all translations are as fortunate  – and it’s not entirely the translation’s fault. A few years ago, I read a book called Snakes and Earrings by Hitomi Kanehara, another Japanese author. I picked it up in English after seeing someone mention it on social media, piquing my curiosity due to its unconventional plot. The novel follows Rui (bizarrely named after Louis Vuitton), who develops a deep obsession in body modification after seeing her new gangster boyfriend’s split tongue. She embarks on a journey to also get her tongue split and subsequently begins a violent affair with a tattoo artist.

The book is incredibly short, just over 100 pages, and was extremely slow-paced until the last fifteen pages or so. Despite receiving literary awards and high praise, I felt Kanehara’s writing style was clunky, as though written by a teenager who had recently discovered smutty fanfiction. I wasn’t surprised to learn that Kanehara had indeed written it at sixteen, albeit with the guidance of her father, a sociology professor.

While the pacing of Snakes and Earrings felt inconsistent with its abrupt, unsatisfactory finale, this was perhaps not the fault of the translator, David Karashima. The novel did offer an interesting sociological insight into youth gang culture in Japan, but I felt let down by the literary limitations of Kanehara, who perhaps did not have the experience of the literary means to express her story in a truly impactful way. It certainly appealed to younger readers due to the simple language and shorter sentences, but of course, the subject matter felt potentially inappropriate for such an audience. Ultimately, I concluded that I may have resonated with the story more if the writing and pacing had been stronger.

Not trusting my initial judgement, however, I decided to give it another go in Japanese: could Kanehara  redeem herself? Perhaps she was more articulate in Japanese and it was simply that the translator did not capture her work effectively, which was entirely possible. But how does one wrongly translate pacing? In the end, I faced similar problems whilst tackling the original, feeling that even with my slightly lacking Japanese reading skills, the plot may have been more exciting if written in a more captivating way.

 Examining translated fiction highlights the pivotal role of a translator in engaging with an entirely new literary audience. The constant decision-making required throughout translation is crucial in determining how a book will be perceived by international readers whilst simultaneously maintaining the original tone and meaning. On a smaller scale, I’ve come to understand this myself while studying Italian. In translation, maintaining the integrity of the text while adapting certain elements to fit more naturally in the target language is key. However, it is not the translator’s job to manipulate the text into something it’s not. After a certain point, surely, we can no longer call it the same book. In the same way that Murakami’s directness is reflected in the work of his translators, I can admit that Kanehara’s English counterparts are also faithful to her craft. As much as I want to blame the translation, perhaps my problem lies with the original storytelling.

Now I understand that Snakes and Earrings in English indeed captures the heart and soul of the original, even if not up to my taste. At least it was an authentic reading experience, which perhaps means more than simply having a great book in your hands.

Dozens walk out of Oxford Union debate in protest against ‘institutional racism’

Image Credit: Selina Chen

During Thursday night’s debate, 17 Oxford Union Committee members threatened to resign as part of a protest against “institutional racism.” They delivered a list of demands, including the reinstatement of disqualified ex-President-Elect, Ebrahim Osman-Mowafy. If not met, they will resign on Monday. 

Details surrounding the “unreasonable claim” that Osman-Mowafy was removed for making remain unknown.

Secretary Rachel Haddad Moskalenko, the highest-ranking officer who walked out, said in her speech: “The deep-seated issues within our institution cannot be overlooked, cannot be excused, cannot be ignored.” She said that Osman-Mowafy’s “only crime was to make this Union a more inclusive and diverse place.”

Her other demands include calling for the tribunal report to be published Monday morning and the Appellate Board to be called by Thursday 6pm. Given that Osman-Mowafy was only given 36 hours to prepare for his tribunal, Haddad Moskalenko believes this is enough time.

President Louis Wilson acknowledges that the three governing bodies passed motions declaring the Union “institutionally racist” and that he “recognises the pain and emotional distress” from recent events. After the business, dozens of attendees walked out of the chamber instead of staying for the debate.

This follows Monday’s motions by the Union’s three governing bodies – Consultative Committee, Standing Committee, and Secretary’s Committee – each declaring the Union is “institutionally racist”.

Osman-Mowafy alleged that a Clerk made Islamophobic comments regarding hijabi women, after which Graduate Officer Sarah Rana had resigned, stating that she felt “unsafe, disillusioned, used, and extremely disturbed.”

Recently, a number of ex-Presidents of colour and top officers signed letters stating that the Union has been overly litigious and those proceedings have been “disproportionately targeting individuals from non-traditional backgrounds.”

The debate’s motion was ‘This House believes Britain is no longer a fighting force.’ Speakers in proposition are former British army officer, Lord Robathan, former Commander Joint Forces Command Genera,l Sir Richard Barrons, and Union President Louis Wilson. Speakers in opposition are retired British army officer Lieutenant General Sir Graeme Lamb, presidential candidate Israr Khan, and director of press Noah Robson.

Regarding the claims of racism, a Union spokesperson said: “The Oxford Union Society acknowledges the concerns of its members that resulted in the passing of the motions on Monday at its committees. The Union is unequivocal in its condemnation of discrimination in all its forms.

“The union seeks to be an open, diverse, accessible, and inclusive society in which all members feel welcome and are treated with dignity and respect as set out in the society’s equality, diversity, accessibility, and inclusion policy.”

At the end of his floor speech, presidential candidate Israr Khan spoke on the recent events. He said he is saddened by the “entrenched racism and Islamophobia” and discusses his upbringing in villages of Pakistan and Afghanistan. He argues that resigning is not the solution because “you need to be part of the system to make a change.”

Arcadia by Christ Church Dramatic Society review: ‘Mad, bad and brilliant to watch’

“The best prophet of the future is the past” – Byron

In the sweet-preserved garden behind Christ Church Cathedral there stands a table decked with cloth and books and a dark-coloured flower-vase. A sharp but naive 13-year-old and her tutor, both in the dress of 200 years ago, sit at table and discuss the definition of “carnal embrace”. The manner, the accents, the dress and the bearing of the pair is perfectly in tune with their time period; and we the audience, sitting in the gentle green of the garden with the waving of boughs overhead, feel for a moment that this is not merely a play, but an authentic window into an English garden 200 years ago.

The period setting is only one of many attractions in what must be the best play that I have ever seen in Oxford. It is a dual story which takes place in the garden of Sidley Park between the early 19th century and the present day. Some of its weightier themes include chaos theory and the relationship between past and present; but these are enlivened by characters who live and breathe with sharp, often amusing, dialogue; and by an ingeniously structured plot which must be seen to be grasped.

Fittingly, for this year is the bicentenary of his death, Lord Byron plays a significant offstage role. He is an unseen presence without whom the plot would collapse. At risk of exposing the developments of the plot, which has the trappings of the very best kind of historical thriller, I will only say that the poet lives up to his appellation of “mad, bad and dangerous to know”.

So much for the play itself; but this fabulous production by Christ Church Dramatic Society elevates it to heights at which even Tom Stoppard, the playwright, must be astounded. Every one of the characters is performed with the keenest blend of boldness and subtlety; the actors go infinitely further than the script in convincing us that they are human beings rather than the inventions of a playwright.

Catty Claire immerses not only herself but the audience inthe glimmering character of Thomasina Coverly; her sharp-naive attitude, which by a lesser talent would be given the appearance of artifice, comes across here as dazzlingly authentic.

Gilon Fox cuts a vigorous and charismatic figure as Septimus Hodge. Like Byron himself, Mr Fox commands audience attention by the blend of boldness and studied carelessness with which he delivers his lines, and by the tireless energy of his manner.

Alex Still as Bernard Nightingale provides a most convincing view of a very recognisable kind of modern-day intellectual; the character’s bookish charm is matched only by the sharpness of his retorts when he is incensed.

Tia Kwanbock is remarkable in elevating Chloe Coverly, who in the original play is rather a pale character, into a charming and believable human being to whose reappearance the audience constantly looks forward.

Hattie Wellock’s performance, as an aristocrat of the early 19th century, must be called Gissingian for its grasp of 19th-century mores and vivid understanding of character; her command of Lady Croom is absolute (with a first-rate delivery of dialogue) and her presence on stage is captivating.

Amina Poernomo, as the charmingly innocent Valentina Coverly on whom the plot turns, is delightful to watch. She understands the humour of her character although she performs all the same with seriousness and skill. With a bright stage presence, she establishes herself as a most excellent performer.

Conor Tidswell is grand and by turns amusing as Ezra Chater. He possesses, for one thing, the subtle art of wearing period dress instead of being worn by it, and there is certainly a kind of star quality in his bearing. It is a shame that he vanishes after the interval.

Cameron Maiklem’s turn as Captain Brice is a marvellous piece of acting. He gives so much character to his role that it is impossible to think of Captain Brice being played or embodied by anyone else.

The most impressive performance, however, is by Susie Weidmann. As Hannah Jarvis, the academic with an attitude, Ms Weidmann is superb. Her entire attitude – the changes of expression, the reach of her voice, the coolness of gait, even the subtle puffs and flicks at her cigarette – has the rare onstage glow of a living character. Here is an actress for whom the audience now holds great expectations.

It is a shame that the director, Billy Jeffs, gives himself so little to do onstage besides standing around in a tuxedo. His most memorable scene involves a frenetic outburst on the subject of the Emperor Napoleon; and here Mr Jeffs’s comical suddenness was frightening not only for the audience but for a flock of pigeons who had been watching with interest from a nearby tree. The effect was marvellous.

Although his role is only a bit-part, Mr Jeffs’s real talents lie in the art of direction. His mastery of mood and scene and period elevates an already skilful play to one that grips and immerses from start to finish. It is to be hoped that next year he selects another play to which he can bring his keenness of vision and scene. If he can reunite with the same cast, all of whom do such great justice to the characters in this play, then next year’s production could well outstrip this one. Until then, I do not think that there will be a better play to see in Oxford this year.

Film around the world: Japan’s Harakiri

Image credits: PDM BY 1.0. Engraving by Félix Jean Gauchard. Drawing by L. Crépon, after a Japanese painting by an unknown artist, via Wikimedia Commons.

It is not The Godfather or The Shawshank Redemption or any Hollywood epic that is the highest rated film on the app ‘Letterboxd’ (a popular film social media app). Instead, it is Masaki Kobayashi’s 1962 samurai film Harakiri that around 100,000 critics and users have judged to be the best film ever made. There are problematic aspects of ranking one piece of art against another. Yet, as humans, we like statistics that help us quantify things. As Harakiri is so highly rated, I wanted to investigate what made it so special. 

The first and only hurdle was actually finding somewhere to watch the film. It is very difficult to find. Amazon has some DVDs for sale, but the film is unavailable on any streaming platform. Luckily, over the vacation I managed to find a cinema showing it in London. Harakiri is part of the Japanese golden age of cinema. This includes realist classics like Yasujiro Ozu’s Tokyo Story and samurai epics like Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai. Harakiri brilliantly combines both genres to create an unromanticised samurai film that depicts the poverty and desperation of the lives of masterless Samurais, also known as ronins.

The film starts with Tsugumo Hanshiro, a middle aged and jobless ronin, arriving at the estate of the Iyi clan. Tsugumo asks to commit harakiri – ritual suicide through disembowelment – on the clan’s estate. Before agreeing to his request, the clan elder tells him the story of the last samurai, Chijiwa Motome, who requested to do the same. The film is told through a series of flashbacks about the life of Chijiwa. Initially, I thought the film would just focus on Chijiwa’s story, but what followed was better than I could have imagined. Without spoiling it, the film also explores Tsugumo’s past and critiques the Bushido Code. The Bushido Code was a code of conduct for samurais that prized bravery and honour whilst disdaining dishonour and defeat. These principles of valour remained ingrained in Japanese military culture until after the second world war. 

All I can say is that the film lives up to its acclaim. The cinematography is phenomenal. It successfully brings to life exciting action scenes, heartfelt moments, and artistic natural shots. This is accentuated by the acting. Like in a lot of classic Japanese cinema, significant emphasis is placed on close ups which draw attention acting grounded in the expressiveness of faces and eyes. The score is brilliantly menacing. Simply rewatching the trailer sends chills down my spine. This is not a short film, but it does not feel as long as it is. The ending may be slightly drawn out but it serves to heighten Kobayashi’s storytelling. 

Kobayashi’s excellent direction perfectly captures the subjectivity of flashbacks and the re-telling of events. The audience is initially ignorant, adopting the clan’s view of Chijiwa as cowardly. However, the flashbacks are presenting  the clan’s version of the story, not Chijiwa’s. It is only later in the film, when Kobayashi reveals other flashbacks featuring Chijiwa, that we understand and sympathise with him. Yet by the end it is the clan who write and rewrite history. They have the power to sweep over any imperfections. This is epitomised by the film beginning and ending in the same way: with a shot of the beautiful but haunting armour of the Iyi clan’s ancestor. It is not Chijiwa who is the coward, but rather the clan. We, the audience, know the real story. But do the history books?

The film presents a society that is cruel to the individual, prizing elitist social convention above humanity. Honour is of greater value than life itself. Through depicting the hypocrisy of the Iyi clan Kobayashi invites the audience to question the narrative status quo. The filmmaker was a pacifist. This is reflected in his critical portrayal of the Iyi clan. Despite being set in the Japanese Edo period; the film is relevant to modern life. It questions the historical narrative and challenges traditional value systems like the Bushido Code. They should not have had a fraction of the importance they did when they were invented –  so why are they still preserved? 

I recommend this film without hesitation, no one could ever replicate Kobayashi’s masterful storytelling.