Tuesday 1st July 2025
Blog Page 6

The Journal of a Chambermaid: The greatest novel you’ve never heard of

Richard Kuehl
-
0
The Journal of a Chambermaid: The greatest novel you’ve never heard of

It is easy to suppose that the greatest authors of the 19th century have all already been discovered. Especially when it comes to French literature, one notices the same names come up over and over again. Yet for every Balzac, Flaubert or Zola, there is at least one author who has been forgotten by history, brushed aside, and reduced to a footnote. That need not mean that these authors don’t have compelling stories to tell which are still relevant to this day. 

A good example of this is Octave Mirbeau. The French journalist was a prolific writer and at the centre of Parisian intellectual life. As an art critic, he was an early supporter of Van Gogh’s and good friends with the likes of Claude Monet and Auguste Renoir. Some of his plays, like Les affaires sont les affaires, were highly successful at the time and are still performed by the Comédie Française today. In 1900, he released his fifth novel, Le Journal d’une femme de chambre, which instantly became an example of the notorious ‘succès de scandal’ genre. Nonetheless, Mirbeau’s extensive work has largely been forgotten over the past 100 years.

It was not until the 1980s and the onset of second wave feminism that Mirbeau and his substantial literary oeuvre began to gain some recognition. But still, even to this day, Mirbeau is rarely talked about, despite having been admired by many peers, including Tolstoy. His books, although in print, are rarely on offer in bookstores. This, to me, is scandalous, because the quality of Mirbeau’s work rivals that of any of his contemporaries. His Journal of a Chambermaid in particular is one of the greatest novels of its time. Its humour and social criticism are as relevant today as they were 125 years ago. 

Its narrative centres around Célestine, a witty young woman who works as a domestic servant in the household of the Lanlaire family. In her diary, she records the idiosyncrasies of her bourgeois employers as well as of the people around her. She is the constant object of male desire, yet she is able to use this to her own advantage. The resulting image is that of a sexually empowered and independent woman. In the end, she escapes her position as a chambermaid by going to Cherbourg with the brutish gardener Joseph, a bittersweet end at a time when social mobility was out of reach for many domestic servants. 

If the novel is so good, why has nobody heard of it? I believe this has to do with the way that we perceive literature today. People like to place authors within a literary canon that is subdivided into movements. It is easy to label Balzac a ‘Realist’, Zola a ‘Naturalist’ or Hugo a ‘Romantic’. Yet when it comes to Mirbeau, none of these labels easily fit. He stands out from the Symbolist and Decadent currents popular during his time, and this inability to place Mirbeau within the literary landscape has contributed to his disappearance from textbooks and literary journals. 

However, there are other elements that make the novel unconventional and subsequently less attractive in the eyes of some literary critics. On the one hand, Mirbeau’s characters in Le Journal d’une femme de chambre are mostly caricatures who, through exaggeration, enable Mirbeau to introduce both humour into the story and underline his political commentary. On the other hand, the novel’s plot focuses on an independent working class woman who, whilst very critical of the people around her, has insight limited to her immediate environment rather than society as a whole. The novel’s detractors have thus sometimes argued out of pure prejudice against a book whose female narrator makes them uncomfortable. 

I would advise everyone to pick up a copy, if they can. Especially those who have access to the French original, who will find it to be both an entertaining and eye opening read. We live at a time in which people are rediscovering voices from the past previously misunderstood or silenced. The best way to support such authors is to read their works. Who knows how many lost Balzacs or Zolas we might uncover in the process.

Oxford University drops disciplinary case against OA4P protestors

Gaspard Rouffin
-
0
Oxford University drops disciplinary case against OA4P protestors

Disciplinary proceedings against the 13 student protesters that were arrested at a sit-in last year at Wellington Square were dropped by the University on Wednesday, Cherwell can exclusively reveal.

The students were facing suspensions of “indefinite length, fines, and formal warnings,” as stated in a letter seen by Cherwell sent to the protesters by the Proctor’s Office in late April. The letter accused the protesters of “colluding” to “cause significant disruption” to University “activities and members of staff”.

The chair of the Student Disciplinary Panel (SDP), barrister Laura Hoyano, who was tasked with deciding whether or not to uphold the Proctor’s recommendations for disciplinary measures, announced on Wednesday afternoon that the case would be dropped on “procedural grounds”.

Cherwell understands that the statutory deadline between the initial hearings, which were held in early October, and the referral to the SDP is six months, but it was exceeded by 22 days. The chair of the SDP also noted that the case initiated by the proctors lacked the expected procedural rigour, and that the students’ reputation had been damaged as a result.

The Senior Proctor initially in charge of the investigation, Thomas Adcock, was notably removed from the case after allegations of conflict of interest were made against him. He had co-signed a statement authored by Irene Tracey condemning the sit-in on 23 May 2024. The University declined to comment on this matter.

Irene Tracey, the Vice-Chancellor of the University, was cross-examined by two King’s Counsels, Bryan Cox and Henry Blaxland, who were representing the students under investigation at the hearings this morning.

A University spokesperson said: “The student disciplinary process is confidential and the University will not comment on ongoing procedures or their outcome.”

Bridget Kendall on interviewing Putin, the Russia-Ukraine war, and her path into journalism

Martha Gathercole
-
0
Bridget Kendall on interviewing Putin, the Russia-Ukraine war, and her path into journalism

Bridget Kendall was the BBC’s correspondent for Moscow in the pivotal period covering the collapse of the Soviet Union. She shares her insights on interviewing Putin, how she predicts the Russia-Ukraine war will end, and advice from her own journalistic journey, which started as a student at Oxford.   

Cherwell: What’s something that you had to learn living under the Soviet Union? 

Kendall: When you have a totalitarian society, people live on two levels. Their public persona is very reserved, and they don’t smile on the streets. Almost as though to compensate for that, in their private lives they are very warm and have a completely different view of life.  

Many were quietly very frustrated with the regime. When children would go to kindergarten, parents would have to say “there’s things that we talk about at home, and then there’s this world where you talk about Lenin and Communism, and these worlds don’t mix.” So, from a very young age people were made to exercise doublethink. This goes for all totalitarian societies, but it’s very important for understanding what Russians think about Ukraine. In Soviet Russia, people had to go into “exile in my head”, as one man told me after protests were suppressed in 2011. People would have thoughts in their head and share them with their close family, but not with the outside world until circumstances changed – the same goes for Putin’s regime. People have thoughts in their head and share them with their close family, but not with the outside world until circumstances change. 

There were people that swallowed communist propaganda, but for lots of other people, it was like being bilingual: you could choose which way you were going to be. This can create a sophistication of thought which can make some people in the West appear somewhat naive, because we only have one level and don’t have to make those choices. So this was a humbling wake-up call to me. 

I went to a provincial town and in those days, there was enormous deprivation in the provinces. You couldn’t get meat and vegetables, so you lived on a very restricted diet. It was interesting to live in a country where people thought of themselves as European, and were very literate, but lived in such deprivation. Most people also couldn’t get basic clothing. I realised that those that had nice clothes were exactly the ones I shouldn’t trust; they had parents in the party who allowed them to get these highly prized imported goods. My youthful assumptions of judging people by their appearances were turned on their head. 

Cherwell: Do you think this internal resistance that some people feel, as shown by [Alexei] Navalny’s funeral, could be enough to overthrow Putin? 

Kendall: Putin has pressed a button of fear, of oppression. The protests in 2011, and when Gorbachev lifted the lid, are telling examples of how people would speak out and would take to the streets if they had the chance. But this probably won’t happen until Putin goes. 

This is about history, but it’s also about geography. Most people haven’t been anywhere except Russia. You can access the internet, and the borders aren’t completely closed unlike in Soviet Times, but surprisingly, even though Putin hasn’t done a complete clampdown, people feel he’s done enough for them to stay silent. They feel isolated – people have retreated into their own little worlds of trusted friends with which they can speak frankly. 

Cherwell: You’ve interviewed Putin twice; what was that like and how did he come across? 

Kendall: When he walked in you barely noticed him, he was a short man and didn’t really have any presence at that point. He had been president for less than a year and hadn’t yet acquired this aura of absolute authority and fear. In the interview, there were two Putins: the ex-KGB man who spoke eloquently on foreign policy and nuclear weapons, and who was pretty fierce when he’d bore you with his blue eyes, and then Putin when we asked a series of personal questions about his family life. To his credit, he answered them all, but came across not totally sure of himself.  

Five years later, I was asked to conduct a similar interview. This time, there was just one Mr Putin: the tough presidential figure who felt he could control everything; a little bit cocky; a little bit annoying; a little bit heartless. This was partly because the economy had grown and he’d brought some stability. He’d been ruthless in Chechnya and had raised state pensions, so he felt he was on a roll. It was interesting to see how he’d grown into the role: this was a man prepared to be ruthless. 

At one point he turned the interview on me. Someone asked why he’d turned the gas off in Ukraine to punish it for the Orange Revolution [a series of protests in Ukraine in 2004-05]. He leant back in his chair and simply asked me: “How much are those pearls around your neck?”. I just replied, “That’s a very unexpected question”. We had a bit of banter, but eventually I told him. He then said, “well you wouldn’t sell them to me for just 5 kopeks would you”. I realised that he was trying to make a heavy-handed analogy with the gas prices in Ukraine; that you shouldn’t sell gas to Ukraine for nothing. 

Something else that feels very relevant was that a man from Ethiopia asked what Russia was going to do about racism in Russia. Putin responded, “Well, when Russian women go abroad, they’re treated like prostitutes”. This is a typical ploy inherited from the Soviet Union; analysts call it ‘whataboutism’: “What about the way Russians are treated?”. I asked Mr Putin if there was anything he wanted to say to this man, thinking he might want to apologise. He said, “No, he’s probably a criminal anyway”. He didn’t seem to care that this was going public. If he came across as tough and brutal, that rather suited him. 

Cherwell: What are you expecting from Putin in the next few weeks and months? [This interview was conducted on Monday 12th May, before Putin had refused to meet with Zelensky in Turkey].

Kendall: I think he’s playing for time. He doesn’t want to fall out with Trump, and wants a reset of relations with the US, the lifting of sanctions, and some collaborative deals. But on the other hand, they do definitely have the upper hand in the war, and he doesn’t want to give Zelenskyy what he wants. What they want is a compliant leader in Ukraine so they can bring it back into Russia’s orbit. 

The other thing is that Putin has decided that the new enemy is Europe. In the last few weeks, they’ve shifted their propaganda. For years Russia has portrayed the US as the big enemy who wanted to destroy Russia, with Europe weakly tagging along. 

Suddenly, the US has changed, and Trump is offering a new policy. There have been some telling articles from the FSB [the Russian security service] declaring that ‘Eurofascism is back’ – their argument being that Europe is the fascist enemy, whereas America is now labelled the ‘land of the free’, as is Russia, so it’s a startling change of tune. 

Cherwell: So do you see Russia forming an alliance with America? 

Kendall: Trump can go hot and cold, and so is an unreliable ally. Russia can hope that more advisers will be hired who see collaboration with Russia as an opportunity. But the Russians will understand that democracies are inherently mobile: that America is an opportunity that might not always be there. Although, Russia’s biggest ally is China, whom Trump is very focussed on as a strategic opponent, along with North Korea and Iran. At the same time, he wants to make deals with everybody, so we’ll see how that pans out. 

Cherwell: What does Putin want as an ideal outcome out of the war with Ukraine? 

Kendall: He wants a ceasefire, for Russia to keep the territory it’s got, to hold new elections, and get a new leader of Ukraine who is subservient to Russia. Look at Georgia as a model. Russia has kept South Ossetia and the current Georgian government understands that keeping peace with Russia keeps their own country stable. It’s a bullying tactic. I don’t know if it will work in Ukraine, as he’s tried to put in [Viktor] Yanukovych before. Ukraine has been through so much that any leader put in by Putin might be quite a poisoned chalice to the electorate, but I’m not sure Putin thinks that. 

Cherwell: And what about an ideal outcome for Ukraine? 

Kendall: A truce to stop the fighting without the territories being recognised as Russian, with rebuilding funded by Europe and America. And living to fight another day.  

The fact that Trump doesn’t want to keep arming Ukraine to the hilt, the fact that they’re running out of fighting men, and Putin enlisting North Korean fighters to the end means that it’s hard to see that it’s a good option for Ukraine to keep fighting. 

Cherwell: Were there any new discoveries you made when compiling your book on the Cold War? 

Kendall: We did the Vietnam War from the point of view of the American soldiers and the Afghanistan War from the point of view of the Russian soldiers. One of the things that stuck in my mind was how similar their experiences were. There was a fight for survival that people at home didn’t understand, and both groups felt very ostracised after the war. It was interesting to see these two superpowers engage in wars abroad and their soldiers sharing similar journeys.  

This is particularly relevant for today. By the end of the Afghan War, far too many Russians’ sons were coming back in a zinc coffin. People then blamed the Soviet state. I thought this would be a reason why Putin would not go to war with Ukraine. How wrong was I. He is prepared to withstand a lot of criticism and be brutal.

The protests over the Afghan War were also about living conditions. People were frustrated and could see that the party had special shops and cars. Putin is more attentive to the people, hence these handouts [efforts to recruit soldiers with financial incentives]. Putin has also seen the war as an opportunity for importing substitutes, moving to a more developed economy that makes their own goods.  

You have to remember that people’s tolerance for deprivation in Russia is quite high. In the Afghan wWr, it took 5 years for the feeling that ‘this has gone on long enough’ to filter through to the villages. We’re not 5 years into the war. I don’t know if Putin has made this calculation too – if he will be facing that problem in 2027. 

David Cameron also stopped the war in Iraq after 5 years. I don’t know if there are any studies on how long it takes war weariness to creep in, but that was something the research this book made me think about. 

Cherwell: What was your career pathway from being a student at Oxford to becoming BBC correspondent for Moscow? 

Kendall: I worked for Student Radio Oxford. I then went to Moscow afterwards as a research student, and it was clear that Brezhnev was about to die. I set about meeting as many people as I could who had known him. I came back from Moscow with quite a broad view of what was going on in society below the radar. 

Coming back to the UK, I was advised to apply for the BBC, and I applied to a couple of their trainee schemes. I didn’t apply for a journalism scheme because I didn’t think I had the journalism experience. To my surprise I got to the shortlist of two of the schemes, but I didn’t get either one. They said I was too old – I was 26. However, the head of the World Service said they thought they should have taken me. They felt so strongly about it that they’d found some money for me to do a training scheme with them. I was immediately put on current affairs programmes, having to churn out stories in six hours – it was incredibly stressful. I felt very ill-equipped, but you just stay up all night reading and try to brief yourself. After a few months I realised that I really loved this.

In 1985, when Gorbachev came in, he started reaching out to the West. The World Service would say to me, “You speak Russian, so you can find some Russians to interview”, which was very easy to do because the Russians had been briefed by Gorbachev to speak to and charm the West! They then said they were going to enlarge their bureau, so I was made correspondent in 1989. Then, the person I was supposed to join was kicked out, due to a spat involving [Oleg] Gordievsky being revealed as a spy for the West. So I ended up going to the Moscow bureau on my own in 1989. It’s quite something to go from no experience to having to field the hottest story on the planet. I did think that the challenge would be that people would think that Russia was opening up and that this was a constant good news story, but there were signs already of backlash from nationalists. My problem would be managing expectations from my editors and audience: this wasn’t all going to plan. What I didn’t expect was the fall of the Soviet Union – I didn’t expect it to be quite so brittle. I thought I would be reporting on a slow return to the norm in the Soviet Union – a rather depressing story. Instead, it was the most amazing story.

On the 19th August 1991 I was rung up saying that there’s a state of emergency, telling me to go to the office, and within hours Gorbachev had been arrested. It was just amazing. The first thing I wondered was “is this really a coup?”. The Soviets were masters at declaring something that wasn’t true. But I really knew this was happening when I turned on the television and saw the newsreader who had been sacked under Gorbachev was back. He made a short announcement, and then they played Swan Lake, which is often what they play when a Kremlin leader dies or is replaced. So I thought this must be real. Then someone called me saying there’s tanks going towards the Kremlin, and then I knew it was real. 

Cherwell: What was it like being a female journalist in Russia? 

Kendall: There were very few female BBC journalists at the time. Soon people realised that this was a fast-moving situation, and they needed people who spoke the language, and that trumped being an experienced male correspondent! Before long there ended up being a lot of us in Moscow from The New York Times, and El País, but we all felt united rather than divided as a cohort of journalists. 

Once, at a meeting with the Soviet foreign ministry, the minister said, “And now let’s have a question from one of our dear lady journalists”. They asked a woman from El País, a fantastic journalist who always had tough questions and fantastic scoops. We saw his expression of being hit below the belt; he hadn’t thought a woman would come up with something quite so poignant.

Cherwell: What’s one piece of advice for aspiring journalists when writing or interviewing? 

Kendall: To follow your passions, travel to interesting places so that you’ve got interesting things to say. It might also give you the opportunity to do things you wouldn’t necessarily have the chance to do in the UK. 

You’ve got to show commitment to journalism – you need a portfolio, so start a podcast or a blog. Be able to turn your hand to other formats: a publication might send you somewhere to do a podcast or radio and take pictures, so you might as well learn to do it. This will also give you a landscape for what you like doing.  Lots of people think they need to fill the gaps in their CV, but what’s really important is doing what you’re passionate about and getting the most out of it. That’s what gives you depth.  

Corpus Christi clash with Cotswolds village over housing plans

Joshua McGillivray
-
0
Corpus Christi clash with Cotswolds village over housing plans

Plans by Corpus Christi College to build a home in a Cotswold village have been criticised by dozens of local residents. The College has applied for permission to construct a two-storeyed barn at the site of The Saddlery, a stables in Kineton in southwestern Warwickshire. 

The plans include timber doors and glazing that will be set partly on the existing footprint of the building. However, despite plans for the new structure to have an “agricultural character”, locals have expressed fears regarding its effect on the pastoral area. 

In particular, Temple Guiting Parish Council stated in a consultee comment on the plans: “[T]he proposed house has an overbearing presence, out of proportion to the site and the other houses in the hamlet.” On plans to create a small pond outside the property, the Council added: “[T]he location would not allow wildlife to survive as it would be in the shade and very close to the house.”

27 separate objections have been made to the plans on the Cotswold District Council website. One commenter said: “It is no small fact that the land has been rented by the same family for nearly 40 years and it is without a doubt a benefit to the village of Kineton.” Another concurred: “While we appreciate the need for housing generally, there are many other sites more suitable in the surrounding area that don’t involve losing this important asset in our community.”

Villagers also claim that the stables have served as a community centre for locals who keep their horses there, and that many first learnt to ride horses whilst visiting them. They note also that schoolchildren from both Cheltenham and Gloucester with intellectual disabilities and special educational needs have come to The Saddlery over the years to visit its ponies, ducks and chickens.

Some have also contended that the land in question could be put to better use if it were converted into new affordable housing.

The officers of the Cotswolds District Council have nonetheless recommended that scheme be approved. They claim that the proposal conforms with local and national policies and that it would not damage protected areas of land or negatively impact the region as a whole.

Over 1,000 sign open letter calling for University to drop disciplinary proceedings against student protestors

Archie Johnston
-
0
Over 1,000 sign open letter calling for University to drop disciplinary proceedings against student protestors

Over a hundred Oxford students, staff and local campaigners gathered at the Careers Office on Tuesday afternoon, calling on the University to drop disciplinary proceedings against thirteen student protestors arrested at a sit-in last year. An open letter making the same demand has garnered over 1,000 signatures.

Protestors gathered from 12.30pm outside 56 Banbury Road, at which the first day of the students’ disciplinary hearing was underway. They carried banners from the student organisation Jewish Students for Justice, and from several local trade union branches. One banner read: “Students, you make us proud! free Palestine! Shame on this uni!”

The sit-in in question happened on 23 May 2024, at the University Offices in Wellington Square. Seventeen protesters from Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P) entered the offices, demanding that the University agree to meet with them.

A statement issued by the University at the time called it a “temporary occupation”, saying students had committed a “violent action that included forcibly overpowering the receptionist.” An OA4P statement in response refuted accusations that the action was violent, and cited CCTV footage which contradicted the claim that protestors had “physically handled” a receptionist.

The seventeen protestors were arrested on suspicion of aggravated trespass. They were all later further arrested on suspicion of ‘affray’, which means “the use or threat of violence to another which would cause a normal person present at the scene to fear for his personal safety”. One was also arrested on suspicion of common assault.

In August 2024, Thames Valley Police told the seventeen that no further action would be taken against them, at which point the University Proctors’ Office began its own disciplinary proceedings. Thirteen of the protestors are Oxford students, and have been summoned to a Student Disciplinary Panel (SDP).

The SDP will decide whether to uphold the Proctors’ recommendations for disciplinary measures. These include “suspensions of indefinite length, fines, and formal warnings.” The open letter states that the disciplinary process has been “opaque” and involved the use of “racist language”. Specifically, it claims that one University employee associated the keffiyeh, a traditional item of Palestinian clothing, with terrorism.

This claim was repeated at the rally, at which multiple students, faculty members, and local activists also spoke to attendees. The parent of one of the sit-in participants expressed support for his son, saying: “They occupied Wellington Square Office because Oxford University is complicit in genocide”, and called the SDP a “phony court.”

A spokesperson from Oxford Stop the War Coalition, which helped organise the protest, told Cherwell: “Oxford University has an endowment of nearly £9bn, and we know for a fact, that which is open for the public to look at, they’re invested in arms companies and they have partnerships with Israeli universities that are supporting the Israeli military as it conducts war crimes that amount to a genocide.”

One sit-in participant no longer at the University also said to the crowd: “I do not trust this University to give my student comrades a fair hearing.” A sit-in participant leaving the building on a lunch break told the rally: “It is not a question for [the University] of justice […] They are not interested. What they are interested in is silencing protest.”

A speaker from Jewish Students for Justice (JSJ) read out a message from the author Michael Rosen, an Oxford alumnus and professor of children’s literature at Goldsmiths University. The message supported the sit-in participants: “It seems that the University has judged them guilty before they’ve defended themselves at a hearing.” Rosen has been an outspoken advocate for Palestine. His poem “Poem for the Children of Gaza” was read out by another JSJ speaker.

Other speakers at the rally included members of the Oxford Palestine Solidarity Campaign and Oxford University and College Union (UCU). 

The open letter ends: “We demand that the University drop the proceedings of its unjust imitation court and commit to fulfilling OA4P’s urgent demands for disclosure, divestment, and reinvestment. In making these demands, we stand unequivocally for the right to protest, freedom of conscience, and above all—for a free Palestine.” It has been signed by forty-one anti-war, environmental, and Palestine solidarity groups, as well as hundreds of Oxford students, faculty, and members of the public.

The Stop the War spokesperson told Cherwell: “We today, there’s over a hundred and thirty people I just counted, support the students, they say it was right to protest, and the University’s wrong to discipline them while they haven’t looked at their own house, and looked at their ties to the war crimes happening in Palestine.”

Also on Tuesday, an open letter from “Concerned Jewish Faculty at the University of Oxford” was issued. It called on the Vice-Chancellor, Proctors, and University Chief Diversity Officer Tim Soutphommasane to drop the disciplinary proceedings. It warned the University against using “supposed threats to Jewish safety” to “demonize the movement for Palestinian rights

and to criminalize lawful protest and expression.” It called the University’s stance “needlessly hostile, punitive, and adversarial stance”, and urged the University to sever financial and institutional ties with Israel.

Last week, former Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott  issued a statement in support of one of her constituents, a student facing disciplinary proceedings for their role in the Wellington Square sit-in. Abbott said: “It is neither fair nor reasonable for a university to treat principled protest on urgent moral and humanitarian issues as misconduct warranting punitive measures.”

In a statement, the University told Cherwell: “The student disciplinary process is confidential and the University will not comment on ongoing procedures or their outcome.” 

The Oxford Cinema & Café: A profile

Luke Brown
-
0
The Oxford Cinema & Café: A profile

The opening of The Oxford Cinema & Café marks a new chapter in Oxford’s cinema scene: a move further towards independent cinema. Of the four central Oxford cinemas – Curzon Westgate, Phoenix Picturehouse, The Ultimate Picture Palace (UPP), and The Oxford Cinema – there is now an even split between independents and franchises. Located on Magdalen Street, the new cinema is in the very heart of central Oxford and, tickets being currently only £4.99 plus an online booking fee, it is in prime position to thrive where, seemingly, the Odeons did not.

Originally known as the Oxford ‘Super’ Cinema, the venue had its grand opening on New Year’s Day, 1924, screening the silent film The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. In 1930, the cinema introduced Oxford to “talkies”, showing The Broadway Melody, which took home the second ever Academy Award for Best Picture. Having undergone countless name changes, including Super Cinema, ABC, Cannon and MGM, the cinema will have been remembered by most as an Odeon. A Grade II-listed building, the venue was vacated by Odeon in 2023, just over a year before the company left Oxford completely by closing their cinema on George Street in January 2025. Whilst the building on George Street is reportedly to be demolished in order to make way for an aparthotel, the Magdalen Street cinema has found a new lease of life.

As is to be expected with the opening of a new business, the cinema has not been without teething problems, primarily regarding sound in the auditoriums. Nevertheless, sitting on the balcony in the quite enormous, theatre-inspired screen one for the first time is an unforgettable experience. A further benefit to the immense scale of the screen is that it boasts approximately 650 seats across both floors, which, given its position tucked away on Magdalen Street, is very impressive.

Given that The Oxford Cinema has only two screens, as does the Phoenix Picturehouse, it is only able to run a limited slate of films. For the most part, the cinema’s film schedule is made up of the latest blockbusters (currently Lilo & Stitch, Karate Kid: Legends, and Ballerina), supported by a few smaller films. Though there is not a massive emphasis on foreign and auteur films, that is not to say that they are neglected. The cinema also holds events, such as a special screening of the drama documentary thriller Comrade Tambo’s London Recruits, followed by a Q&A with the director.

In the modern age of technology, a good app is essential for attracting customers (especially young students). Despite having only recently opened its doors, the cinema already has a very user-friendly app, Oxford Cinema, which can be downloaded on the App Store. It is rare that new apps work exactly as expected, but this appears to be an exception. Notably, however, there is no option to select where you sit, which means that arriving in good time to secure the best seats is a must if a screening is particularly busy. Thankfully, the app provides users with the remaining capacity of the screen, so this should not be a problem.

This is all without mentioning the other side of the business: the café. Quaint, well-furnished, and friendly, the café is the perfect place for the obligatory post-film debrief and Letterboxd review. It is even equipped with chessboards so you can challenge your friends whilst you make your next cinema plans.

So, where does The Oxford Cinema & Café find itself in the tumultuous world of cinema in Oxford? For those who miss the low prices and central location of Odeon George St., this new cinema is perfect. Ticket prices are just as low (if not lower) than the other Oxford cinemas and its position puts it within easy walking distance of most colleges. For those who prefer to support independent cinemas, such as the UPP and the Phoenix Picturehouse, which, although a subsidiary of Cineworld, manages to maintain the impression of independent cinema, The Oxford Cinema is a great new option. Finally, those who frequent the Curzon or venture all the way to the Vue at the Ozone Leisure Park to watch the latest big hits, will find that the new cinema caters to their wishes at a very reasonable price.

In short, Oxford’s newest cinema is certainly worth a visit before the end of term. Open seven days a week, The Oxford Cinema is the perfect place to escape from the stress of exams or the impending long vacation and immerse yourself in film.

It’s okay to hate tourism in Oxford

Oscar Whittle
-
0
It’s okay to hate tourism in Oxford

Tourists are as much a feature of life as a student at this University as tutorials, Summer Eights, or getting unfathomably hammered next to your tutors at subject dinners. They are also considerably less fun to experience than any of these three staples, and it is regrettable that we are so constantly subjected to their effects. While tourism to this city and its colleges bring in considerable revenue not just for the University, but for the local and national economy too, are we really so shallow as to value something simply because of its commercial value? I’d hope not.

Before this term, I had really only suffered bumping into large groups of distinctly lost looking tourists in the usual hotspots: Cornmarket, the Martyrs Memorial, etc. – I am sure we are all familiar. As of this term, however, my tutorials have been at Christ Church, and I am now tortured far more frequently and far less avoidably.

Walking to the damned college is bad enough, as I am not only subjected to the overcrowdedness of many of the aforementioned hot spots, but subjected to them on a Friday of all days, which comes second only to the weekend in managing to bring the hoards out of the woodwork. Having got there and negotiated hard with the Porters to let me in (their suspicion of visitors is remarkable – seemingly another negative externality brought about by their subjection to hundreds of lost tourists every day) Tom Quad brings a brief moment of respite. Alas, it is a Trojan Horse. Walking around the corner towards Peck can feel like being suddenly launched head-first into rapids and told to swim against the current. Having made it through my tutorial, I then have the delightful task of repeating this challenge in reverse.

It is true, of course, that tourism is an important part of Oxford’s economy. In the 2018/19 financial year alone, tourism to the University generated a whopping £611 million. On an annual basis, tourism to the City generates an even more impressive £780 million. However, one cannot help but wonder which businesses this sizeable financial endowment supports. Is it the quaint independent bookshops or cafés? Or is it the unremarkable, copy-and-paste tourist traps that plague Cornmarket? I have a feeling it is rather more the latter. It is worth asking whether we really want to see this as beneficial to the City’s culture. Unlike the strong arguments for immigration that stand on the dividends of cultural diversity, tourism simply cannot do the same. Mass tourism, involving shipping large numbers of visitors to the city arriving on buses that crowd St Giles’, brings little but constant and annoying obstacles that residents are subjected to on a daily basis. I pity the poor students who live in ground-floor rooms in St. John’s front quad – I cannot count the number of times I have seen tourists wandering into staircases or having their picture taken in front of the large windows. I also cannot help but wonder about how many embarrassing or intimate moments have been caught in the background of these inappropriately-taken photos.

Colleges, and this City in general, should not feel like a minefield, nor an obstacle course, but rather a place to live and enjoy without constant observation. It is a sad indication that one of the first memories I made here is being photographed by persistent flocks of seagull-like tourists squawking at me on my matriculation day, which made me feel more like a caged animal than a budding undergraduate. While tourism brings in money to the City and the University, I cannot help but wonder if financial gain alone is enough to justify those of us who live here being constantly subjected to this pesternace. 

Of course, even if you concur with this assessment, the question that emerges from all of this is what are we to do? As much as scheming about how to deal with these pesterances has amused me, the more practical solutions seem rather harsh – even in the opinion of this generally unforgiving author. Limiting tourist visiting hours or demarkating no-go zones seem more like the machinations of some deranged dictator than viable policies. It is important to note, however, that many of the issues caused by the visiting hoards are the result of a general lack of awareness rather than deliberate ignorance. For instance, the seemingly simple (and, dare I say, common sense) notion that when walking as part of a large group, one should not stand side-by-side as some sort of tribute to the Iron Curtain, seems to have been missed in the Tourists’ Handbook to Oxford (if this is yet to be written, please consider this article my formal declaration of intent to do so). Ultimately, as much as we can loathe the tourists and be pestered by their genuinely impressive capacity to always be standing in the most inconvenient places possible, maybe we as hosts – albeit rather unwilling ones – should try and do better to inform and explain rather than scoff and judge. After all, one day we might be playing the role of the annoying visitors in some strange and interesting land. 

JCRs launch ‘Safe Celebrators’ welfare scheme for post-exam celebrations

Laurence Cooke
-
0
JCRs launch ‘Safe Celebrators’ welfare scheme for post-exam celebrations

A new student-led peer support initiative was launched this week by Brasenose College and St Catherine’s College JCRs. The pilot scheme, Safe Celebrators, provides bystander support to students during post-exam festivities. 

Student volunteers from a range of colleges will be on hand in Port Meadow from Week 7 to offer warm drinks, water, pastoral support, and signposting. Safe Celebrators told Cherwell that the volunteers were not there to offer first aid nor was it their job to police celebrations. They said their aim was to “help maintain a kind, welcoming atmosphere”, affirming: “we’re not here to judge or interrogate anyone”. 

The programme is not affiliated with the University’s ‘Celebrate SMART’ campaign, which reminds students to stay safe and advises against participating in trashing to avoid incurring £150 littering fines from Proctors. Cherwell understands that prior to this week, a total of three fines have been handed out so far this term.

The scheme comes in the wake of a tragedy involving a Brasenose student last year. 

The lead organiser, Taona Makungaya, told Cherwell that “Safe Celebrators was born from deep grief – the kind of grief that is really just love with nowhere to go. In the wake of Wesley Akum-Ojong’s tragic passing during post-exam celebrations last year, many of us felt a powerful urge to do something – anything – to honour his memory and to make sure no one else feels alone or unsafe in moments meant for joy.

“What began in sorrow has grown into something collective and hopeful. Safe Celebrators is a student-led initiative grounded in care, community, and kindness – offering warm drinks, moral support, and a calm presence during high-energy celebration weeks.

“This isn’t about limiting celebration – it’s about making sure it’s shared, supported, and safe for everyone. The response from students across colleges has been incredible. Wesley’s spirit – his generosity, his joy, his warmth – continues to guide us. This is one way we carry that forward.”

Brasenose JCR has taken a leading role in the plans. JCR President Rory McGlade told Cherwell: “The Royal Lifesaving Society, who spoke to Brasenose College, recommended student peer-to-peer initiatives as a crucial way to improve water safety in university settings.

“This isn’t medical support, lifeguarding, or telling students off – it’s about providing welfare support at a time that is emotional for many, ensuring that wellbeing during post-exam celebrations is prioritized.

“The supportive response that this pilot has got shows that this is something that means a lot to students, and is something that we hope to continue in future years as well.” 

The organisers have worked with College staff to identify key days for undergraduates finishing, achieving 75% coverage of all exams finishing in Weeks 8 and 9. Volunteers will be present on Friday of both weeks, Tuesday and Thursday afternoons of Week 8, and Thursday morning of Week 9.

W.H. Auden at the Bus Stop: In Praise of Intellectual Delay

Ava Doherty
-
0
W.H. Auden at the Bus Stop: In Praise of Intellectual Delay

It’s a damp Tuesday afternoon, and W.H. Auden is waiting patiently at the bus stop, umbrella forgotten on the ground beside him. He’s been there seventeen minutes. No one speaks to him, but everyone seems to know who he is, at least they think they do. He doesn’t say a word. The 148 is cancelled again. Still, he stays, unmoving, rain misting his collar, not impatient but vaguely amused. Not quite waiting for Godot, that would be gauche, just the bus that never comes.

The clocks tick on, but time feels adrift. A kind of metaphysical delay hangs in the air. And Auden, tweedy and abstracted, does not resist it. He leans against the bus stop, a man perfectly at home in suspended time, a philosopher of missed connections. Around him, students rush to collections and clutch tattered library books like shields against the wind, whilst tutors dart toward High Table. But Auden waits like the human form of a footnote: tangential, though necessary, and often overlooked.

He would not look out of place in Oxford now. You could imagine him dawdling past the Taylorian, rain soaking his cuffs, pausing outside the Rad Cam to scowl vaguely at the architecture. His shoes would squeak down St Giles as he muttered a half-rhyme about exile. He might even be seen in the Upper Reading Room of the Bodleian, scrawling something illegible on an index card, then promptly losing it forever. His spectacles might fog slightly, but he would not mind.

Oxford is, after all, a city designed for delay. There are buses that never come, travel grants that never arrive, theses that never resolve. The system seems built not to accelerate thought but to gently mulch it in slow, damp bureaucracy. Like Auden’s bus stop, Academia is a space of sustained anticipation. You wait for funding, for feedback, for permission to begin. You wait to be noticed. Or worse, understood.

We tap our bus passes, hoping something will validate us.

And when it doesn’t, when the red light flashes and the doors hiss shut, we retreat to the safety of ritual. Pret filter coffee. A wander around Blackwell’s. A return to the desk where ideas come slowly, if at all. Delay becomes a liturgy of sorts, a form of quiet, ironic worship. Even the pigeons seem to linger on purpose.

This waiting, so ordinary and passive, starts to feel like the condition of thinking itself. Ideas take time. Or at least, they take waiting: waiting for a sentence to click, for a thought to emerge, for a supervisor to reply, ideally without the words “slightly disappointing.” A kind of unspoken purgatory defines academic life: a limbo between potential and irrelevance, between imagined genius and absolute exhaustion.

Slowness becomes deliberate.

Auden, who once wrote that “poetry makes nothing happen,” knew the quiet dignity of non-arrival. He saw waiting not as a weakness but as a witness to modernity’s speed, its desperation, its refusal to pause. He would have loathed our timelines, productivity apps, and endless small performances of usefulness. Instead, he offers an alternative: to stand still and feel something. Or perhaps, to stand still and feel nothing, observing the nothingness for all its worth.

In the rain, the bus stop timetable flickers again. Still no bus. A fresher mutters something about walking to Jericho. A don in an oversized scarf sighs audibly. But Auden is unbothered. He has his coat, mind, and, presumably, a few lines of verse he’s been carrying for days.

He is not waiting for transport. He is waiting for meaning.

And perhaps we all are, in our strange little offices with flickering radiators, our Moleskines full of crossed-out ideas, our unread JSTOR tabs, waiting to write, to be read, to matter, or waiting for the courage to be still.

Let the 148 never come, let the timetable remain in flux, and let the rain fall endlessly onto the cobblestones.

For now, Auden is here. So are we. And that feels like a kind of arrival—tentative, quiet, and entirely our own.

Oxford Union presidential candidate investigated by police over WhatsApp ‘smear campaign’ allegations

Cherwell News
-
0
Oxford Union presidential candidate investigated by police over WhatsApp ‘smear campaign’ allegations

Oxford Union Treasurer and presidential candidate Rosalie Chapman was identified by police as the owner of a WhatsApp number used to send anonymous messages which accused her Michaelmas 2024 election opponent of “inappropriate behaviour”. The messages were later deemed to be electoral malpractice by an internal Union tribunal, but no disciplinary action was taken because the sender’s identity was unknown.

This incident was also subsequently reported to Thames Valley Police which resulted in an investigation for harassment against Chapman. Cherwell understands that Chapman had a voluntary interview under caution with police earlier this year but exercised her right to remain silent throughout. Following this, police ultimately determined that there was not enough evidence to charge her for either harassment or an Online Safety Act violation.

The WhatsApp messages were sent under the alias ‘Grace’, with at least 25 individuals sent messages by the number. These messages accused her opponent of behaving “inappropriately towards some of [my] friends” and of using an unofficial Postgraduate Union discussion group to campaign unfairly.

Chapman, who is running to be President in the Society’s upcoming elections said in a statement on Instagram: “I’ve stayed silent throughout months of relentless misogynistic abuse, harassment and slander – not any longer. Over the last 3 months, I’ve been dehumanised and humiliated in a place I once felt safe in.” 

She went on to recount experiences of being “verbally assaulted” in the Union bar, saying: “This is not about accountability, it is about targeted, sexist and humiliating campaign designed to break me.” Chapman went on to say: “Such behaviour is never acceptable, and backing down from who I am and what I stand for will only validate those retrograde and regressive individuals and their beliefs.”

A motion of no confidence was recently brought in Chapman, but it failed to reach the 150 signatures required under the Union’s rules to bring about a poll of all members on the matter.

Chapman was first contacted by police in early 2025, eventually attending a voluntary interview on 23 April. The next day, on 24 April, police closed the investigation, stating that the evidence was not strong enough.

An email from Thames Valley Police, viewed by Cherwell, confirmed that “further enquiries identified Ms Rosalie Chapman as the owner and likely user of the ‘Grace’ profile”. However, they made clear that not answering questions “does not imply guilt in law” and that she remains “innocent from a legal perspective”.

The police had considered the case both for the offence of harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, as well as under Section 179 of the Online Safety Act 2023, which covers sending false communications with intent to cause harm. A review of the evidence by a police sergeant and a detective sergeant determined that the threshold for prosecution had not been met.

The Union told Cherwell: “The Oxford Union is unable to comment on police investigations. As a private members’ society, we conduct all internal affairs – including electoral processes and disciplinary matters – according to our established rules and procedures.

“These processes, which include confidential tribunals, are designed to uphold the integrity and fairness of Union elections. As such, we do not comment on the specifics of tribunal proceedings.”

Thames Valley Police was contacted for comment.

1...567...2,515Page 6 of 2,515

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by James Ashley