Tuesday 28th April 2026
Blog Page 615

Review: Lucian Freud: the Self-Portraits

Clare St George
-
0
Review: Lucian Freud: the Self-Portraits

The Royal Academy’s current exhibition, Lucian Freud: The Self-portraits, is a bold and singular response to this century’s fascination with self-image. Lucian Freud’s artistic career predates the selfie-saturated 2010s, yet his work captures the obsession and volume with which we display ourselves today. As Nancy Durrant says, ‘it is the perfect show for an egomaniac’. By piecing together Freud’s self-portraits through the years, we witness a rare and striking event: the lifetime pursuit of an eye intent on viewing itself.

With a portfolio spanning nearly seven decades, the Royal Academy displays Freud’s work broadly chronologically. The exhibition begins with his teenage sketches, including the ‘Self-Portrait as Acteon’ (1949) – one of four drawings where Freud is drawn as a mythological stag. Turn around, and you see ‘Man with a Thistle’ (1946) and ‘Man with Hyacinth’ (1948), where Freud is composed alongside his plants. He attempts something of narrative in these earlier studies. There is the anxiety of how best to present oneself – one which endures throughout his life. As Freud admits, in a statement that might resonate with us all:

“I don’t accept the information that I get when I look at myself and that’s where the trouble starts.”

Freud felt early that he could never quite represent himself – that his style needed to develop as he did.  He writes in his only published piece, ‘Some Thoughts on Painting’ (1954),

“A moment of complete happiness never occurs in the creation of a work of art. The promise of it is felt in the act of creation but disappears towards the completion of the work… It is this great insufficiency that drives [the artist] on.”



This drive is clear throughout. As the exhibition continues, Freud visibly moves away from geometric frames towards looser compositions. In terms of tools, he switches to coarser hog’s hair brushes upon the advice of his close friend, Francis Bacon. Gone are the companions of flower, fruit, or feather; the subject alone remains. The same questions persist: who am I, why this moment, this angle?

His ‘Man’s Head’ series (1963) is three self-portraits painted in rapid succession. The triptych interrogates both physical and psychological structure as emotional immediacy takes priority. Freud measures his own face against his quickly developing mood and style; the challenging expressions are aimed at him as much as us.

In the same space, a smaller study, ‘Self-portrait with a Black Eye’ (1978) fights for attention. Freud’s forehead swells inside the frame; his skin bulges yellow and purple and the uncomfortable crop offers no relief. Freud is his own unbearable subject: he paints with a constant fascination and dissatisfaction with what he sees. The portrait’s magnification is arguably key to his process. In the ‘Thoughts’ he suggests that:

“The painter’s obsession with his subject is all that he needs to drive him to work.”

This ‘obsession’ extended beyond Freud himself – into his other portraits and commissions – yet we always find glimpses of him in whatever – and whoever – he sees. Even as he paints others, there is a clue of brush in a mirror, the sight of a hand at work, or in the case of ‘Flora with Blue Toe Nails’ (2000), a shadow looming on a bedsheet. The exhibition reveals his deeply self-reflexive creative process – driven by an incessant questioning of how and why he should be painting. Flora is a fine example of this extensive obsession. She had to seek osteopathic treatment to recover from the months of modelling Freud put her through (something which he asked of many of his muses).

While he completed many commissions (from Kate Moss to Big Sue), Freud repeatedly returned to his own image. It becomes apparent, after walking through each section of the gallery, that the central theme of his work is reflection. This is made explicit by the fact he often painted with mirrors, dotted around his studio. Freud preferred them to photographs and enjoyed the surprise that new angles forced him into. Two meanings of reflection are at play here in his work: in the external tools he used and the internal moments he captured. ‘Interior with Hand Mirror’ (1967) and ‘Small Interior (Self-portrait)’ (1968) propose how reflective surfaces can create depth, how a perspective can be physical, temporal, and psychological. The mirror selfie, it would seem, has long been a popular mode. The tradition extends long before Kim Kardashian, back to Rembrandt, Kahlo, and now Freud.

“The aura given out by a person or object is as much a part of them as their flesh.”

In his later period, and the final stages of the exhibition, Freud’s reflections reach full maturity. The knotted, frayed, almost sedimentary surface of ‘Self-portrait, Reflection’ (2002) offers a frank depiction of the ageing process. In ‘Painter Working, Reflection’ (1993), Freud paints himself nude (for the first time) in his 70s. He is bare, save some unlaced boots, and scrutinising of every feature – calves, nose, genitals – paint palette and knife in hand. Freud meets his own image with ruthless honesty. His self-observations are never narcissistic, but always obsessive.

Throughout his life, Freud’s own image never left him. It was where he – like we – went to scrutinise and find the ‘trouble’ that occurs when we look at ourselves. The Royal Academy’s exhibition shows us one man anxiously at work, talking always of insufficiency. Yet we leave with a palpable sense of accomplishment: that Freud has earnestly given us something of himself.

I would recommend this exhibition to anyone in London with a few hours to spare. There is one month left to see it in person, and the RA are also broadcasting it on-screen from the 14th January.


https://www.royalacademy.org.uk/exhibition/lucian-freud-self-portraits#articles

Review: Knives Out

Albert Sowerby-Davies
-
0
Review: Knives Out

British audiences know the whodunit genre well. The Queen of Crime, Agatha Christie, wrote 66 murder mystery novels over the course of her prolific literary career and her two most famous detectives, Miss Marple and Hercule Poirot, are undoubtedly amongst the first names in the hat at family games of charades across the country every holiday season.

This Christmas break, The Last Jedi director Rian Johnson brings us the warmth of the living-room fireplace and the iciness of familial contempt in his modern American murder mystery, Knives Out.

The Thrombey family history is stained with grudges and secrets. Christopher Plummer is Harlan Thrombey, a white-bearded, rose-cheeked family patriarch with a twinkle in his eye. His best-selling crime novels have amassed a great fortune and afforded he and his family  the gorgeous Gothic-style mansion where most of the film takes place. The morning after his 85th birthday party, he is found dead in his bedroom, lying on his divan with his throat slit. 

Local police conclude it was a suicide. So, it falls to mysterious piano-playing detective Benoit Blanc (whose ancestry is an amusing mix of Belgian, American and British) to untangle the web of family grudges which led to Harlan’s death. When lawyer Frank Oz delivers the shocking news that Harlan’s inheritance is up for grabs, almost every one of his heirs proves themself to be as false, self-serving and greedy as those upper-class Americans who claim self-made success, hoard their millions, and vote for Trump. This is no coincidence. Johnson’s critique of social class in modern-day America is as razor sharp as the knife that killed Harlan. 

Rian Johnson’s efforts to make the film fresh and modern are welcome and the results well-crafted. Harlan’s crime novels, stored on his bookshelf, have colourful cheap mass-market sleeves; internet-speak is integrated into the dialogue in a not unnatural way; and characters (particularly the younger ones) clearly belong to a generation whose daily life is consumed by social media and screens. Consequently, Knives Out feels like a movie-in-time– the kind of film that reflects the world of today so accurately that it may not age well. 

That said, the timelessness of Knives Out comes from the impressive performances of its stellar ensemble cast. The casting is superb. We all know that Daniel Craig is great as a stone-faced super-spy (James Bond) and an efficient, tidy drug dealer (Layer Cake). But who knew that he was so gifted at dead-pan comedy? Alongside him Lakeith Stanfield and Noah Segan make a memorable duo as happy-go-lucky cops; Jamie Lee Curtis and Don Johnson play a husband and wife hilariously gritting their teeth through a marriage in tatters; Chris Evans curses his way to some laughs and emits a flirtatious air of masculine confidence that is both lovable and detestable; and Ana de Armas delivers an immensely likeable, and at times brilliantly vengeful, performance as Marta Cabrera, Harlan’s nurse.

The cast of Knives Out

Similar to the way Tarantino makes you laugh while wincing through the excitement of one of his movies, playful acting makes Knives Out not just a thrilling film but a funny one. The comedic moments of this film should be fawned over just as obsessively as its impressively water-tight plot is appreciated . You may leave the cinema prizing the mystery apart and puzzling over its intricacies, but you’ll be chuckling at Daniel Craig’s donut speech for days or even weeks on end.

The marriage of cool pop music (The Rolling Stones’ “Sweet Virginia,” for example) and Nathan Johnson’s ominous score with the artful cinematography of Steve Yedlin ensures that Knives Out appeals on all fronts. Not least of these fronts, the costume design, led by Jenny Eagan, has been celebrated by the public and critics alike. Online sales of ‘Chris Evans’ sweater’ have gone through the roof and one independent Los Angeles cinema even hosted a sweaters-only Knives Out screening. The illustrated miniatures of each character in the final credits, which pay homage to the graphic design of Agatha Christie novels, are also a nice touch. 

With Knives Out, Rian Johnson seems to be making a statement about what his cinema is all about. His films subtly argue that there is something to be said for pure entertainment and the impermanent candy-cane sweetness of a commercial film. Knives Out is exactly that: a clever, funny picture with mass market appeal. It’s Hollywood done right– the cinematic equivalent of a Campbell’s Soup Can. 

* In UK cinemas since 29th November, Knives Out is currently clocking an impressive 97% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

How the Grinch Stole the Christmas Number One

Joanne McNulty
-
0
How the Grinch Stole the Christmas Number One

Many years ago, all the good girls and boys of the United Kingdom would get a special present from Santa every Christmas – a brand new Christmas number one. But then, the grinch stole this Christmas gift from the good boys and girls and gave them commercial, indistinguishable cover songs instead – ruining the magic of the Christmas number one forever. This, at least, seems to be the prevailing narrative to make sense of the declining importance of the Christmas number one. To some extent, it’s true. But reaching Christmas number one has never been a guarantee of longevity and posterity. Who can honestly say that they remember 1982’s Christmas number one ‘Save Your Love’ by Renee and Renato? ‘Lily the Pink’ by The Scaffold, anyone? Nor did the X Factor mark the death of quality music in the Christmas charts – at least not while 1994’s number one ‘Mr Blobby’ exists. What it did achieve, however, was to expose how insignificant the Christmas number one is in the first place.

From a realistic perspective, the only function of the Christmas number one should be as a fun piece of trivia or as the answer to a pub quiz question. It’s newsworthy, but it doesn’t tend to elicit more than a passing “oh, alright” or a “back in myday we had real music!”, depending on who you’re talking to. In reality, there’s no reason that reaching number one on Christmas Day should be any more momentous than reaching number one on the 16th April. Of course, the snag in this way of thinking is that the British public love Christmas, and so the weekly, relatively mundane event of the updating of the charts is suddenly imbued with a special kind of festive gravitas.

That said, you still most likely wouldn’t lose sleep over it. However, music industry executives have taken note of the public penchant for marking occasions and have turned the idea of the Christmas number one being somehow special into an effective marketing strategy. Whilst the Christmas novelty song has in itself always been somewhat of an exercise in cash-grabbing, the construction of a narrative about how massively important it is to get Christmas number one only encourages people even further to go out and spend their money. The ‘race’ to reach Christmas number one between Slade and Wizzard in 1974 undoubtedly helped to boost both of their sales, and East 17 were able to sustain the momentum of their number one by standing in some fake snow, despite ‘Stay Another Day’ having otherwise nothing to do with Christmas. 

On a slightly less cynical note, charity singles, too, are aided by the Christmas spirit of festive goodwill. Bob Geldof could have simply put out an appeal for donations to the Ethopian famine relief, but instead he chose to release an explicitly Christmas-themed charity single with a call to the public to make it reach Christmas number one. It ticked every box possible, and it remains the biggest-selling Christmas number one of all time.

In the 1990s, however, something seemed to happen. Producers realized the potential of novelty songs and suddenly ‘Mr Blobby’ and ‘Can We Fix It?’ joined the illustrious ranks of the Christmas number one, prompting brief outrage from fans of Real Music before they immediately stopped caring about it because it really doesn’t matter. The Noughties, however, took things to a new level; suddenly, the X Factor winners’ single was the Christmas number one four years in a row. It was no longer possible to ignore the amount of marketing manipulation that went into securing the X Factor number one. The fact that these songs were all covers was an even greater affront to fans of Real Music; it seemed as though people couldn’t possibly be buying these songs because they actually liked them, but because they felt as though they had to. It’s no coincidence that the refrain of ‘Killing in the Name’, the Rage Against the Machine song at the centre of the 2009 protest campaign, is “Fuck you, I won’t do what you tell me!” The irony of the campaign is not only was it in itself a coordinated campaign to get one specific song to number one, but that RATM’s label are a subsidiary of Sony – just like Syco, Cowell’s label. And the spell was not yet broken – there were three more X Factor Christmas number ones to follow.

With the dawn of the Spotify age, however, Cowell has completely lost his grip on the Christmas number one – because, as the organizers of the RATM campaign correctly pointed out, nobody actually listens to these songs, and the charts are now reflected by what people are streaming and thus actually listening to. This has also inadvertently created an increasingly closed-off canon of Christmas songs which get blasted on repeat every year, sitting uncomfortably in the December charts alongside business-as-usual pop. In the US, 2019’s Christmas number one is the classic ‘All I Want For Christmas Is You’, a song released 25 years ago. This kind of situation is becoming increasingly likely in the UK – as the Christmas canon becomes ever more entrenched, it’s become increasingly difficult to galvanize the public into accepting new Christmas songs – and especially streaming them in large enough numbers to even hope of reaching Christmas number one. The status quo means that the number one is now almost guaranteed to be a song that was already popular or a song that can somehow sell actual copies in very large numbers.

One genre does, however, benefit from this – the charity single. In this case, people are prepared to go out in their thousands and actually spend their money on one specific song, comforted by the knowledge that it’s all for a good cause. This does mean that these charity number ones bear less resemblance to what people are actually listening to; LadBaby’s sausage roll parodies won’t be appearing at the top of anybody’s Spotify Wrapped. However, if it means that the money is going into the pockets of The Trussell Trust rather than the already well-lined ones of music industry executives, then it is a small sacrifice to make.

Red Wednesday: Remembering the Persecution of Christians

Paul Sapper
-
0
Red Wednesday: Remembering the Persecution of Christians

Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the world. I’m sure many will find that shocking. I did when I first heard it, but it’s true: 75% of all acts of religious discrimination are directed towards Christians, according to the International Society of Human Rights, a secular NGO.  The statistic is supported by the Foreign Office.

Why is it then that we in the UK, and the West more broadly, have barely heard of the scale of this persecution? A big reason is that the majority of this persecution does not happen in the West today. Instead, it’s the Middle-East and Asia, where Christians are vulnerable minority groups, that are the hotbeds of religious oppression. It can be hard to care about problems that are happening so far away, regardless of how grave they are. Another reason, however, is what Jeremy Hunt rightly called ‘a misguided political correctness – or an instinctive reluctance to talk about religion’. For most (but certainly not all) of its history in the West, Christianity has enjoyed a privileged position of institutional power and has been the majority religion across most nations. Rightly or wrongly, many people today negatively associate Christianity with Western colonialism. It therefore seems absurd for us to speak about Christians as an oppressed group. However, this Western-centric way of viewing Christianity is misguided and dangerous. It leads to an apathy concerning many places in the world where Christians enjoy no such status and are horrifically oppressed on a daily basis simply for simply practicing their faith. 

I will focus this article on Christian persecution in Iraq as I know the most about the persecution of my people. I am an Assyrian. The Assyrians are an ethnic and Christian minority group in Iraq, where both of my parents were born. Christianity has a long and venerable history in the region. The Assyrians and the closely related Chaldeans trace their Christian roots back to the 1st century AD, when according to church tradition, Jude Thaddeus, the Apostle of Jesus, converted the region and established the Church of the East. Despite becoming a minority group after the spread of Islam in the 7th Century, Christianity has endured in the region, and although martyrdom is as common in the history of the Church of the East as it is in any Christian church, up until about a century ago Christians, Muslims and Jews co-existed in Iraq in a relatively peaceable manner.

This all changed in the early 20th century when Britain became involved in the region. In the runup to the First World War, Britain knew that it needed allies in the region in order to combat the crumbling but still formidable Ottoman Empire. The Assyrians were an obvious choice because of their shared Christian faith. The British promised the Assyrians an autonomous Christian state in the region if they sided with them in World War I against the Ottomans; a promise that was never fulfilled and the consequences of which have left Christians vulnerable in the region ever since. Siding with the British led to Christians in Iraq being viewed as traitors to their countrymen, who had sided with a foreign invading power. The consequences of this were devastating beyond belief. Between 1914 and 1924 a genocide was carried out against Christians in Iraq by Turkish and Kurdish militias. Somewhere between 150,000 and 300,000 innocent men, women and children were slaughtered indiscriminately simply because of their ethnicity and religion, in a genocide which, like the Armenian one, still has not been recognised by the Turkish government. My maternal great great grandmother was hurriedly born on the road while her family was escaping the genocide on donkey back and by foot. Immediately after she was born her whole family had to continue escaping for fear that the militias would catch up and murder them. Their fears were justified; she had lost 14 brothers and cousins in the genocide and her own son was murdered in the 1930 Simele massacre at the hands of the Arab forces of the newly independent Kingdom of Iraq.

Fast forward to the end of the Second World War and things were better for Christians in Iraq. But they still horrendously inhospitable by any objective standard. Between 1945-1960 many villages in northern Iraq were under the control of Turkish organised crime syndicates, not dissimilar to how the Italian mafia controlled cities in the United States in the early 20th century. These Turkish gangsters did not like Christians. In Kirkuk, where my paternal great grandfather lived, Christians were not allowed to own property. If they tried to buy or build a house, it would be robbed and they would be dragged out and beaten in front of their families. If a Christian was seen wearing nice clothes or jewellery they would be beaten and robbed. As a successful businessman, my great grandfather bought a Western car which was promptly stolen and destroyed. My grandmother had to stop attending school from the age of 13 for fear that she would be kidnapped, raped and forcibly married off as many young Christian girls were.

Between 1968-2003 things were better for Christians as the nationalist Ba’athist Party, lead by Saddam Hussein, brought some stability to Iraq through the ruthless implementation of law and order that often accompanies ideological authoritarian regimes. Christians were still persecuted at this time, because of their non-conformity to the Arab national identity that the Party wished to establish. Ali Hassan al-Majid was a military commander in Saddam’s regime, nicknamed ‘Chemical Ali’ by Iraqis for his fondness of using chemical weapons to systematically wipe out Christian (and other non-Arab) villages.

After the 2003 American-led invasion of Iraq, things became the worst that they had been for Christians since the genocide. The lack of stability in the country led to the rise of Islamic extremism, culminating in the formation of ISIS which made terrifying territorial gains in the country in 2014. When ISIS invaded the Nineveh plains, the historic homeland of Iraqi Christians, they marked the doors of Christians with the Arabic letter N for ‘Nazarene’. This was designed to single them out similarly to how the Nazis singled the Jews out in World War II by forcing them to wear a band of the Star of David. The Christians were then given an impossible choice: convert to Islam, pay a tax that was impossibly high or die by the sword. This led to over 125,000 Christians fleeing the region as refugees, as their churches were burned and their property and possessions were stolen.

Before 2003 there were about 1.5 million Christians in Iraq, about 6% of the country’s population. According to one estimate, there are about 150,000 Christians left today- in 16 short years the population has shockingly decreased by nine-tenths. Most Christians fled the country but thousands were put to death or sold into sex slavery by ISIS. It is very hard to get an exact number because of the persistent chaos in the region, but it is certain that Christians are hazardously close to extinction. ISIS tried to eliminate Christianity from Iraq once and for all, and they have come incredibly close.

This story of Christian persecution is horrific and I hope that it has been moving, but it is important to remember that it is not unique. Today there are millions of Christians throughout the world who are silently suffering the same fate or worse- in countries like Egypt, Syria, North Korea and China to name just a few. The international community and the UK are not doing enough to help prevent this persecution. A big reason why is because not enough people are aware that it is even going on.

That is why Aid to the Church in Need (ACN) started Red Wednesday in 2016. ACN is a Catholic registered UK charity whose sole mission is to help persecuted Christians around the world. They do incredibly important work: for example, in Iraq, they are helping Christians move back into the Nineveh plains now that ISIS has been eradicated, rebuilding schools, houses and churches. They are giving Christians a fighting chance of enduring in the region, as they have for the past two millennia. Red Wednesday is a day to acknowledge and raise awareness for modern-day Christian persecution. This year it falls on Wednesday 27th November, and churches and buildings around the UK, such as St Paul’s Cathedral and the Houses of Parliament, will be illuminated in blood-red for persecuted Christians around the world. Mosques and synagogues throughout the country will also be illuminated as a sign of solidarity.

The phosphorescent blood serves as a reminder for the actual blood that is poured out by modern-day Christian martyrs across the world, whose sufferings would otherwise go forgotten and without commemoration. Regardless of your religious convictions, or lack thereof, all reasonable people can agree that the freedom to express one’s religious beliefs in a peaceful manner is a fundamental human right that ought to be protected. Please do not forget those who have had this right violently stripped from them this #RedWednesday.

Is the Christmas vac actually the worst holiday of the year?

Jenna Colaco
-
0
Is the Christmas vac actually the worst holiday of the year?

In very simple terms, yes: the Christmas vacation is arguably the worst of the year. It is usually the shortest— 39 days this year. It may seem very long and to our friends at other universities or in employment, very generous, but is actually a period of great stress for many students. It comes after a very draining term, Michaelmas— always a hit to the system after a long summer. For freshers, this is probably the hardest term in general, trying to navigate the complexities and rigour of Oxford for the whole term only to pack up and go back home after spending eight weeks trying to settle in. However, now they are going back with the added burden of probably an overdraft, a heap of academic work, a temporary loss of all their new friends and newfound freedom and the impending pressure of collections. To top it all off, everyone wants to ask how university is going, how the course is, or how much you must love it all, when in reality sometimes you just want a mental break from it all.

The Christmas vacation is also expensive; whilst many may not have to pay for accommodation during these periods by moving out of college, the money spent trying to have a social life and visit all the friends and family members you haven’t seen in a while can quickly add up. Not to mention that a term at Oxford can be very expensive, probably using up most, if not all, of your student loan, especially if your family or partner has not been able to help financially support you. With this in mind, and the fact the next student loan installment won’t be until the start of next term, you might be taking on part-time work to try and build up your bank balance before next term. The stress of finances and academic work are hard enough without having to work shifts, a time consuming activity which some tutors do not understand is a necessity for some students. Not to mention that this takes so much out of the time you could spend relaxing with those dearest to you, or just having some uninterrupted time to yourself. With all of these pressures combined, the idea of gift-giving can feel more like a burden than a happy exchange, especially when the budget is tight.

The Christmas period in general, without all the revision and assignments, is one of the most isolating for people who do not have a consistent home life. We are constantly attacked by images of people huddled under a tree with an abundance of presents sitting underneath it. We are inundated with songs and films which depict happy families, lovers and magical white Christmasses. Unfortunately, the commercials sell dreams and not everyone has such a wonderful home to go to, or people to care for them. For some students, returning home may not be an option at Christmas, so while everyone else leaves Oxford, they remain in city devoid of so many of the people who make it home, all while being bombarded by images of the magical Christmas ideal that ignores the fact that it is a day that can feel very isolating. It is a day where transport stops and public buildings are closed so people are forced to accept that this is a time where society expects them to have someone, it can be lonely. Additionally, Oxford, like many other cities in the UK, has a massive homelessness problem, and though there are many organisations who work to bring warmth and festive joy to those in need, winter is the toughest time for those on the street, or those whose families struggle to afford heating or food over the holidays.

In many ways, Christmas is the most beautiful time of year, but for those of us lucky enough to have somewhere to go and people to share it with, let’s count our blessings whilst remembering and doing our best to help those we know who don’t have the same privilege.

Please note:

The Oxford Homelessness Project is running a Christmas meal and need donations and volunteers (they will be having a three course dinner, handing out gifts, playing music and board games!).

For students who are finding university difficult to afford the university has a fund which you can access regardless of household income, you should really consider applying, you deserve to have time to put into your education and wellbeing without the constant pressure of worrying you won’t have enough: https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/fees-funding/assistance/hardship/alf?wssl=1

Photo Credit: Booth Centre

Crémant: a lesser-known, lesser-priced French sparkling wine

Hattie Blackman
-
0
Crémant: a lesser-known, lesser-priced French sparkling wine

I might still be coming to terms with the fact that I don’t lead a life involving the regular and copious consumption of champagne (Oxford hasn’t quite gone that far towards the realisation of Brideshead Revisited-fantasies), but this time of year provides a pretty good opportunity of pretending to do so, and it’s likely that a lot of us will be buying sparkling wine in one form or another over the coming weeks – be it for New Year’s Eve, Christmas, or one of the other various parties which are supposedly taking place constantly over the season. A student budget, though, hardly admits the purchase of champagne, regularly or not, so you may be sent seeking alternatives.

Nowadays, prosecco seems to be the default cheap fizz; bottles are widely available in supermarkets and bars for under a tenner, to the extent that it almost seems to be promoted as an everyday drink. These ubiquitous bottles tend to taste everyday, too: often rather one-note, sweet, even sticky, and bland. If you want something that feels more special and celebratory, there are many other less-promoted, often much better varieties of sparkling wine available, and Crémant is perhaps that which comes the closest to champagne – at least sharing the prestige of a French origin.

Of course, as its name suggests, champagne comes only from the Champagne region of France: being legally protected under an Appellation d’Origine Controlée means that only wine produced to stringent regulations from within a designated terroir in the northeast of France can be labelled as such. And, as is often the case with prestigious names (think Burgundy), wine produced there can be sold at extraordinarily high prices, making it very difficult to get quality without spending a lot of money. The less strictly controlled and much less famous Crémant, on the other hand, can provide a similar complexity for very good value (M&S stocks a Crémant de Bourgogne for ten pounds, Aldi a Crémant d’Alsace for just over eight).

Its production is still carefully regulated: it must be aged for a minimum of nine months (compared to champagne’s minimum of fifteen); hand-picking and whole-bunch pressing are used, ensuring a purer must (grape juice); and, crucially, it is still made using the méthode champenoise. In this process, the initial dry white wine (or cuvée) undergoes a second bottle fermentation, during which yeast further breaks down the sugars in the mixture, producing more alcohol and carbon dioxide (which forms the bubbles under pressure), before being aged ‘on the lees’, or with the yeast remaining in the bottle. It is this which, through contact and reaction with the wine, produces the more complex, often toasty or creamy flavours which can be found in a good champagne – in contrast with the flatter notes of prosecco, which is fermented using the shorter, less labour-intensive (and easier to mass-produce) tank method. Unlike champagne, though, Crémant can be produced in several regions, including Alsace, Bourgogne, Limoux, and the Loire, with different stipulations on ageing and grape variety in each. As a result, it varies more widely in style, allowing more scope for choice based on your individual preferences, as well as the potential for a greater number of more or less ill-informed and outlandish ‘tasting’ comments to be made as you relish your glass…

Naturally, Crémant does vary in quality, and it’s also worth remarking that Prosecco is subject to different levels of regulation, with some very high-quality and tightly regulated versions available. But Crémant is almost always a dryer, more multi-dimensional sparkling wine, much closer in style to its famous counterpart. Plus, its relative obscurity, in conjunction with its old-world kudos, means that providing a bottle might also spark conversation (or monologue) and reinforce a knowledgeable, gourmand (or dull, gluttonous) persona (really, this depends on the outlook of your friends…) For someone who unashamedly conforms to many of the characteristics of the stereotypical student, this is a factor not to be overlooked: pretension and cheap alcohol are both highly important. Crémant, then, might just be the way to realise those highbrow boozing dreams.

Punch and BoJo

Tom Mawson
-
0
Punch and BoJo

‘What’s the point in fiction if it’s not somehow different from reality?’ Armando Iannucci writes in The Washington Post.

‘Ha’, scoff first-year English undergrads country-wide. The man clearly hasn’t heard of George Eliot. But Iannucci has a point. His particular brand of cutting, on-trend political satire is becoming almost redundant in an age when the President of the United States is embroiled in an adultery scandal with a pornstar, and our own Prime Minister has— amongst other, worse things— a history of buffoonery following him that includes knocking over Japanese children.

During The Thick of It’s run, the political world seemed to be a case of life imitating art, with Iannucci and his writers often coming up with inane policies that the coalition government would wheel out months later. I unashamedly followed our most recent general election largely through a Thick quote group on Facebook, amazed by the universal application Malcolm Tucker’s rants seem to have. Today, having moved from a leader with the charisma of a three-day-old box of chips to one whose Wikipedia page states he has ‘At least five’ children, we may long for a Nicola Murray or a Peter Mannion, whose crimes were at least limited to incessant buzz-wording and excessive Twix consumption.

In many ways, the political farce of today seems far too ridiculous to be true, and Iannucci himself laments that ‘any attempt to present a fictional version of today’s events would never be as crazy as the real thing’. Dominic Cumming’s masterstroke of sending Boris out to regale the public with his apparent love for modelling buses out of wine boxes is right out of the top drawer, trumping anything that the likes of ‘quiet batpeople’ might throw at it. Of course, this was only an attempt to muddy search engine results, distracting from the £350 million pound lie emblazoned on BoJo’s Brexit bus, but oh well.

The only way to make sense of these ridiculous goings-on, I think, is to treat them like the jokes they really are. Instead of seeing Boris as a man, I suggest that we might see him as a performance art piece actually operating at the forefront of satire— the Old Etonian spearheading a ‘People’s Government’, an oven-ready Jonathan Swift for the Meme Age. As soon as the Conservatives launched ‘lo-fi boriswave beats to relax/get brexit done to’, it became clear that our timeline had somehow transcended political reality. Our world treads so closely to the land of fiction that we might as well treat it as such.

In fact, I’d say that Boris Johnson’s casting as the primary pro/antagonist of season three of The Tories is nothing short of genius. To compete with Love Island, we all knew a change was in order. The show had been struggling in the post-Cameron era, losing much of its edge and wit as Theresa May gave something of a lackluster performance, free from the razor-sharp satire that David so aptly delivered. We can all remember season one’s highlights. Cameron and his team of writers were unrelenting in their pursuit of the “posh toff” caricature, expertly working in details such as Cameron’s Bullingdon Club membership, and the allegations of pig-f*****g that ensued. Cameron perfectly skewered the OE political class with his carefully contrived combination of cronyism (inviting previously more minor characters such as George Osbourne to share something of the limelight) and the easy repartee he shared with fellow ex-public-schoolboy Nick Clegg. The season was near-perfect, dropping in the Panama Papers scandal at just the right time, before climaxing in the pig’s ear that was the Brexit referendum.

It was only right that the showrunners deemed a change of personnel was in order. Cameron’s elitist figure had done all it could to skewer the old-fashioned political class, and it was time for a breath of fresh air. Season two, however, was a disaster. Theresa May’s performance as protagonist was akin to that of a 59-year-old vicar’s daughter trying to revive a dead horse. In fact, that’s exactly what it was… May lacked entertainment value, and viewer figures dropped off as anti-scandal after anti-scandal emerged. One can’t help but blame poor writing as well— the whole ‘fields of wheat’ storyline did nothing for positive character development, and exposed May to amateur online ridicule rather than the full-blown press meltdowns that previous protagonists craved. Season two was something of a non-event.

Now that we’re a few episodes into season three, I’m a mixture of delighted and disappointed. It’s something of a let-down that after having pushed the boat out with a female, non-public-school PM, the writers have immediately fallen back on such a Cameronesque character to lead their show forward. However, I must say that as a vehicle for satire Johnson does superbly. He manages to poke fun in the face of racists, with his ‘postbox’ comments highlighting the ignorance and downright negligence with which previous politicians have operated, whilst casting a light on the sexist operations of British magazines through the accusations of sexual harassment that peppered his stint as Spectator editor. His perpetual misquoting of the classics goes beyond the polish of Cameron’s posh stereotype, with these inane attempts at intellectualism revealing the exterior bluster that the men Boris seeks to satirise have relied on for so long. All in all, this season of Tories is shaping up to be one of the most ground-breaking yet.

… Is the review that many would love to write, were the governments of recent years some of Iannucci’s inventions. Satire, I would say, is not dead. Instead, it has moved on from drawn out and well-developed politically based TV shows, and onto sketch formats and internet memes. As politics gets more ridiculous, so will the way in which we mock it until someday even student journalists feel free to chance their arms.

Vintage Actually

Sonya Ribner
-
0
Vintage Actually

Holiday dressing with a new old approach

We love the holiday season because dazzling decorations adorn our neighborhoods as we revel in the joy of reunions with family and friends. One of the most favored holiday films, Love Actually, captures this sentiment in the quote, “If you look for it, I’ve got a sneaky feeling that you’ll find that love actually is all around.” Yet, with this cheer comes the double-edged sword of holiday dressing. It can be both exciting and overwhelming to shop for festive clothing. Reconnecting with people that we may not have seen for an entire year can lead to the self-imposed pressure of presenting ourselves at our best, and that prompts a mad dash to find outfits that are both unique and affordable. Though fast-fashion retailers like Zara and Topshop appear the obvious option for the wardrobe dash, the purchase of a suit or dress from these chains often prompts recognition from others because they too have made the jaunt to the stores or frequented websites and considered the same items. On top of that, the news website, Vox, reports that “Zara alone churns out roughly 840 million garments every year” and that “apparel and footwear production currently accounts for 8.1 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.” So, what environmentally conscious option can we turn to for special and stylish pieces? Vintage dressing. And like love in Love Actually, you can find it all around.

Vintage is undoubtably making a come-back. With photos in the Daily Mail of Kendall Jenner leaving the popular luxury vintage store, What Comes Around Goes Around, and the partnership between Burberry and The RealReal (77.4 metric tons of carbon emissions have been offset by consignments of women’s Burberry clothing items on the site) the interest for sustainable and distinctive clothing alternatives is prevalent. It’s not just that making decisions in favor of sustainability never goes out of style, but the idea of owning a piece that has its own history adds a new meaning to Yves Saint Laurent’s adage, “Fashions fade, style is eternal.” Your choice of a sumptuous second-hand blouse or tie proves that great pieces transcend space and time (and season). The added benefit of vintage clothing is that it can often be better made: a second-hand piece that you come across from the 50s necessarily required more thoughtful production than a current comparably priced fast-fashion garment. As opposed to advertising for a mass-market retailer, your vintage picks highlight your own style and creativity.

Although shopping for vintage items does require a similar appetite for discovery to that of adventurers mining during the Goldrush, it’s never been easier to do. Websites such as The RealReal, Vestiare Collective, and 1st Dibs provide designer fashion with a more attractive price tag, and it’s only a click away. (A particularly festive Proenza Schouler sequin sleeveless top is £15.45 on The RealReal as I write.) Nevertheless, those outlets can still be costly. Because the popularity of online vintage shopping has established a baseline price for desirable second-hand items, it can prove slightly more challenging to unearth the great deals once associated with second-hand gems. However, there are independent shops that are easily accessible and provide excellent vintage pieces. In London, a stroll down Portobello Road reveals a number of second-hand boutiques that sell items spanning across decades and high-low fashion designation. Closer to home in Oxford, shops on Cowley Road provide interesting pieces perfect to wow the guests at any holiday party. So, this holiday season, when your aunt or best friend asks you where you got your killer (insert your item of choice), revel in this response: “It’s vintage actually.” 

Opinion – Hypocrisy in our Democracy: Why We Must Hold the Tories to Account

Ashley Singh
-
0
Opinion – Hypocrisy in our Democracy: Why We Must Hold the Tories to Account

Ironically, the one thing we can all agree on is that the United Kingdom is currently divided. Deep inequalities of wealth, opportunity, and a proliferation of echo chambers have alienated a majority from Westminster. They provided the conditions for voting to Leave for so many people across so many regions.  Considering such great division, we should all try to build bridges. But we should be wary in hoping for the government to bring us together: it is the Conservatives who have benefited the most from the monumental divisions in our society.

Whether someone voted for the Conservatives or not, the pledges in the Tory election manifesto will impact their lives. The MPs that have stuck with the Conservative party through its recent changes will be held accountable to these pledges by their leadership as well as the voters who gave them a mandate to carry them out.

Rather than sitting back and luxuriating in its new majority our government should be held accountable by the public it serves. This is not only on its central promise to “get Brexit done” by January 31st but to uphold the values of democracy, free speech, and tolerance that we all share. However, I’d argue that some of the government’s policies – dwarfed by Brexit during the election campaign – pose a threat to the very values we look to our government to protect.

Page 48 of the manifesto tells us, “We will get rid of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act – it has led to paralysis at a time the country needed decisive action.” There is no pledged constitutional reform to follow, since there is no mention of what the Act will be replaced with, so this is a pledge we need to follow. For context, the Septennial Act was amended in 1911 to reduce the maximum term of any Parliament from 7 years to 5 years. The Liberal Party’s Walter Runciman stated, “Our only object in limiting the period of the duration of Parliament is that the House of Commons shall not get out of touch with the opinion of the electorate.”

Nick Clegg introduced the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, repealing the Septennial Act and its amendments, which set in legislation a default fixed general election date before the end of this 5 year period. The absence of a fixed date was deemed to unfairly advantage the incumbent prime minister who could advise the monarch as to when to hold the election. The two ways in which the FTPA allows an early election require some consensus in the House of Commons, either through a Vote of No Confidence in an existing government alongside an inability to replace it, or a two-thirds majority in favour of an election. Even the method of a one-line bill, used to get around the act this year, still required a parliamentary majority.

Continuing on page 48, “We will protect the integrity of our democracy, by introducing identification to vote at polling stations, stopping postal vote harvesting and measures to prevent any foreign interference in elections.” Allowing the Party the benefit of the doubt for leaving out a much needed Oxford comma, there is still a question of whether the Conservatives can be trusted to protect the integrity of our democracy, despite their claims to be delivering on the largest democratic vote in our history.

Reports on foreign interference, such as from Parliament’s cross-party Intelligence and Security Committee, have not yet been released by No 10. An investigation by Open Democracy has found that the Conservatives received over £3.5 million from Russian funders since 2010. This includes over £1.3 million from former leading Russian Defence Ministry figure and oil magnate Alexander Temerko, who calls Boris Johnson a “friend” and has reportedly admitted being involved in a Eurosceptic plot to oust Theresa May. Admittedly, however, we should be wary of classing all acts by Russians as some sort of Kremlin-sponsored interference: Mr Temerko is a long-standing critic of Putin who has called for Parliament’s report on Russian interference to be published without delay.

Boris Johnson’s decision to prorogue Parliament in August 2019 was ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court. It is therefore speculated that the majority Conservative government will use their powers to reduce the powers of the judiciary. Indeed, page 48 continues “After Brexit we also need to look at the broader aspects of our constitution: the relationship between the Government, Parliament and the courts”. The government’s solution is to set up a Constitution, Democracy and Rights Commission in its first year. However, history tells us to be wary of government boards that are cleverly named after the rights of the people, and some might say Johnson’s claim to be leading a “People’s Government” is eerily similar to tyrants as diverse as Kim Jong-Un and Nicholas Maduro. I hope such a commission is truly independent and is not simply an attempt by the government to ram through changes under a cloak of official impartiality.

Integral to the modern democratic government is the provision of checks and balances, provided by a separation of powers. The role of opposition parties in Parliament is to keep the elected Government accountable to the people. However, the influence of the latter is undermined by the extent of the government’s current majority; Labour’s failings have helped give the Conservatives a relatively free hand. This was highlighted by the smooth passage of their Brexit bill through Parliament on Friday. Furthermore, holding the government to account is made harder by an increasing tendency towards groupthink within the mainstream print, broadcast, and digital media. Freedom of association and collective action have been purposefully made more difficult with David Cameron’s Trade Union Act 2016. The precedent for repressing organised protest has been set by the ban on Extinction Rebellion’s protests across London in October 2019, deemed “an abuse of power” by High Court judges.

As opposed to upholding British values of respect and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs, the Conservatives have been criticized over the past few days for dropping the inquiry into Islamophobia in the party. The accusations include that the proposed inquiry has been watered down so it no longer focuses on Islamophobia. The Muslim Council of Britain has expressed suspicion that the broadening of the issue was designed to bury the real problem and Baroness Warsi has raised concern over the suitability of the academic chosen to lead the inquiry.

This follows the investigations called by the Tories over anti-Semitism from Tory candidates Sally-Ann Hart, Lee Anderson, and Richard Short, the former two now elected as MPs. While Labour candidates, such as Safia Ali and Kate Ramsden, accused of anti-Semitism have been sacked, the Conservatives have allowed two candidates to serve as MPs and have suspended rather than removed Ryan Houghton and Amjad Bashir. With reports of anti-Semitism in the Labour party in recent years a source of rightful outrage, it is more appropriate than ever for the government to ensure that it leads by example and has its house in order.

In the ‘Promote our values’ section of the Conservative manifesto, the (apparently) laudable pledge is made to “maintain our commitment to spend 0.7 per cent of GNI on development and do more to help countries receiving aid become self-sufficient.” However, on page 20 in discussion of limiting immigration, the Party pledge to continue “Actively recruiting leaders in their field to come to the UK.” This depletion of educated leaders in other countries by the UK and other world-leading countries is known to repress rather than support progress around the world in a way that financial hand-outs cannot repair. Arguably, there is no point in ending Freedom of Movement if the government continues to take the best and brightest from around the world, something that has caused tension over the last couple of decades, especially with countries in Eastern Europe. Oxford students wouldn’t stand for a replacement of their lectures, tutorials, and classes with money to buy textbooks, so why should other countries?

The government’s apparent determination to encourage immigration from high skilled individuals is contrasted by pledges such as “Migrants will contribute to the NHS – and pay in before they can receive benefits.” It could be argued that this policy lacks a basis in fact as, according to Oxford Economics, “The average European migrant arriving in the UK in 2016 will contribute £78,000 more than they take out … and the average non-European migrant will make a positive net contribution of £28,000 while living here. By comparison, the average UK citizen’s net lifetime contribution in this scenario is zero.”

What I would argue that all this adds up to is an attempt by the government to run away from its record to avoid the reality of its job in upholding our fundamental values. I find it tragic if the government benefits from attacking the EU, mass migration or the Labour Party whilst committing the very mistakes or iniquities of which it is accusing them. It is galling if the government can get away with winning a landslide whilst swerving the reality of its pledges and actions. For however long this government is in power, we must hold it to account. With a weakened opposition, it is now all the more our duty to do so.

Tis the Season to be Sustainable

Tara Mewawalla
-
0
Tis the Season to be Sustainable

I’m dreaming of a Green Christmas, so let’s make this the Last Christmas we produce 30% more waste than usual, otherwise Baby, It’ll Be Way Too Hot Outside. Rock Around The Reusable Christmas Tree and don’t let your festive food (Jingle Bell) Rot with these 12 Tips of Christmas!

Food

  • According to the waste management company Biffa, 2 million turkeys, 74 million mince pies and 17.2 million sprouts are binned each Christmas. Reduce food waste by only cooking what you need and freezing the rest as leftovers.
  • Donating extra food to a local food bank or soup kitchen is also a great way to reduce food waste and help with poverty in the local community.
  • Buy as locally as is possible and economically-viable to reduce the carbon footprint of the food and maybe reduce that second meat portion for an extra plate of carrots and potatoes. After all, the Soil Association argues ‘food is the single most important, everyday way for people to reduce their own environmental impact’.

Crackers

  • Instead of Christmas crackers which you will likely throw out, buy tissue paper hats (you can get these on Amazon) and make up or research jokes for each other. They might even be funny! If you miss the excitement of pulling the cracker make your own. There are plenty of videos on YouTube showing how to make them out of card from an old cereal box and cracker snaps (also available cheaply on Amazon).

Trees

  • In the UK, fresh trees are usually the more eco-friendly choice, if they are grown from a sustainable source. Look for the FSC certification logo or Soil Association organic certification and buy as locally as possible.
  • Some organisations are offering tree rental now, such as garden centres, which would mean the trees would not be thrown out after use!
  • If these aren’t accessible, go for a reusable tree (if you don’t have one already), made locally if possible, that is small enough to be stored and used for as many years as possible; most plastic trees need to be used for at least nine years to be as environmental as natural trees. Local charity shops may be reselling ones you could buy or donate to if you cannot store your own.

Decoration

  • LED lights are the most energy-saving so will save power lighting up your Christmas tree. Another way to save energy is to just be mindful of when and for how long your lights are on for. While light decorations can be warming during the long nights, maybe you could savour the spectacle for Christmas eve or Christmas day.
  • Obviously, reuse decorations and if some are broken or lost you could even make some out of recyclables.

Transport

  • As much as possible, celebrate locally to reduce air travel. You could share shopping trips with friends and family to make car travel greener and cheaper or use public transport. Shop online together with family members on the same websites (without peeking at their shopping basket!) to get bulk deliveries.

Presents

  • We’re all guilty of buying random gifts last minute that we probably know the person won’t use. According to the UK Gift Card and Voucher Association, an estimated 20% of gifts head to in landfill on Boxing Day. Be thoughtful about what you’re buying and if you’re not sure what to buy (what on earth do you give your dad?) buy them a voucher for a shop they like or donate to a charity for them. I bought all my presents second-hand this year, making them much cheaper too!
  • Don’t use wrapping paper! Old newspapers or magazines can be used to wrap presents so attractively and can even be used to personalise the gift. Go one step further and tie the presents with string or ribbon instead of using tape to make your wrapping completely plastic-free.

Photo credit: Susanne Nilsson

1...614615616...2,580Page 615 of 2,580

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 Jamie Ashley