Monday 9th June 2025
Blog Page 647

Flattering fashion: fiction or reality?

0

‘Black slims you down. Tall girls shouldn’t wear heels. Ruffled bikini tops balance out small breasts.’

Disguised as friendly advice, the mantras go on and on. Every magazine, online blog, Instagram page or YouTube channel that is in some way related to fashion has potentially done something on ‘flattering fashion’ or dressing for your body type at some point. This is undergoing a drastic intervention.

The magic words are now ‘body positivity.’ A popular little comic BuzzFeed posted on Instagram shows a girl getting dressed while instructing: “Step 1: Put on whatever the fuck makes you happy. That’s it!”. Cosmopolitan articles are explaining which fashion rules should be broken. From every side it seems that the rules of fashion we grew up with have become grossly outdated.

But they certainly aren’t entirely bad. What I love about fashion – and I am sure most people do too – is the power to transform, to create illusions. I adore that a perfectly placed seam can make me seem taller, that shoulder pads give me an edge I don’t normally have, that a belt accentuates my waist.

What is more important than the effect these rules teach you to achieve, is how they force you to get to know your body. Do you know your measurements? Your skin undertone? Your proportions? Most people do not. And this makes them victims of an arbitrary sizing system, colour trends and cuts they do not understand. Did you know that the sizing system is updated every few years? Have you ever noticed how drastically they vary from brand to brand and country to country? I’m a 38 in France, a 36 in Germany, a XS in the US and a size 4 in England. In a German pattern from the 70s, I’m a 42. Is any of these numbers more true than the rest? No. They do not mean anything. Centimetres or inches however, those are precise and stay the same everywhere.

The problem is not in knowing the basic facts of your dressing canvas – your body – the problem is in the rhetoric these makeover stories employ. Breasts are suddenly breasts that are ‘too small,’ thighs that are ‘too big,’ stomachs that are ‘too wobbly,’ arms that are ‘too flabby.’ But what are these comparatives measured against? And by whose standards? In calling for one norm, they fail to appreciate the diverse range of body types and the different forms of beauty in each.

Whatever fashion guidelines and tips you’re reading, whether it is gently suggesting that this top will make your arms look more ‘toned’ or straight up telling you to avoid shorts, they always make it seem as if something is wrong with your body. That there is a problem which the ‘right’ clothes can fix.

This whole concept is a bizarre perversion of priorities. Clothes exist to serve your body, and your body never has to change for them. But being aware of the body as a canvas for self-expression through fashion is incredibly empowering. So, use all the advice you’ve read or been told as a chance to learn about yourself – with no judgement but gentle curiosity.

But please, there is no use in wearing yellow just because it is in fashion. If you absolutely have to, at least keep it away from your face and choose yellow wellies.

 

Review: House of Improv presents: I’m an Improviser Get Me Out of Here! – ‘relentlessly silly’

0

Upon walking in to the Pilch, I’m pleasantly surprised to find a blank sticky note waiting on my seat. As part of the dreaded ‘audience interaction’, I can suggest any name I fancy, which will promptly be turned into one of the six contestants on the reality show we are about to watch. I can, unfortunately, confirm that audience suggestions are taken into account, as my ruthlessly unimaginative ‘Bluebell McButtercup’ made it into the running as a pyrotechnic PTA member (handled well by Kilian Lohmann, who did the best he could with my shoddy prompt). So begins I’m an Improviser Get Me Out of Here!, House of Improv’s latest venture into a fully improvised, one-hour performance.

Having been fortunate enough to watch House of Improv’s Family Secrets last term I’m familiar with the format – but what strikes me most is how much this troupe have refined both process and skills in just a term. In large part, this is due to the new engaging reality-show theme, but also due to a switch-up in logistics– taking names from the audience pre-performance is far more efficient than inventing (and re-inventing) them mid-flow, and the sticky label prevents cases of forgotten identity. I believe the whole affair has been shortened as well – a snappy 60 minutes – which zips along at a fair old pace, with only a few scenes which start to drag.

Most importantly, the troupe have picked up on what they do well – character tropes – and brought them to the fore. It’s something which is handled brilliantly by the new format: a short ‘audition tape’ from each of the characters introduces some backstory from the get-go (and probably gives the actors time to think), while a live vote-off introduces an impetus for drama – an impetus, at least in tonight’s President of the Moon competition, which was duly filled.

As might be expected, there are some undeniable scene-stealers. By far the best tonight is Augustus, knowingly played to the audience by Emma Hinnells, who plays the man-spreading, “yes-of-course-I-know-how-to-roll-a-cigarette” ‘Stus’ with absolute aplomb (“I went to a difficult inner-city comprehensive called Westminster” gets a laugh from the get-go). Equally effective is Eliza McHugh as ‘Sebastian the Angry Vegan’, who lives up to the incredibly specific prompt with eye-watering intensity. Such was the blossoming romance of the two on this particular night that some secondary storylines fell into the background – to an extent it may be a true case of you get what you give, since we’re the ones who provide the suggestions, but some characters aren’t quite developed to their fullest extent.

As usual, Will Jefferson (in a very literal, pyrotechnic, take on ‘Mr Burns’) is on hand to steer the plot in some kind of coherent direction, even remembering to shut the ‘door’ and turn off the ‘tv’. The whole thing is underscored with remarkably subtle skill by keyboardist Matthew Kemp and with lights by Jake Shapter; part of their talent is in hardly making you notice they’re there, but they underpin the whole thing beautifully. There’s still a lot of bugs in the running of the show which shouldn’t be there, and sometimes it falls a bit flat, but it’s great to see some new blood in the troupe, and a call for audiences to attend their workshops at the end is a welcoming touch.

The nature of improv means, of course, that every night will be different – which makes reviewing for a potential audience no easy task. What I can confirm, however, is that the whole thing is relentlessly silly, and it’s refreshing to see a show and cast which doesn’t take itself seriously – both troupe and audience genuinely seem to be having a good time throughout. It’s not the most polished piece of work, but it never claimed to be – what it is is a piece which, while still not quite there yet, seems to be having an amazing time on the journey.

Satiating Sá-Carneiro

0

When we think of Modernism, we tend to think of T.S. Eliot, James Joyce and Virginia Woolf. Marcel Proust or Miguel de Unamuno might come to mind, if we are familiar with Modernism in French and Spanish contexts. What is perhaps less well known is that Modernism thrived in Portugal, the most famous writer to fall into this category being Fernando Pessoa, about whom much has been written and debated.

 

Alongside Pessoa, there existed a small but prolific network of writers and artists, known popularly as the Orpheu Generation, committed to reworking and revoking nineteenth-century received wisdoms about cultural and literary convention and practice. One such writer was Mário de Sá-Carneiro who, though still celebrated in his country of birth, has today a relatively small, if devoted, readership beyond its borders.

 

Sá-Carneiro was born in 1890, as Europe looked towards the arrival of a new century. With the death of his mother coming when he was just two years old, Sá-Carneiro was raised by his grandparents at their home near the Portuguese capital, Lisbon. By all accounts, he was a precocious young man; by the time he was a teenager, he was translating works by authors including Victor Hugo and Goethe into Portuguese.
From there, he went to study Law at Coimbra University, Portugal’s oldest and most prestigious higher education institution. He left, however, without taking a degree. At that point, he decided to travel to Paris, then a beacon for intellectuals and creatives from all over the world, where he attended lectures at the Sorbonne. He returned to Portugal, where he met a man called Fernando Pessoa and the rest, as they say, is history.
Sá-Carneiro and Pessoa struck up a very close friendship, writing to each other constantly up until the former’s death by suicide at the tender age of 26. They wrote to each other about their work, and most probably read parts of it before it was published. And it was during this period, in the early 1910s, that the bulk of Sá-Carneiro’s literary output was published. Said literary output comprises one novella, A Confissão de Lúcio (‘Lucio’s Confession’), published in 1913, and a collection of short stories Céu em Fogo (which, translated into English, means ‘Sky Ablaze’), published in 1915, as well as some poetry.
His writing shows influences of Decadence and Symbolism, two movements which flour- ished towards the end of the nineteenth-century but had started to fade as the new century dawned. Modernist principles, such as explorations of the unconscious and the concept of the city, are also evident. His characters deviate from the social, sexual and cultural norms of the period and have urges to discover three key realms: the realm of the otherworldly, and the realms and experiences of the ‘Other’ and non-normative desire.
In Céu em Fogo, the reader encounters a plethora of characters who think, quite simply, that life is not enough. As the depressed protagonist of the short story ‘The Fixer of Moments’ declares: “You cannot touch life, it is all glitter, a fleeting image”. He is far from the only character in these stories who is desperate to venture beyond the boundaries of life and the living, to experience the otherworldly, even death. As one character in ‘The Man of Dreams’ states, “For me there are always new panoramas to explore”. He narrates his journey to an “extraordinary place” whose beauty, he repeats, cannot be expressed in words, because “what I saw was the darkness.” Decadence’s emphasis on social and moral degeneration is clearly at work in this particular short story.
Equally important for Sá-Carneiro’s curious characters is their urge to explore life as other. We experience moments and emotions as we experience them; what many of Sá-Carneiro’s characters seem determined to find out is what it is, or would be, like to inhabit the body and mind of another human being. Chief among these characters is the protagonist of the short story Eu-Próprio o Outro (‘I Myself the Other’), whose title alone indicates the importance of the juxtaposition and interrelatedness of self and other to its plot.

In it, the protagonist experiences what can only be described as an overwhelming existential crisis after meeting a stranger, who quickly becomes an object of painful fascination for him. He exclaims, “I have run aground inside myself” and, later, “I am too much for myself”, with the image of him overflowing his bodily borders suggesting that his understanding of the self is not compatible with society’s. The short story ends with the protagonist, terrified, claiming that “I am another…I am the other…The Other!”. Just as before, it could be argued that the influence of fin-de-siècle literature, and specifically its fixation with foreignness – exemplified in such works as Bram Stoker’s Dracula and Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness – has found a place in Sá-Carneiro’s text.

 

The third and final urge on the part of this array of characters is their desire to explore and experience non-normative forms of love and lust, gender and sexuality. What the feminist poet and critic Adrienne Rich famously described as “compulsory heterosexuality” is railed against in Sá-Carneiro’s work, especially in ‘Lucio’s Confession’, in which the eponymous protagonist narrates the story of how he ended up serving a jail sentence for murder. His best friend, Ricardo, returns from Paris married, but Lucio soon notices that Ricardo and his wife, Marta, are rarely, to be found in the same room together at the same time, if at all. Lucio commences an affair with Marta, which is discovered by Ricardo who, in a fit of rage, shoots Marta dead in front of Lucio. At this point, the climax of the novella, Lucio tells us that before him lay the bodies of Ricardo and Marta; in shooting Marta, Ricardo shoots himself. Whilst he thought he was having an affair with Marta, it becomes clear to Lucio that he was actually having one with Ricardo, introducing the possibility of queer readings of the novella. Through a variety of guises, it’s clear not only that Sá-Carneiro’s characters seek to satisfy their urges, bodily as much as psychological, but also that the influences of a range of literary movements can be found in his writing. In many ways reflecting the urges of Modernism to break the creative mould, the Portuguese modernist’s presentation of queer subjectivities and his questioning of socially-sanctioned desires is surely as bold now as it was in the 1910s.

Is a college shared a college halved?

0

TO POOL:

By Zahra Farzanekhoo

When applying to Oxford, most of us had to make a decision as to which college to apply for. There are 43, including PPHs, to choose from and the choice we would make would dictate each of our respective experiences of Oxford for the entirety of our degrees.

Therefore, it would appear to be an important decision. However, most students are unaware of the inequality between colleges, especially when it comes to funding. Whilst the collegiate system of the university should continue, aspects that can have tangible effects on student experience, such as college funding, should be pooled to remedy this inequality.

Earlier this month, Cherwell revealed analysis showing the impact endowment has on how much a college invests in reading material for their library, and the subsequent effect it has on their place in the Norrington table. It is very clear that students at wealthier colleges have a different experience when it comes to exam performance but it is not surprising and unfortunately, the effect of this disparity in college endowment does not stop there.

Financial help with purchasing textbooks, choir tour costs, costs associated with student sport, travel costs to conferences, and hardship support are just several areas that vary between colleges. These are costs that can make or break a student’s experience. It can dictate whether they can fully enjoy the opportunities available to them during their short time here.

Further, low-income students are disproportionately affected by this decentralised and fractured system of college funding.Pooling resources will mean that all students have equal access to help, an outcome that is justified especially as the college choice is often arbitrary.

The burden is on the student to make sure they are informed. Except colleges do not release the information necessary to ensure this. The severity of this choice is further heightened when we take into consideration the fact that the university itself actively propagates the idea that applicants will not be adversely affected by their choice.

Pooling college funding will help alleviate the financial burden imposed on unassuming students. Students are not given the necessary information to make an informed choice and even if they were, the college pooling system has the capacity to render any choice they may make using such information meaningless.

The discrepancy between college funding is too large and the impact should not be ignored. The university ought to recognise this shortcoming in the collegiate system and pooling resources can aid in making the university more accessible and fair.

NOT TO POOL

By Troels Boesen

For nearly 80 years, Gordon Brown is the only prime minister with a university degree not to come from Oxford. Even relative to the Russell Group, an Oxbridge degree boosts your expected lifetime earnings by 12%. Since the QS world universities ranking first came out, Oxford has never dropped below 6th. This year we scored an even 100 out of 100in academic reputation.

All of this is just a complicated way of saying something really simple: we are incredibly fortunate. There is simply no argument. We have access to the UK’s largest library system, some of the best academics in the world, and a spectrum of societies and sports clubs that allow you to pursue basically any interest you could possibly have. And at this point someone raises the inevitable question: Is the playing field completely equal? Do all colleges prioritise in the same way?

When inequalities get so big that people practically no longer live in the same world, it fundamentally threatens the stability of society. When we consider the big perspective, the debate about equality is meaningful and important.

However, not every debate that makes sense in the big perspective, makes sense when applied to microscopic subsections of society too.

The system certainly is not perfect. Education at a lower level is still not as good as it should be. There are still psychological barriers to be broken down. Oxford life is stressful, and it can be difficult to adjust. Even when we take all of this into account, there is no two ways about it: If you are an Oxford student, you are resourceful in one way or another.

If it could reasonably be shown that some colleges offer so little support in the form of grants for sport or culture and prizes that students with less economic capital genuinely could not take advantage of the huge opportunity, then it would make sense for the University to provide some support as a lower boundary.

But undermining the college system by centralising funds, taking steps to homogenise colleges by removing the right to prioritise locally, all for the sake of making the world’s most fortunate young people more equal– that is frankly absurd.

It is as true in politics as in any other area of life: priorities matter. And we must consider what signals we choose to send. Everyone will sometimes get too caught up in their own issues. That is understandable.

But part of going to university, part of growing as a person, is learning how to identify what is a real problem and what is not.

Unfreedom, poverty, and war is. Inequality across Oxford colleges is not.

Review: Gods are Fallen and All Safety Gone – ‘a relationship fraying at the edges’

0

Oblivious to the gathering audience, the two actors sit on stage, intently, and intensely, staring at each other. What is it they see? Or rather, what is it they are looking for in each other? The title of the play quotes John Steinbeck’s East of Eden, which explores every child’s eventual recognition of their parents flaws. This production cleverly relocates this realisation to the visual world, as the daughter Annie’s searching gaze is only ever met by her mother’s unfaltering blank stare, forcing her to publicly come to terms with her mother’s inability to provide her with the maternal love or validation that she so desperately seeks. The prevailing sense of lost innocence is mirrored in the various shades of blue costume. A ladder in the mother’s tights unknowingly reflects the unravelling of their relationship. But so too does the unity of colour tastefully foreshadow the possibility of reconciliation at the play’s end.

Linguistically and visually the play is a simplistic affair. Selma Dimitrijec presents the mother/daughter relationship within just four short scenes, where mother and daughter banally discuss bad weather, baths, and boyfriends. But the quotidian nature of their conversation only serves to enhance the loaded subtext of the script. In each scene the text remains virtually the same. The repetition encircles their relationship with a claustrophobic inability to enact meaningful change even as the textual alterations mark a linear progression of time. With the words of the play becoming ever more meaningless with each repetition, the audience’s focus shifts to the actors’ body language. Whilst Nancy Case (Annie) and Lara Deering (her mother) make good use of the space, weaving in and out of the two chairs on stage, switching roles between hunter and prey, it is in the minutia of facial expression that this play becomes as golden as the heavenly lighting of Scene 4.

Deering’s physicality is enviable. Slightly bent forward, shoulders protectively drawn in, it is hard not to envisage her as the older women she portrays. The character’s beautifully offensive language and resentment rests in the sardonic smile playing at the corner of her mouth throughout the play. Whilst Case does not display quite the same stage presence, her open face allows for her battling feelings of disappointment and acceptance to emotively shine through her eyes.

The audience is seated on three sides of the stage, a decision I feel was detrimental to the play’s appreciation. With much of the two’s relationship progressing through facial detail, the position of the actors renders at least a third of the audience unable to see their exchange. Either the audience should be sat facing each other (in keeping with the tone of the opening), or the angle of the chairs on stage should change between scenes. Nevertheless, with a run time of 40 minutes, no-one has an excuse not to see this play. The themes resonant with a young and older audience alike, and I am sure I will not be the only person to leave the theatre with a childish desire to call my mother straight away.

The Forgiveness Arc

0

What do you do when you’ve reached your lowest moment? It’s a topic that’s been broached in every story since the end of time, but in none more poignantly than musical theatre, which is able to combine harrowing visuals with chilling music.

Sometimes there’s an answer; sometimes there’s not. Whether it leads to redemption or nothingness, here are some of the best musical theatre songs centred around forgiveness.

Those You’ve Known – Spring Awakening

“Those you’ve pained may carry that still with them,
All the same, they whisper ‘All forgiven’”

The fourteen-year old Melchior finds himself in one of the worst positions conceivable – his best friend dead by suicide, and the girl he slept with dead through his own, indirect, fault. At his wit’s end, he tries to take his life, but the spirits of his friends return to offer him salvation.

Guilt is a theme handled expertly by the show, from the act two opening of The Guilty Ones to the final, harrowing, ending. And yet ultimately the performance finds a note of hope to end upon, and it’s this which is carried forward into the future: Melchior resolves to live, carrying the memories of his friends into he future along with the lessons they’ve learned. It’s a beautiful song of forgiveness – of someone reaching their lowest point and managing to find their way out again.

It’s Quiet Uptown – Hamilton

“Forgiveness, can you imagine?”

Alexander Hamilton finds himself in an unimaginable situation – a son dead, a wife scorned, and the responsibility firmly resting with himself. This is at once both a song of mourning, of guilt, and of forgiveness – a character arc in and of itself. Eliza doesn’t have to forgive Hamilton’s behaviour – but she does. It’s a show of strength and of reconciliation, with a chorus which almost acts as a sigh of relief.

It’s a rare song which allows mourning and forgiveness to exist so intimately together. Away from the dramatics and intrigue of ‘Non-Stop’ and ‘The Reynolds Pamphlet’ this is the true turning-point of the play – the Hamilton we knew, at once brash and unapologetic, never really regains the same spirit he had before. And of course, this is an important development for the show’s dramatic climax – a role-reversal between the show’s two protagonists, Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr.

Absolution/No Words – Bare: A Pop Opera

“We’ll always ask ourselves if there was something more that could have been done.”

“Do you ask yourself that, Father?”

It’s near-impossible to pick a song about forgiveness from a show set entirely in a Catholic high school. A song titled ‘Confession’ may have been the more obvious choice, but this duo songs form a poignant conclusion to a show basically marinating in guilt. After the death of their classmate, a group of high-school students – and their priest – attempt to come to terms with the loss, each detailing the things they would have said.

As the priest and Peter, the classmate’s boyfriend, meet in a confession box – and as the priest attempts to explain away his role in the death – Peter is left in that most unusual of situations: deciding whether he wishes to accept forgiveness. With everyone seemingly without words in the final lines, the musical ends on a note of open address without much hope of answer.

For Good – Wicked

“I guess we know that there’s blame to share,
And none of it seems to matter anymore”

Wicked focuses so strongly on the dichotomy of good and evil that it’s sometimes hard to look past it to the friendship beneath it all. ‘For Good’ comes the closest to achieving that – a stripped-back, bare account of a (to say the least) tumultuous friendship. Complements are exchanged, faults are owned up to. A request for forgiveness is immediately granted. It all feels so perfect and fairy-tale like that it’s almost possible to forget one of them’s due to melt into a puddle of water.

However, the underlying inevitability of the ending is what makes this song what it is: occurring towards the show’s finale, this is the last time the two meet one another – hence why it’s so poignant that it’s an ending on good terms. It almost matches ‘Defying Gravity’ in terms of the sheer satisfaction of it all: we know how the story ends, and at this point the protagonists do, too, so ‘For Good’ provides that much-needed moment of catharsis.

From Now On – The Greatest Showman

“From now on, these eyes will not be blinded by the lights”

Family-friendly though it may seem, The Greatest Showman comes close to ending in a very different place than advertised. ‘From Now On’ offers an uplifting and much-needed catharsis to a plot which has, by this point, taken some increasingly dark turns. With an almost resurrection-like quality (Jackman perhaps channelling a certain Jean Valjean) and compelled by the assistance of his employee-friends, Barnum pulls himself out of the depths of alcohol-induced despair and, with a fairy-tale-like magic, convinces his wife to forgive him for losing the house. (It’s an easy job, in the end – she only cares that he didn’t tell her.)

It’s a song not only of forgiveness, but, perhaps more importantly, redemption – and also a testament to the power of support, thanks to the beautiful, gospel-like ensemble. The real-life Barnum may not have been on as friendly terms with his employees as we would have hoped, but this song leaves us believing in what could have been.

Bring down controversial speakers with debate not disorder

0

As someone with Jewish heritage I cannot help noticing cases of antisemitism whenever they arise. And so I was disheartened to learn earlier this term that the Oxford Union would be hosting Mahathir bin Mohamad, the Prime Minister of Malaysia, who has described ‘antisemitic’ as a term devised to give Jewish people immunity from criticism and who apparently has no reservations about describing Jews as ‘hook-nosed’.

It is important to recognise from the founding principles of the Union that an invitation to speak does not constitute an endorsement of the speaker’s views, and this invitation was hardly unprecedented given that last term saw visits from current or former leaders of eight different countries. What this instance shows, however, is that the Union must consider how far it is willing to delve into the realms of controversy at the risk of tarnishing its reputation.

Something which I found far more concerning than any name featured on the Union’s term card was the conduct of some of those protesting the visit of Marion Maréchal last week, in particular the attested chants of ‘who protects the Nazis? Police protect the Nazis’.

Setting aside the issue of disrespecting those who work so hard to maintain public order, chants of this kind are hugely problematic. Taking the term ‘Nazi’ out of context and hurling it at anyone whose views one disagrees with risks distorting our perceptions of history and trivialising the experiences suffered by millions of victims. Even more crucially, such use of the term threatens to disallow any kind of distinction between varying degrees of fault. The implication in this case was that Maréchal, who has made controversial comments about Islam and homosexuality, should be lumped into a category which includes perpetrators of large scale atrocities.

Of course, not all of those present at last week’s protests took part in these chants. In general it is highly encouraging to see the visit of a figure like Maréchal accompanied by protests. When a guest speaker has been known to voice offensive and discriminatory views it is important to raise awareness of this and to put pressure on those attending the talk to use the opportunity for questions to hold the speaker to account.

But when peaceful protest gives way to physical violence, as occurred at the visit of Steve Bannon last term, and protestors begin to use language more hateful and vitriolic than any of the comments which form the pretext for their actions, their respectability is rapidly eroded and with it the prospect of challenging the speaker effectively. Protestors who resort to these methods seem fuelled by a belief that once someone has crossed a certain line there is no longer any point in debating them and the only reasonable response is to inundate them with abuse.

It is unclear whether such a belligerent approach can ever be successful. Consider how two decades ago a considerable victory was achieved against all those who would participate in Holocaust denial when David Irving was defeated in a libel case brought before the High Court. It was only by the careful deconstruction of Irving’s arguments that he was totally and irremediably discredited. Such a positive result would not have occurred if the course adopted had merely been to tell Irving how abominable he was.

A key argument which some protestors have used to justify their actions is that we should think more carefully before providing controversial speakers with a platform. Some of the orchestrators of history’s most unfortunate events, it can be argued, might never have attained the influence they did if those in power had done more to deny them access to large audiences.

These considerations are certainly valid and ought to be heeded, even if they do undermine the value of free speech. But it is difficult to argue for their relevance in the case of Maréchal, whose party came close to winning the French presidential elections in 2017. No-platforming ceases to be an effective response when the cause championed by the speaker has already received widespread acclaim, and besides it hardly seems probable that a talk given at the Oxford Union would impact on the political situation in a foreign country.

Even on a symbolic level it is difficult to justify no-platforming, because it removes the only option remaining for those who wish to take a stand against beliefs they find reproachable. This is to listen to the speaker to gain a clear understanding of their views and why they hold appeal, and to thus be better equipped to confront the speaker and to educate others about why these views are harmful.

It is an unfortunate fact of life that there are people who make us feel uncomfortable. Debate and reason are often the only effective means of response.

Resisting bodily urges: extreme asceticism in medieval female saints’ lives

0

Warning: this article contains references to eating disorders and self-harm.

For many world religions, the body and the soul have seldom gotten along well. Their uneasy relationship is perhaps most strikingly illustrated by – and, in the west, most heavily associated with – some of the foundational texts of the Christian Church. In his epistle to the Romans, for example, St. Paul the Apostle writes that “those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit […] for if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live” (Rom. 8:13). In the centuries since those words were written, putting to death the deeds of the body has played a central role in the teachings of virtually all churches and denominations.

Suppression of carnal urges – for food, sex, sleep, and so on – has formed an important aspect of religious practices for many faiths, but it is a theme to which the devotional literature of Christianity has returned over and over again, often in conjunction with the valorisation of suffering. This is peculiar to a religion whose central image is of a broken, bleeding body hanging from what was originally designed as an instrument for torture.

In mid-medieval Europe, there was a remarkable increase in hagiographic literature emphasising the virtues of fasting above and beyond the prescriptions of the church, in spite – or perhaps because – of chronic food shortages that characterised the lives of so many. The striking thing about this intensification of ascetic practices over the 12th and 13th Centuries was how many of its adherents were women, and how many did so in defiance of male authorities.

The monk who wrote the life of the 13th-century Blessed Alpaïs of Cudot described a vision in which the Virgin Mary tells her that, because she “bore long starvation in humility and patience”, henceforth “corporeal food and drink will not be necessary for the sustaining of your body, nor will you hunger for bread or any other food.” It is a typical example of the period, but it reads suspiciously like a wish fulfilment fantasy; the vitae of holy women often present fasting, especially the particular practice of fasting on nothing but the Eucharist, as a kind of euphoric experience. “Thus,” it continues, “rejoicing as if possessed, [Alpaïs] frequently vomited from too much food, as if her drunkenness and inebriation were increased… and this was… how God underlined her merits and virtues.” St. Catherine of Siena, according to the Vita by her spiritual director Raymond of Capua, fasted until she was unable to keep down any food or drink, and regarded her asceticism as an infirmity. Eustochia of Messina, whose biography was written by her female companions, was one of many anchoresses who confined themselves to cells to subsist on bread and water.

She went further, however, by whipping and burning her skin. In addition to extreme self-deprivation, many of these women outdid male ascetics in their commitment to stomach-churning displays of active self-harm. Jacques de Vitry, who wrote a Vita of Marie of Oignies, commends his subject’s imitation of the Desert Fathers in her commitment to fasting and mortification of the flesh, even eating hardened stale bread to tear the skin of her mouth. The same St. Catherine of Siena who ate nothing but communion wafers in the last years of her short life would also, while tending the sick, drink the pus of her patients’ sores (a habit she shared with St. Columba of Rieti). Seeking to keep herself ‘spiritually pure’ after her father rejected her desire to become a nun and married her off, the teenaged St. Frances of Rome would pour molten fat and wax onto her vulva before fulfilling her conjugal duties, ensuring she never derived anything but pain from the act. She was terrified, it is recorded, by demons who took the forms of naked men and women in her dreams, and stuffed food into her mouth.

Profoundly disturbing though it is, the satisfaction these women derived from pain, restriction and purgation, has more parallels in our society than we might initially recognise. The anorexia memoir (by both sufferers of the disease and their carers) remains a distinctly lucrative literary genre, fuelling the same morbid fascination that drew flocks of pilgrims to observe medieval fasting women.

In her novel Wolf Hall, Hilary Mantel writes, “as I am a woman, I am the means by which sin enters this world. I am the devil’s gateway, the cursed ingress.” Eating, as well as sex, still holds greater cultural stigma for women in spite of the advance of feminism; suffering and deprivation are the natural expectations of a patriarchal culture for those bodies it regards with suspicion. It is true, of course, that many male saints are also written as devoted ascetics, and modern eating disorders also affect men, but it has seldom inspired quite as much horror or veneration.

We should be wary of straightforward interpretations of medieval saints’ lives as manifesting patriarchy in the gruesome panegyrising of women who, in effect, starved themselves to death. Most of these texts were written by men, though Eustochia’s collaborative biography stands out as a notable exception. The consecration of a fertile uterus-owning body to God also deprived the patriarchal family unit of one of its most valuable economic assets, as Frances of Rome’s father knew. Some of these women abused their own bodies even after leading churchmen begged them to show moderation. But there was a fine line, an often-indiscernible boundary, between this and the kind of suffering of which they wholeheartedly approved, between what was embarrassing excess and what constituted a case for canonisation. Our attitudes have changed significantly since the days of pre-Reformation Europe, and even the most conservative 21st-century priests would struggle to vindicate some of the practices discussed by medieval mystics. But this same contradiction is still with us, in the modern magazines carrying hard-hitting stories of the horrors of anorexia and listicles of dieting tips in the same issue. In the name of achieving an unblemished, unattainable ideal of perfection – whether that of Christ or the bikini body – patriarchal structures will always find a pretext for imposing control on female flesh.

Mary Queen of Scots review: ‘artistic licence breathes life into history’

0

Elizabeth I and Mary Queen of Scots are undoubtedly two of British history’s most well-known female figures, their rivalry forming the focus of many films and novels. In her directorial feature debut, Josie Rourke brings a fresh take on this fraught relationship between two women ruling in a man’s world. The film begins as Mary (Saoirse Ronan) arrives in Scotland after the death of her husband, the French Dauphin, and takes us through her difficult time at Scotland’s helm.

Rourke takes a well-known motto of the Scots Queen to poignantly open and close the film. “In the end is my beginning” was the famous saying Mary had embroidered onto her cloth of estate during her years of English captivity, and the film also ends as it began, in 1587, with Mary’s imminent execution after being implicated in a plot against Elizabeth’s (Margot Robbie) life. Through this creative choice, Rourke cleverly embeds the tragedy of Mary’s life into the film’s very structure.

A charge of historical inaccuracy is typically laid against any historical drama, and Mary Queen of Scots is no exception. But considering that historians still heavily debate the truth of Mary’s story, Rourke can easily be excused for bringing a creative twist to elements of Mary’s life still shrouded in mystery. Well-known facts are so smoothly blended in with acts of artistic license that it is difficult to tell one from the other unless viewers are familiar with the minute details of Mary’s life. The most interesting divergence from pure historical fact is the presentation of a love triangle between Mary, Darnley (Jack Lowden) and the Queen’s secretary David Rizzio (Ismael Cruz Cordova), as there is a lack of conclusive evidence that the two men had a sexual relationship. Rizzio’s gruesome murder hence takes on deeper meaning in the film, with Darnley destroying the physical manifestation of his sexuality.

The film will no doubt interest history buffs as it provides its own answers to the big questions circulating Mary’s life – whether she had a hand in the murder of her second husband Henry, Lord Darnley, and the circumstances of her subsequent marriage to Lord Bothwell (Martin Compston). Some may be disappointed that important moments in Mary’s life are skipped over, such as her forced abdication and lengthy imprisonment, but for the sake of running time these omissions are unfortunately necessary.

Historiography centred on Mary Queen of Scots has fluctuated between portraying her as a victim or a perpetuator. Rourke gives us a Mary capable of fitting into both categories, and for this reason may come close to the true historical Mary. Ronan is an excellent choice for the role of Mary, as she combines the Queen’s fierce nature and independence with her increasing desperation. She is betrayed both by the men in her life and ultimately the woman who should understand her the most.

David Tennant gives a spot-on performance as Protestant preacher John Knox. Famous for being misogynistic even in an era that was hardly noted for its gender equality, Knox’s antagonism towards Mary translates well onscreen. His harangues against Mary, calling her a ‘strumpet’, and his commentary on the evil of allowing women to rule contributes to Rourke’s overall depiction of the difficulties faced by these two women in establishing their authority. Yet Rourke also counteracts this ever-present misogyny in the film’s most powerful scene, one that sees Elizabeth swoop down a palace corridor as a sea of black clad male courtiers fall to one knee as she passes.

The central irritant of the film was the decision to dramatically age Elizabeth beyond her years, as Robbie’s Elizabeth is a lot more disconcerting to look at compared to previous depictions. The fictional meeting depicted in the film between the two queens took place in 1568 when Elizabeth was only 35 years old. Though Rourke’s intention was no doubt to reveal Elizabeth’s vulnerability behind the mask of stoicism that she must present to her subjects to survive, the imagery is too blunt. This endurance is more effectively communicated through scenes of Elizabeth consuming herself in her art. The film’s recent Oscar nomination for Best Consume Design is, however, well deserved, as no expense is spared in crafting the Virgin Queen’s lavish wardrobe.

The film’s most interesting, yet factually inaccurate scene, comes with the meeting between Elizabeth and Mary after the latter flees to England seeking her cousin’s help. It is an emotional moment that culminates years of rivalry and competition, and although there is no evidence to point to it ever having occurred, the film would lack an emotional pay-off without its inclusion. Its execution was partially flawed, as the tension building until the moment when Mary finally pulls aside a sheet to reveal Elizabeth was slightly overdone. It felt as if the setting was being milked a little too much for all of its dramatic potential.

Any inaccuracies aside, Mary Queen of Scots is a brilliantly directed and passionate take on one of history’s most famous ‘sisterly’ relationships, and brings our attention back to two women whose stories are always worth telling in new ways.

Jenny Holzer at the Tate: An Exhibition for Instagram

0

The first thing you see when walking into a Jenny Holzer exhibition is text. The new Tate Modern display is no exception – the entrance to the exhibition is a small, high-ceilinged room empty save for walls filled with repeated phrases and wandering readers. One sentence reads “SYMBOLS ARE MORE MEANINGFUL THAN THINGS THEMSELVES,” and it becomes increasingly obvious, reading on, that Holzer cannot possibly mean the bold statements. Rather, they are there simply to provoke thought, or, at least, reaction.

Holzer has been making art since the 80s, but has since moved away from the use of original text which characterised her earlier work. Many quotes in the Tate exhibit are recycled from her most famous series, ‘Truisms’. The series popularised phrases such as “Abuse of power comes as no surprise” and “Protect me from what I want”. The quotes were printed on t-shirts, tweeted, and displayed in bold-face italicised Times New Roman on a pastel pink background then uploaded onto tumblr.com. You’ve probably seen Holzer’s work and not even realised it is art.

The intentional of the art is, however, unmistakeable in the exhibition. For one thing, it is located inside a museum. For another, it creates an incredibly strange space – a public space (the exhibit, like the Tate Modern, is free entry) which is pervaded by text. Unlike Holzer’s previous works, which usually placed or projected texts into busy public areas, physical and virtual, the Tate exhibition forces the public to come to the text. As we have learned from Orwell’s ‘Books v. Cigarettes’, the public are not very excited by the concept of reading, and must therefore be enticed.

Holzer excels in this, creating a space which demands to be filmed and uploaded to the internet. In this, the exhibit itself becomes an exercise in conceptual art – it is effectively forced out onto the wider public by being so ‘grammable’, transgressing the museum space. However, it also loses some of its focus in that form. The text becomes secondary to images of neon lights and strange interiors. Even within the exhibit, the text begins to feel gratuitous; the inscribed black and white marble benches are barely legible and the flashing messages pass too quickly to process.

This is the main failing of the exhibition; Holzer seeks to be transgressive in every way – soliciting emotional response for victims of human rights violations in Syria while simultaneously deriding the desire to construe meaning by overloading her viewers with highly politicised and often-conflicting text. Holzer’s art poses as anti-establishment, and is yet incredibly commercialised. Perhaps this is the convenient message of the exhibition: anti-establishment is also establishment. I am undoubtedly accidentally paraphrasing one of Holzer’s truisms – though they are so copious that I may not even be paraphrasing.

However, if the death of authenticity is the message of the exhibition, it is a message which is expertly imparted if it was intentional. The ‘Truisms’ (1984) which were once hot takes in the days of second-wave feminism become the banal reminders of female victimhood, such as one plaque which reads, “AFTER DARK IT’S A RELIEF TO SEE A GIRL WALKING TOWARD OR BEHIND YOU. THEN YOU’RE MUCH LESS LIKELY TO BE ASSAULTED.” Holzer’s previous art is implicated in the information overload, and leading the viewer to question Holzer’s work as a whole.

If the death of authenticity is the message, can the exhibit even be art? When does the art itself become a commercial enterprise, amassing currency which is not physical, but in the form of followers and posts?

Holzer’s disregard of her own text leads me to think that in this exhibition, as in most conceptual art, symbols are more meaningful than things themselves, but perhaps it is the wrong symbols which are the most meaningful.