Wednesday 15th October 2025
Blog Page 698

Election Review – an ‘interesting and ambitious’ look at politics

-
0
Election Review – an ‘interesting and ambitious’ look at politics

Election says surprisingly little about the 2016 US election. It’s essentially a play about friendship, relationships, and identities that are banded around in politics. It focuses on politics’ human relevance: not in the sense of exposing the results of political decisions, but instead in highlighting where politics comes from – in people’s different social identities, views, and the conflicts between them. ‘Election’ is about five Oxford students, but it’s also about how those characters reflect wider social attitudes.

The play is set in a student room, as the five characters watch the US 2016 election results unfold. We see conflict emerge as they watch, initially between all five, and then splitting the stage to expose individual clashes: the frustrated Kit (Mary Lobo) and Arthur (Joshua Portway), and the idealistic Rori (Beata Kuczynska) and cynical Shaun (Jack Blowers).

The conflict between Kit and Arthur was particularly powerful, as an immigrant woman of colour attempts to articulate to a disgruntled and confused white man why she is “always angry”. Lobo was deeply compelling and watchable in portraying Kit’s frustration at Arthur’s inability to understand her oppression, constant marginalisation, and sense of “otherness” – particularly highlighted in one deeply resonating speech about “oriental” vegetables. These mutual frustrations were interesting to explore in the context of the characters’ friendship, and were also an example of how the play seems to reflect back to the election and wider society (reflecting the resentment and miscommunication that arises from discussions around “political correctness”).

In fact, this is potentially the flaw of the production. Its strong focus on the political, on conflict, and on using the characters to reflect wider social attitudes, meant that at times it felt as though it was forcing this theme a little too hard, and taking itself a little too seriously – with its sustained intensity undermining the realism of the characters as a group of students.

Shaun (Jack Blowers) often provided an effective relief from this, with his cynical yet sharp sarcastic comments throughout the heated scenes: think Chandler from FRIENDS, but with a slightly darker sense of humour. His conflict with Rori (Beata Kuczynska) is engaging, as he resents her Christian optimism for trying to “fix” his pessimism and self-loathing (complete with some laugh out loud moments, such as angrily referring to God as “space daddy”).

The directorial decision to split the stage into these two conflicts, and then later amalgamate them into one cacophonous argument is effective in developing the different kinds of relations on display here, as well as echoing the disorder of real politics. The set up particularly seems to trap Sam, engrossed in the election, and continuously reminds us of this backdrop by piercing the chaos with regular, emotionless political updates.

There was real chemistry between all the actors (particularly Arthur and Kit), and aside from some points of over-intensity, all were very believable. It might, however, have been nice for Sam to have been developed more as a character.

The design accentuated this chemistry well, with the student bedroom set working with the BT’s natural intimacy to create a feeling of domestic space. The use of lighting, to separate the external TV (broadcasting the election) from the domestic, was particularly effective, especially when subverted at the end.

Election was certainly thought-provoking, and I heard numerous people confirm it was “not what they expected”. It is an interesting and ambitious portrayal of how politics (and the framework for identities which politics creates) is entangled in our lives, and has both moving and laugh–out-loud moments. The concept certainly is intriguing, and perhaps with a little more humour, a little less seriousness, and a bit more development of certain characters, this could be a fantastic production.

Environmental damage, human rights abuses, and nukes: St Anne’s dodgy investments revealed

Havard Yttredal
-
0
Environmental damage, human rights abuses, and nukes: St Anne’s dodgy investments revealed

St Anne’s College invested in corporations associated with environmental damage and the production of nuclear weapons, Cherwell can reveal.

A Freedom of Information request made by Cherwell shows that St Anne’s invested in BAE Systems, Rio Tinto Group, and Barrick Gold Corporation – all of which have been excluded from the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, the Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global, following recommendations from its Council on Ethics. Nuffield College also invested large sums in Rio Tinto, totalling £2.5 million from 2006 to June this year.

Together, the corporations have been accused of selling arms to Saudi Arabia, producing nuclear weapons, causing huge environmental damage, and committing human rights abuses. Despite this, St Anne’s were found to have invested in the corporations after their controversies had been publicly reported.

Oxford SU VP for Charities and Communities, Rosanna Greenwood, told Cherwell: “It is scandalous that colleges still invest in Fossil Fuels and companies with dubious ethics. We would want to see all the colleges disinvesting from unethical investments. We have seen the University make that commitment after lobbying from us and it’s time that colleges follow suit.”

A spokesperson for St Anne’s told Cherwell: “The College employs a third party fund manager to manage its investments. Both the College and its fund manager take Environmental, Social and Governance standards seriously and have recently undertaken ESG benchmarking as part of a regular review of its investments.”

A Nuffield spokesperson noted that “the transactions in respect of Rio Tinto plc were made through an investment portfolio managed on the College’s behalf by an external investment manager”, and that the college “no longer has any holdings with that investment manager”.

St Anne’s and Nuffield are two of only a handful of colleges that invest directly in individual shares rather than through pooled investment funds. Foremost among such collective investment schemes is Oxford University Endowment Management (OUem), which manages investments from 25 colleges, as well as the University and six associated trusts.

As a wholly owned subsidiary of the University, OUem – which manages a combined £3bn – is also subject to the Freedom of Information Act. However, citing a duty of confidentiality to their fund managers and the need to protect commercial interests, they refused Cherwell’s request for information about their transactions in specified securities.

OUem follows the University’s ethical investment guidelines which prohibit direct and indirect investments in “tobacco companies, manufacturers of weapons illegal under UK law, or companies whose main business is the extraction of thermal coal and oil sands.”

As part of a broader environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policy, they also evaluate investment ideas for “social, environmental, political and reputational risks,” and use the UN Global Compact to guide due diligence. The full OUem ESG policy can be found on their website.

However, there are no absolute prohibitions other than those restricting investment in tobacco, illegal weapons, and thermal coal and oil sands extraction.

A spokesperson for the Oxford Climate Justice Campaign (OCJC), Pascale Gourdeau, told Cherwell: “In 2015, after a long debate about fossil fuel and arms investments, the University Council acknowledged serious issues in transparency, requiring OUem to improve its reporting on societal and environmental impact. Cherwell’s failure to obtain information on the University’s basic investment strategies casts worrisome doubt on that promise.

“As students, faculty, and staff, we should not have to rely on leaks such as the Paradise Papers to get an accurate picture of the University’s indirect investments and to understand what our University endorses with its financial and cultural clout.”

The University’s ethical investment guidelines are also employed by a number of colleges. Of those which responded to Cherwell’s request by the statutory deadline, none had more substantive de facto ethical investment policy than the University. Several have no substantive ethical investment policy at all, instead relying on case-by-case assessments or the judgement of their investment managers. The latter is the case for St John’s, the University’s richest college, whose transactions records remain undisclosed.

A St John’s spokesperson told Cherwell: “The College’s largest investment adviser, Cazenove, operate[s] a programme of socially responsible engagement with the management of companies in which they invest and the College takes account of advice from its investment and property managers about the social and ethical dimensions of its investment holdings.”

On their ethical guidelines and transparency, a University spokesperson said: “The University has a clearly set out Policy on Socially Responsible Investment, ensuring investment decisions taken on its behalf consider social, environmental and political issues in maintaining ethical standards. The policy includes a ban on direct investment in coal, tar sands, tobacco and companies involved in illegal arms.

“We work closely with our colleagues in OUem in applying the policy, through the University’s Socially Responsible Investment Review Committee and the Investment Committee of the Oxford Funds.”

They added: “Breaches of confidentiality on investments could restrict OUem’s ability to make the decisions which ultimately provide an important source of funding to the University, with many scholarships, bursaries and fellowships funded by this charitable money.

“The University is confident that OUem operates entirely within the Policy on Socially Responsible Investment and has a transparent approach to its investment decisions, providing as much information as is consistent with its obligations to confidentiality and commercial sensitivity.”

When asked for further comment regarding transparency, OUem told Cherwell: “We are conducting a review of our original decision dated 18 October 2018, as requested by you yesterday (31 October). This is a request we must take very seriously, and dedicate enough time to undergo a thorough review. It would be inappropriate to make a comment for your article before we have completed the review. We will provide a response within 28 days and by no later than 28 November 2018.”

Citing concerns about severe environmental damage, the Norwegian Pension Fund Global ruled to exclude Rio Tinto Group in 2008. The company operates a joint venture with Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc to run the Indonesian Grasberg mine, which, according to the Indonesian Supreme Audit Agency, had caused $13.5bn worth of environmental as of 2017.

The mine is also controversial due to conflicts about the area’s indigenous peoples’ right to the land the mine pollutes and on which it operates. The Indonesian police and military, who provide security to the mine due to its status as “strategic industry”, have been accused failing to respect workers’ rights by the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH).

Freeport, though they defend making use of services provided by Indonesian security forces, have never been implicated in these human rights abuses.

The year after Rio Tinto was excluded, Barrick Gold was excluded on similar grounds. The Council on Ethics’ investigation into the Porgera mine in Papua New Guinea, in which the company has a significant stake, revealed substantial issues related to the disposal of mining waste in the river. In particular, the Council cited concerns over accumulation of heavy metals, which could have serious negative consequences for human life and health.

A Human Rights Watch report from 2011 revealed that members of the mine’s private security personnel were implicated in “violent abuses” including gang rape. Barrick has since taken action, and recently commissioned a human rights report which was published in September this year. The report revealed a backlog of more than 940 human rights cases.

BAE Systems is a UK based defence contractor which which has contracts with the US Air Force and the US Navy for the maintenance and upgrade of Minuteman III and Trident missiles, both purpose-built to carry nuclear warheads. The Council on Ethics argues that, along with cluster bombs and anti-personnel landmines, these weapons “violate fundamental humanitarian principles through their normal use.”

BAE has also faced criticism for supplying Saudi Arabia with 72 fighter jets used in airstrikes targeting Yemen. Saudi Arabia has been accused of targeting hospitals, including those run by the Red Cross and Médecin Sans Frontières, and a UN report published in August this year reveals that at least 6,660 civilians have been killed from March 2015 to 23 August 2018.  Most of these casualties were caused by airstrikes conducted by the Saudi-led coalition. The UN report claims that the actions of the Saudi government may amount to war crimes.

St Anne’s have conducted several transactions in the shares of these three corporations since the issues above became public knowledge. Whilst they do not currently hold shares in the two mining companies, they did as of mid-October hold £88,400 worth of shares in BAE Systems.

A BAE Systems spokesperson told Cherwell: “As a global company, BAE Systems has operations in numerous countries and it complies with all relevant export control laws and regulations in the countries in which it operates.”

They added: “BAE Systems provides defence equipment, training and support under government–to-government agreements between the United Kingdom and Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.‎”

Freeport-McMoRan, Rio Tinto, and Barrick Gold were all contacted for comment.

New campaign launched to get more Oxford students active

-
0
New campaign launched to get more Oxford students active

A campaign has been launched by the university to encourage Oxford students to take part in sport and physical activity whilst studying. The ‘Active at Oxford’ campaign seeks to promote opportunities for students to take part in sport, competitively and casually.

It suggests some different ways to get active such as joining sports clubs, taking exercise classes and having active study breaks such as going for walks or cycling to lectures.

The campaign is aiming to emphasise the mental and physical benefits of an active lifestyle. This is in light of the fact that a survey of 311 Oxford students taken in June this year found that a quarter of Oxford students don’t take part in any exercise in term time with nearly a third of students believing that even light exercise could harm their academic performance. It also found that one in four students had been discouraged from taking part in sport by a member of staff.

As well as sport’s health benefits, Active Oxford wants to highlight that sport can have a positive impact on student’s academic work. The campaign told Cherwell that there is a “growing body of evidence highlighting that students who take part in sport are better equipped to cope with stress, are happier, and can even earn more after graduating”. The campaign referenced a BUCS study which found that the average salary of graduates who played sport at university was almost 20% more than those who did not and 94% of employers agree that active students have good employability skills.

The campaign has suggested five ways to maintain a good balance of exercise and study: communicating well with tutors, prioritising, being organised, getting enough sleep and asking for help to manage different pressures.

Martin Williams, the Pro Vice-Chancellor for education commented on the campaign saying, “There are huge benefits to sport and physical activity, with some fantastic clubs and opportunities across the University for students. There is always a way to balance sports with studying, and we actively encourage students to get active while they are here.

Student Kinga Nesselfield also told the campaign that sport taught her to manage her time better and that playing handball helps her reduce her stress level, allowing for a fresh perspective when she returns to college to continue working.

Active at Oxford will run during Michaelmas with materials distributed to staff and students across the University and online.

Citizenship Review – ‘witty, thoughtful and true-to-life’

-
0
Citizenship Review – ‘witty, thoughtful and true-to-life’

Ask any bisexual what the main struggle they face is and they will likely say ‘visibility’: the impression of being neither seen nor heard, often invalidated in a world where a binary is the norm, where things are either black or white; gay or straight. Mark Ravenhill’s play, Citizenship, brings to light the complex and nuanced nature of bisexuality, tracing the main character Tom’s complex journey in the exploration of his identity, from adolescent naivety and insecurity to a final, defiant yearning for belonging. Nightjar Theatre Productions succeeds in a sensitive yet witty portrayal of the growing pains of burgeoning sexuality, which holds resonance for a new generation of teens.

Knowing that Citizenship spoke on an individual’s struggle with sexuality, I was expecting a cliché exploration of the main character’s difficulties in ‘finding himself’: a narrative that LGBTQ+ individuals know to be a far cry away from the often painful process of reconciling one’s sexual identity with the unfortunately omnipresent anti-LGBT discourse. But where Citizenship shines is in its direct yet deft handling of bold subject matter – not limited to self-harm, sexuality and teenage pregnancy – and in its sensitive and considered portrayal of the unique struggles of not fitting neatly at one end of the gay-straight spectrum. Indeed, the full-to-the-brim BT Studio on opening night seems to be a testament to the perennial importance to a new generation of such questions of sexuality and identity.

I was entranced by how effortlessly Waddon inhabits the persona of the ambivalent, endlessly anxious Tom. He and Wayze have a natural rapport on stage, contributing to a natural and candidly open portrayal of Tom’s struggles. His nail-biting, hand-wringing nervous tic contributes to the anguished view of naïve adolescence that is so central to Ravenhill’s drama.

This impression is built on, through the sexual tension and awkwardness perceived in so many teenage interactions, portrayed candidly through the messy friendship between Tom (Henry Waddon) and his best friend Amy (Olivia Krauze). Krauze brings this loving yet insecure character to life through delicate physicality, defensively crossed arms and sardonic eye rolls, as she shrugs off the comically ridiculous hollow mantras she is instructed to repeat to herself to cure her of the mental health struggles she faces.

At the heart of our understanding of the play is Tom’s patronising and agitated schoolteacher De Clark (Harry Berry), who is implicitly gay. However, De Clark’s reticence to help Tom explore his sexuality seems to be Ravenhill’s plea for a shift in the don’t-ask-don’t-tell culture commonplace in schools. Indeed, if Tom’s citizenship teacher is unable to help him explore questions of sexuality, then this begs the question: who is Tom to turn to? In this sense, Ravenhill accurately captures the acute sense of isolation inherent within this questioning of one’s identity: the distinct feeling of being on the periphery, an outsider looking in. Here, what Waddon and Berry do so well is portray the strangely awkward intimacy between two strangers who connect in a shared divergence from a heterosexual identity, but who are unable to talk about this freely together.

Citizenship made me feel understood and validated; I saw my own struggle in the acceptance of my bisexual identity reflected in Tom’s initial confusion, in his gradual realisation of the inadequacy of the narrowly defined, restrictive labels which didn’t describe him, coupled with his growing confidence and expression of his sexuality. It encapsulates perfectly the paradoxical fragility of the pursuit for a fixed, concrete identity as reconciled with the ever-evolving identities which are a natural part of adolescence.

It is a credit to the cast, director (Anna Myrmus) and producer (Tracey Mwaniki) that the rapport between characters is so effortless on stage, meaning the authentic, witty repartee – which stands out as a particular highlight of the production for me, often eliciting full belly laughs from the audience – allows the piece to tackle such sensitive subject matter in an approachable and relatable way.

The pervasive pressure to the very end of the play to ‘decide’ on a fixed identity is compounded by Amy’s insensitive insistence that Tom has “gone gay” despite his assertion of his enduring attraction to her, highlighting perfectly the sexuality binary that Ravenhill is protesting. The production finishes on a poignant note as Tom wrestles with his unfulfilled desire for genuine emotional connection, moving closer to an understanding of what he wants whilst remaining uncertain.

Citizenship doesn’t afford its audience any easy answers about a conclusion to Tom’s journey; instead, it encourages deep, internal reflection which stays with its audience long after leaving the theatre. A witty, thoughtful and true-to-life piece which grapples with topical subject matter, Citizenship is a must-see for anyone seeking to gain a greater insight into bisexuality and the modern teenage condition.

Drunk Enough to Say I Love You? Review – ‘genre-crossing and well-executed’

Katie Knight
-
0
Drunk Enough to Say I Love You? Review – ‘genre-crossing and well-executed’

From the moment we enter the claustrophobic Pilch, the audience is confronted by a massive, overhanging projection of a sleeping face – always a disconcerting start. It’s only when I sit down that I realise that this is of a couple sprawled on a mattress, and only when it’s picked up by the cameraman (‘played’ by Luke Wintour) that I realise it’s in fact live. It’s an unusual start to an unusually named play. Drunk Enough to Say I Love You? is a show which takes the phrase ‘politicians in bed together’ and runs with it.

It’s a performance that will best be appreciated by those with a working knowledge of the American political system, although this is hardly a requisite as a painful, chaotic, and curiously intimate relationship unfolds on stage and screen. A flurry of references and statistics are flicked around in pinball-motion, many of which go over my head; however, as we move forward in time to 9/11, torture, and climate change, the audience inevitably becomes more familiar with the events discussed, building the tension up beautifully for a powerful, heart-breaking final montage.

The script is at times more poetic than conversational, and I can’t help but wonder what would happen if the conversational turns were made a touch sharper. But, at the same time it’s this careful pacing which gives weight to each word, making the whole thing feel slightly surreal despite the intimacy of the two actors. Pelin Morgan as the British ‘Guy’ and Charithra Chandran as the American ‘Sam’ both give exceptional performances with startling chemistry. Despite the warning signs you can’t help but be drawn towards this convulsive relationship as they cuddle and kiss, discuss the bombing of cities, and recount the numbers of civilian deaths. It’s a terrible thing to be drawn towards, and yet that’s what makes it so compelling. Chandran’s character is clearly in charge, charming both audience and counterpart. She is at times genuinely frightening, but there is a clear sense of direction from both and something to be said for Morgan’s quieter, emotive performance. At times the performance edges into dance, the two using the full breadth of the stage to create a genuinely boundary-breaking performance.

It’s clear, however, that the focus has been on the technical side of things, with an incredibly talented crew. The show is a multimedia extravaganza, with a soundscape as overwhelming as the projection which is constantly pinned to the back wall. Though initially sceptical of what a cameraman can bring to such a personal dynamic, its value within the piece soon becomes fully apparent. Every facial expression is able to be captured from the perfect angle, something which a three-sided stage alone is never quite able to do. Snapshots of pre-recorded film both take centre stage and play unobtrusively in the background, ladled with symbolism– I’m not sure what the significance of a bathtub of black water is, but it certainly made me feel uncomfortable. At times the whole thing feels more like a film than a traditional play, but a play isn’t something this show ever claimed to be. It’s genre-crossing, innovative and well executed, making the most of every medium it involves to genuinely impressive effect – it’s the type of thing I’d be interested to see more of in the future.

At times it gets a bit too caught up in its own symbolism – I was unsure if the exposed cameraman was meant to imply political surveillance or was just a physical necessity, and references to in-universe family and to Trump and May complicated what the two characters were exactly meant to represent. Yet even when you don’t fully understand it, the effect is undoubtedly compelling. The combination of visual media and emotive performance produces beautiful moments of tableau which stick in the mind, and each scene brings something different, whether it be a condemning news report, an intergalactic journey, or a frightening full-screen interrogation. It’s clever and bold, and all the better for it.

Rugby blues suffer narrow loss to Canada

-
0
Rugby blues suffer narrow loss to Canada

The Men’s Blues rugby team faced Canada on Wednesday, losing 20-26 at the final whistle, their first loss all term.

Canada are set to play three very important matches this month as they seek to gain the last remaining place in the 2019 Rugby World Cup in Tokyo. They will have to play Hong Kong, Germany and Kenya in order to qualify for the last spot in the ‘group of death’ alongside South Africa and New Zealand. With Hong Kong currently ranked 21st in the world and Canada in 23rd place, they will have to deliver their best rugby to get through. From their performance on Wednesday night Canada appeared weak for an international side, with Oxford keeping the game in Canada’s half for the first 40 minutes, and pushing back with aggression in the last 15.

There was an impressive turnout at Iffley road with Oxford supporters excited to see how the Blues would fare against a national team. From kick off Oxford attacked the game and seemed to be bursting with energy, they went 3-0 up after five minutes with No.10 Tom Humberstone clearing the first penalty of the night. Canada then appeared to go on the offensive, gaining their first try shortly after but Oxford responded with a try from Jasper Dix and seemed to be gathering momentum. At half time the score was 13-14 for Oxford and from the standard of their play it seemed like the win was well within their reach.

Oxford appeared to slump in the second half whilst Canada attacked right from the re-start. Oxford’s scrum half George Tresidder was injecting needed pace but after 53 minutes Canada scored their third try and converted, bringing the score to 21-13. Canada stayed in Oxford’s 22 and with Oxford allowing the North Americans a large overlap it was only inevitable that Canada’s fourth try came shortly after. Shane O’Leary, Canada’s fly-half, missed his first kick of the night and with twenty minutes to go it seemed impossible for Oxford to make a comeback.

Oxford wanted to win for their own pride and to demonstrate that they are a strong and developing side as they come close to the height of their season. Whilst the Blues showed that they had skill and speed Canada appeared to have their missing asset, composure.

In the last 15 minutes of the game Oxford made a spell of substitutions and they appeared to be regaining some ground after a disappointing twenty minutes. In the closing minutes a successful line-out for the blues got them close to the try line, with Flanker Charlie Posniak putting in an impressive performance in the line-outs all game. Captain Dom Waldouck put in a last minute push and Oxford gained another chance to boost their point score. With a member of the Cambridge rugby management leaving the ground at the 78-minute mark shouting to someone in the stands “the Blues are stuffed”, Oxford went on to prove their worth. A triumphant penalty try was award to Oxford in the 80th minute as they collectively pushed over the line, meaning that the final score came closer to reflecting the quality of Oxford’s play.

It was a disappointing end result for the Blues who at first seemed to rise to the challenge of playing a professional, national team. If Oxford are to win at the all-important Varsity match at Twickenham in a month’s time they will need to work on playing in an intensive atmosphere and in maintaining the attacking quality that they are capable of, for the entire game. The Blues will also have to bolster their defence who weakened under pressure in the second half. The Blues have three games left before the Varsity match on the 6th of December, including the Major Stanley’s match against Cardiff RFC and a fixture against Trinity College Dublin next weekend.

Brasenose leads Veggie Pledge

Eve Webster
-
0
Brasenose leads Veggie Pledge

Over 1,000 people have signed up to participate in this year’s Veggie Pledge, with Braesnose taking an early lead in the college league.

The Veggie Pledge is an annual scheme organised by the Oxford Student Union aiming to encourage people to reduce their meat intake throughout the month of November.

Colleges are encouraged to promote Veggie Pledge through a league table. As of last Sunday, Braesnose College is currently in the lead with 119 students, 20% of the college, signed up.

Wadham is in second place, with 95 college members signed up. The college has also recently passed a motion to have an additional meat-free day provided by the catering department.

VP Charities and Community Officer, Rosanna Greenwood called the Pledge “the flagship campaign” for environmentalism.

Greenwood told Cherwell: “Now in its 3rd Year, Veggie Pledge is bigger than ever – smashing 1000 pledges!

“It’s the flagship campaign encouraging students to be more environmentally and sustainably conscious throughout the month of November.

“Everyone can be involved in Veggie Pledge in some way whether reducing meat intake, taking Tupperware to Gloucester Green Market or using less palm oil.

“Pledging is open until Wednesday 7th, so make sure you join the Facebook group and take part!”

Last year’s winner, St Hugh’s College, have passed a motion to only provide vegetarian food at JCR meetings throughout the month.

The motion noted the college’s “strong legacy of commitment to the November Veggie Pledge”, with 282 pledges made last year.

A number of eateries in Oxford are also offering discounted for those participating in the scheme this month, with Bill’s offering 20% discount on all vegetarian and vegan food and Crisis Cafe on George Street offering a 15% discount.

Jeff Koons to exhibit 17 works at Ashmolean

-
0
Jeff Koons to exhibit 17 works at Ashmolean

Contemporary artist Jeff Koons is set to stage a rare exhibition of his artwork at the Ashmolean Museum in spring 2019.

The exhibition will be curated by Koons himself, in collaboration with art historian Norman Rosenthal, and will include 14 works that have never been on display in the UK before.

The announcement of Koons’ exhibition comes a year after the artist visited Oxford to accept an award from the Edgar Wind Society, the University’s only art history society.

The Society’s former president, Oli Lloyd-Parry, told Cherwell: “My invitation was the first invitation to Oxford that Mr Koons had accepted and the visit forged a relationship with the University.”

“Mr Koons became fascinated by the Ashmolean Museum when my collaborator Mallica Kumbera Landus, the former Andrew W. Mellon Teaching Curator at the Ashmolean Museum, and I gave him a tour of the permanent collection.

“Mr Koons was incredibly generous with his time and relished engaging with the
diverse student body that constitutes the Edgar Wind Society.

“I am delighted that the Edgar Wind Society has been able to facilitate this rare UK museum exhibition of Mr Koons’ art.

“I cannot think of a more appropriate place to present this important exhibition than within the Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archeology, the world’s oldest public museum which explores the stories of human existence across cultures and through time using its prestigious collection which ranges from objects of antiquity to contemporary art – a fitting location which really resonates with Mr Koons’ work.”

The Society awarded Koons an Honorary Membership for Outstanding Contribution to Visual Culture, which was established in 2016 by Lloyd-Parry to recognise the achievements of contemporary artists.

The Ashmolean’s director, Xa Sturgis, told The Guardian: “It is hard to think of any other artist of the last 50 years who has such a significant and influential place in how we think about what art is today.”

Koons is known for his sculptural works depicting objects from popular culture, such as balloon animals. One such Balloon Dog (Orange) was sold for $58.4 million in 2013, the highest price fetched at auction for the work of a living artist.

The exhibition will run at the Ashmolean Museum from 7th February to 9th June 2019.

OULC passes motion mandating ‘educational discussion’ on antisemitism

Daniel Hall
-
0
OULC passes motion mandating ‘educational discussion’ on antisemitism

Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) has passed an amended motion mandating the Club to “hold an educational discussion on the history of antisemitism on the left”.

The motion comes after a summer in which the issue of antisemitism plagued the national Labour Party.

Referring to recent issues of antisemitism on the left, the motion read: “Antisemitism is an ideological poison which, by seeking to explain the world in conspiratorial terms and pose as a politics of resistance to the powers-that-be, is particularly and specifically toxic for the left.”

However, during the debate an amendment was tabled and eventually passed, to remove a section of the original motion, which noted: “The issue of antisemitism has been cynically exploited for factional ends by the right, both within the party and more widely.”

The member who proposed the amendment removing this section said in the meeting: “I actually think that it’s almost more factional to make it into a left/right within the party issue.

“When you’re talking about the is-sue of antisemitism being ‘cynically exploited for factional ends by the right within the party’, I really don’t think that’s helpful to fighting antisemitism whether you’re on the left or on the right of the party, or wherever in the party.

“We should all be committed to fighting it.”

In support of the amendment, another Club member said: “I think its brilliant that this motion is actually being put forward, and substantively I agree with the vast majority of it, because it is such a pernicious issue across the entirety of the left.

“But I think if we really want this motion to be as strong as possible then it really needs to be able to draw as much support as possible from the entire party.

“The best way to do that is having a motion that everybody can really get behind, that doesn’t pin the blame on anybody, that just signifies a general commitment to take this forward as an issue and to absolutely ensure that this kind of pernicious evil is eradicated from the party by everyone.

“So perhaps if we drop that sentence it would allow it to have to scope to draw everybody behind it in a meaningful way.”

During the meeting it was raised that the wording of the motion was important, because of OULC’s “very recent issue of antisemitism”.

In 2016, OULC was investigated by now-Somerville Principal, Baroness Janet Royall. Her report concluded that then members of the club had engaged in anti-Semitic acts.

In June, a motion was passed by the club condemning Labour MP Chris Williamson for his “actions and statements regarding antisemitism”. The motion also said that “antisemitism, anti-Semites, and those who excuse or absolve them, have no place in the Labour Party”.

Another separate motion at the meet-ing was debated which if passed would have mandated OULC to campaign for a “People’s Vote with an option to remain” in the EU, and to “call for Labour to come out for remain in such a vote”.

The motion was rejected by OULC members, mirroring the policy of the national Labour Party to reject calls for another EU referendum.

An earlier caption of this Facebook upload referenced a clause that was, as described in the article itself, rejected by a majority at the meeting. As by itself this was potentially misleading, the caption has been amended. We apologise for the oversight.

International breaks should be here to stay

-
0
International breaks should be here to stay

Taking a weekend off from the Premier League to make time for international football has long been a source of annoyance among football fans. Typically boring and unmotivated matches, more often than not ending in a loss or goalless draw where England are concerned, are not quite up to the standard of excitement we come to expect from the usual weekend league matches. Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp recently called the newly formed UEFA Nations League “the most senseless competition in the world” for the unnecessary added strain it puts on players.

Although it is true that international matches are disruptive to players’ routines, with Brazilian internationals recently flying to the US for a mere five days in the break to play two friendlies, the matches are not without their positives. After a post-World Cup lull for English supporters, excitement around the national team has been renewed by the surprising brilliance they showed in their Nations League win against Spain the weekend before last, showing that the importance of international fixtures should not, in my opinion, be written off.

Although Klopp’s criticism of the Nations League may have been harsh, he did make a valid point concerning the added risk involved in overworking players. Dele Alli suffered a hamstring injury during England’s 2-1 loss to Spain in September, which put him out of action for Spurs’ next clashes against Liverpool and Inter Milan, leading some to question whether the international result was worth this sacrifice.

The disruption caused by the international break to clubs and managers is understandably frustrating, as teams are unable to settle into a string of League matches before some of their key players are shipped off around the world. You only need to look at the contrast in relationship between Rashford and Southgate, and with Mourinho, and observe the difference in play between his recent club and country performances, to see the impact having alternating managers can have. Mourinho came out of the September international break having to defend his lack of use of Rashford, after the striker scored twice in two England matches, and this lack of continuity in managerial style seems undermining for everyone involved.

Nevertheless, despite all these factors, there seems to be something important about retaining the regular international fixtures. The England team were praised over the summer for the cohesion and chemistry the players seemed to have, their relationships off the pitch apparently positively affecting their performance on it. With too much of a gap between international fixtures, national teams would risk losing their connectedness and relationship as a team, a factor we would be stupid to overlook. Replacing the majority of international friendlies with Nations League matches was greeted by some criticism, but seems to have had an overall positive impact.

For the lower teams, the league ranking system provides some much-needed motivation at an international level, as can be clearly seen by Gibraltar’s exultant celebrations after their first ever competitive international win, over Armenia, in the last break. Possibly the problem with international fixtures in the past has been the lack of excitement in friendly matches; England’s win against Switzerland three days after their loss to Spain in September did not come as much consolation as the match didn’t count for anything.

Having a competitive format provides the impetus that drove England to redress this loss the weekend before last. If Spain had beaten them, England would have been out of the Nations League; as it stands they now still have a chance to progress. It is this sort of incentive that has re-injected a spurt of energy to the international fixtures, and which will keep the momentum up for when the qualifying matches for the Euros come around in March.

Could the international format be improved? Probably. Should it be scrapped altogether? Undoubtedly not. Whatever their faults, an England match gives an opportunity to put everyone’s club differences aside and unite under one aim. Whether England progress in the Nations League or not, the matches will have been largely exciting, and a good addition to the football calendar.

As for complaints about an overcrowded match schedule, tournaments like the Carabao Cup should perhaps be the first contender for re-evaluation in that regard; international breaks give a different perspective of play, remind us of why we love events like the World Cup, and we should ultimately try to savour them as much as possible.

1...697698699...2,527Page 698 of 2,527

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