Oxford's oldest student newspaper

Independent since 1920

Blog Page 70

Oxford scraps results of botched admissions tests

By
Ed Ledgard and Martha Smith
-
Admission tests
Image credit: Kampus Production via Pexels

The University of Oxford has confirmed that both the Geography Admission Test (GAT) and the English Literature Admissions Test (ELAT), which took place on 19 October, will not be used to shortlist candidates this year. The University has also confirmed that students who sat Maths the Admissions Test (MAT) will have the option to take a supplementary test. These decisions come in response to technical errors in the new online tests.

Earlier this year the University unveiled their plan to digitalise all but two of its admissions tests (the Thinking Skills Assessment and the Biomedical Admissions Test), aiming to “transform the paper-based testing environment typically still found in educational settings.”

The task was entrusted to TATA Consulting Services (TCS iON), one of India’s largest companies and a leader in the UK IT service industry. Following the announcement of the deal, TCS iON’s Global Head, Venguswamy Ramaswamy, said: “We are excited to bring our expertise in working with the University of Oxford, one of the biggest names in education, to make digital assessment possible for its admissions tests.”

The ELAT consists of six passages of text, all of which are united by a common theme. Students report sitting in exam conditions for up to an hour waiting for the passages to load. Applicants were further confused when the test asked for the passages to be considered in relation to the theme of the previous year’s paper.

In an email to candidates, the Director of Undergraduate Admissions for the Faculty of English, David Taylor, wrote that “the clear errors in the test’s rubric (which gave last year’s theme of ‘sleep’ rather than this year’s theme of ‘the moon’) are unacceptable. They caused stress and confusion for talented young people for which we are truly sorry.”

One student told Cherwell: “these issues really threw me off and I felt so disappointed with what I wrote.”

On 20 October, the University announced that “this year, ELAT scores will not be used in any formal shortlisting calculation. No candidate will be deselected (i.e. not shortlisted) on the basis of their ELAT score.”

Applicants also had difficulty accessing other online tests, such as the Maths Aptitude Test (MAT). 

The Oxford University Mathematics department issued a statement on behalf of the Mathematical Institute, apologising for the “widespread distress and difficulties” experienced by prospective maths students who took the MAT.”

Students describe taking up to five hours to complete the MAT as a result of glitches in the new system. 

Unlike the ELAT, the Mathematical Institute will be offering a supplementary test for students who were unhappy with their performance on the MAT – whereas the marks of the ELAT will simply be discounted from the application process. According to the statement, “the majority of candidates experienced no disruption – we do not want to disadvantage those candidates” and so the second test will be optional and the scores of the original MAT will still be taken into consideration. 

The supplementary MAT will take place on 14 November at 9am. The additional test will be administered entirely by Oxford University. 

The University told Cherwell: “We understand the difficulty and disappointment some UK students have experienced because of technical problems with online admissions tests run by a new provider, and we are very grateful to the students and their teachers for their patience and feedback. 

“Tests are only one part of the admissions process and we will use a range of information, including candidates’ individual circumstances, to help us assess their potential and ensure no-one is disadvantaged by these events.

“We will be having further talks with the provider to understand better why these problems occurred with their systems and obtain assurances that there will be no repeat.”

“An ambitious testament to Epic theatre”: Angels in America Review

By
Anuj Mishra
-
alt= the main cast of Angels in America at the Oxford Playhouse
Photo courtesy of Oxford Playhouse and Happier Year Productions; (L-R) Aravind Ravi, Grace Gordon, Will Shackleton, Maniel McNamee)

Angels in America: Milennium Approaches is a big show. Indeed, a play with a three-hour runtime and a Pulitzer Prize can really be nothing but. Rising to this Herculean task, Happier Year Productions’ version at the Oxford Playhouse conveyed all the magnitude of Tony Kusher’s “gay fantasia” with room to spare.

The cast of Angels, spearheaded by Daniel McNamee as Prior, a gay man living with and dying from AIDS, was superb in all aspects. Kushner’s 1991 play places two couples at its centre: Prior and Louis, a gay couple falling apart as Prior’s health enters a steep deterioration; and Harper and Joe, a straight Mormon couple whose marriage is a scant façade for an addict wife and repressed husband.

For all its greatness, the way in which Angels is written can allow its cast to fall into archetypal role-playing at times. This is a pitfall which applies especially to the characters of Prior, a foppish WASP, and Roy, a dirty yet powerful lawyer. Nonetheless, McNamee’s portrayal of a man in physical and mental collapse – cracking open as it were – never felt overdone, perfectly treading Kushner’s line of theatrical illusion and never spilling into histrionics. Immanuel Smith’s Roy Cohn was an impressive character study, Roy being a character with which Kushner writes real-life into the play. Special mention must be given to Smith’s Brooklyn accent, which rivalled that of any native New Yorker.

Similar credit must be given to Grace Gordon as Harper, her Valium-induced delirium never failing to strike a nerve and arousing violent laughter where it mattered most. Aravind Ravi’s performance as Joe was impressive also: his portrayal of a sort of everyman, alienated from the values of Christianity and Reaganism he once held dearest, was sympathetic to even the most radical of us in the audience.

Image courtesy of Oxford Playhouse and Happier Year Productions; (L: Will Shackleton, R: Grace Gordon)

As the play hurtled towards doomsday, each scene morphing into the next with no pronounced set changes (aside from an interval), Raynes crafted profoundly moving images. A highlight being the climactic end to the second act (before the interval) where we see the stage occupied by both couples in a cacophony of rage and sorrow. This scene was well choreographed, allowing each performer to weave a confusion of narratives and identities, and was complemented by excellent lighting design (Lucas Ipkendanz).

Raynes’ direction also did a good job of preserving the moments of sheer abjection in Angels. Each of these moments induce a discomforting voyeurism that makes us writhe in the play’s collapsing of social order: a cruising scene in a park (familiar to only the most adventurous of us), the vivid spectacles of Prior’s AIDS-related symptoms, the awkward layering of male desire and sheer greed which marks our final impression of Ray Cohn.

The relevance of Angels – a clear point of interest for Raynes, as revealed in an interview for Cherwell – was never unconvincing. From the delivery of the opening speech, a sort of proem to the “National Themes” the play speaks for, by Rabbi Chemelwitz (Maya Robinson), to the hilarious yet hauntingly accurate argument between Louis (Will Shackleton) and Belize (Essence Lotus) on race, antisemitism, and politically-correct drag queens.

Image courtesy of Oxford Playhouse and Happier Year Productions; (L: Essence Lotus, R: Will Shackleton)

The play boasted original sound design, by Madeleine Lay, which was effective in the most dramatic moments if a little too loud in others. The projected angels’ voices were demonic (reminiscent of those terrifying Biblically-accurate angels) and conveyed a sense of doom which felt out of place in the earlier act, but nonetheless effectively precipitated the ending.

Angels in America, Millennium Approaches impressed, awed, and shocked. An ambitious testament to epic theatre which was well handled, it must not be missed. I patiently hope for Perestroika.

Angels in America, Millennium Approaches will continue its run at the Oxford Playhouse until the 4th November, at 8pm on Friday 3rd and 2.30pm & 7.30pm on Saturday 4th. Tickets are available to purchase here.

“Surprising, and slightly macabre”: Sampi at the Burton Taylor

By
Kiaya Phillips
-
alt= Sampi at the Burton Taylor
Credit: Flora Wilson Photography

A play about friendship, breakdowns, a chicken sandwich, existential questioning and a nosebleed, Sampi at the Burton Taylor Studio is a piece of new writing by Oliver Roberts taking the Oxford drama scene by storm. Selling out the venue on Friday night, I was lucky enough to get a front seat to the madness.

The plot of the play is simple in concept: two men and one woman, all in their early twenties, prepare for a birthday party. Tensions within the group are quickly established and along the road to reconciliation we see Nat, Hayley and Sara struggle with new jobs, drug issues, irrational fears, relationships and ultimately their understanding of self. All common topics that will ultimately hit well with an audience of university students. 

The play explores the fine line between what everyday acts are terrible and what is simply a part of the system. Staged in the BT’s black box setting in the round, you are thrust into the centre of the chaos. With a minimal, but clever, set of a table and three chairs, but an otherwise empty space, the actors were given space to move, allowing exploration with proximity in their acting choices. The only thing disturbing the minimalism was the tabletop, cluttered with miscellaneous party supplies; beer, hats, streamers and a radio.

The play is carefully crafted with recurring motifs that I felt myself recognising as we returned back to them. The radio, brought in by Nat at the start acting as the centre for the transitional audio between scenes; adverts for Spotify skips, static, and snippets of pop songs jarringly played over loudspeaker as the scene shifts. We also see titular references embedded in the play. Nat, our charmingly naïve deep thinker, introduced us to sampi in one of his existential musings; leading me to learn that it is an archaic letter added onto the end of the Greek alphabet (a fact I had never before encountered!).

Moreover, the motif of the nosebleed intertwined with the concept of bloodletting struck my attention. A concept that was openly discussed in a contemplative, philosophical manner in the former half of the play and being constantly reminded to us with the presence of this unrelenting nosebleed from Hayley. The emotion is physical and we see Haley’s pain expressed through his own purging of blood. When he hits Sara near the end of the play he wants her to share in the pain he is experiencing leaving both characters wearing their emotional scars smeared on their faces. The motif finishes at the end of the play when Halyey and Sara reach the final peak of their already crumbling relationship; blood is spilt into cups which are swapped and drank from, symbolising them finally agreeing to disagree. The ending is surprising, slightly macabre, and disturbing yet reinforces a sense of finality at the end of the play in the face of all this unresolved conflict. Ultimately, however, I came away still debating over whether closure between the characters was ever really reached.

Despite the depth of thought gone into the writing of the play, the comedy that it’s described as does not go amiss. With expertly timed quips built naturally into the fast flowing conversations of the young adults, the audience were continually laughing aloud at the dialogue on stage. Whether from a sense of camaraderie with these figures of young adulthood that are so vibrant, overpowering yet familiar, or genuine confusion at the absurd topics addressed, it worked either way. Only a group of twenty year olds can muse over the possibility of a reincarnated chicken sandwich with a soul being a form of cannibalism with utter sincerity! 

The production done on Sampi was particularly interesting. Along with the aforementioned transitional soundscape, we were given a large projection of a digital timer upstage right. The timer begins as the action of the play starts and ticks up to the hour mark as the play progresses, adding to the intensity of the action as the omnipotent pressure of time overshadows the action unfolding. Moreover, the soft yellow lighting enhanced the plays realist nature, before expertly shifting to a soft focussed red on Hayley and Sara in their final heated argument. 

The play felt comforting and funny yet tense and overdramatic. Roberts takes the mundane and common experiences of young people and exaggerates them to a comic extent, whilst also getting us to question the authenticity of human connection.

Is football becoming inaccessible?

By
Thomas Bristow
-
Illustration of football and pound notes in stadium
Artwork by Madeleine Storer

Like millions of other people, my first football match is an important memory. West Ham lost 0-1 to Stoke in the 13/14 season, but I still remember seeing the pitch for the first time and being unable to comprehend the size of the stadium and the amount of people in it. If it sounds like something of a religious experience, you’re not mistaken. In many ways, supporting a team is like subscribing to a religion, with all of the heightened emotions and admiration of a few exalted figures. But like religion, historically the privileges are given to those who can afford them.

In general terms: where there is sport, there is money. Clubs need to be established, equipment bought, staff paid, home turf hired/purchased and players need to be signed. Football is no different in this respect, and perhaps presents the most clear example of all sports. Vast amounts of money have nearly always been involved, from Giuseppe Savoldi’s transfer to Napoli in 1975 (the first over £1 million), to Manchester United paying £80 million for Harry Maguire in 2019. Despite the recent astronomical inflation of the transfer market, these huge amounts are far easier to manage for the top clubs, who are backed by enormously wealthy individuals (and sometimes entire countries). But a football club is as much a business as a passion project, and when people invest their money they logically expect a return. 

Clubs can profit in many ways, from lucrative broadcasting revenue, sponsors and transfers. But, aside from Todd Boehly, fans are perhaps the most willing spenders of all, and they alone represent a huge potential for profit. In 2021, Barcelona took £110,900,000 on the matchday experience (tickets, food, drink etc.) and Tottenham were not far behind with £94,500,000. Whilst these may seem like huge figures, for top clubs the money made from fans actually accounts for a small portion of the overall revenue. Thus the question arises; if fan revenue is far less consequential for clubs than other streams, why is it seemingly so expensive for supporters? 

An immediate answer could be as simple as, ‘Clubs are businesses, they can charge what they like’. But this does nothing to address the issue that, for many people, football just is expensive. The most obvious place to start is with tickets. Many would claim that you’re not a true fan if you’ve never seen your team play. There is something truly unique about being in a massive stadium of people with a shared passion. But for West Ham fans it will cost a minimum of £50, and that’s likely for a seat as far away from the pitch as possible. Factor into this the travel to and from the stadium for supporters from all around the country, matchday food and drink, and the cost of attending a Premier League match skyrockets. Of course West Ham cannot be representative of the whole league, and according to goal.com tickets can be bought for as little as £9 at Liverpool and £16 at Burnley. But this in itself is not representative, as there’s very few of these tickets available and the view from your seat will be greatly affected. 

The reality is that attending a Premier League game is expensive. For Manchester City’s upcoming league game against Bournemouth, the tickets range from £58-75. Not exactly a casual day out. European cup games usually mean a more modest price, and West Ham are offering a 3-match ticket to adults for £60, decent value for three home games. There is, however, one major condition, aside from the fact that these will almost certainly be for the worst seats in the stadium; this deal is only available to season ticket holders. An adult season ticket for the current season which guarantees semi-decent seats starts at £630. The offer is there, but only if you’re willing to fork out £100s in advance. For many people, attending a game, arguably the essential aspect of supporting a team, is unaffordable. Consider further the fact that Premier League teams will play 38 games in a season, and the idea of semi-regularly watching your team play becomes a mere fantasy. Fans create the matchday experience and are the backbone of any football club, but so long as tickets inevitably become more and more expensive, fewer and fewer genuine fans will be able to participate. 

But attending a game is not the only way to signify your support. The football shirt is famous and iconic, and the appeal is obvious. You can clearly display your support for your team, sometimes amongst thousands of others at matchday, and have the chance to wear what the players themselves wear. It is an intrinsic aspect of one’s identity as a football fan, almost like a uniform which can distinguish the wearer from fans of other teams. Some would call football deeply tribal, and I would probably agree. Seeing a random person wearing your team’s shirt is a strangely comforting experience, almost as if being reminded of being part of an enormous family. The football shirt is a deeply desired garment, but this inevitably comes at a significant cost too. I remember buying Dortmund’s 14/15 shirt with a name and number on the back and it cost £65 which was not cheap. The same item, for this season, now costs £87. I’ve read a few articles from the late 2010s which claim that the modern-day cost of a football shirt is partially negligible as they’ve always been expensive and, adjusted for inflation, cost pretty much the same. Whilst this may have been the case in 2017, it’s not anymore. In 1973 Leeds United began selling kits to their fans for £5, a considerable amount of money at that time. Using the Bank of England’s inflation calculator this would come to £51.69, but this season’s Leeds shirt is £65. The gap is not huge, but it’s noticeable, and shows that Leeds shirts now cost more than ever. 

The most striking examples, however, are those of the world’s biggest clubs. For the clubs that sell the most shirts, there are often two options available; the replica and the ‘authentic’. Replica shirts are more common, they are a slightly cheaper-produced shirt for the everyday fan. But authentic shirts are, as is probably obvious, exactly what the players themselves wear on the pitch. These shirts represent a deluxe option, being made of higher quality fibres and having all of the latest (probably quite insignificant) technological advances in football shirts. Take Real Madrid for example, one of the world’s biggest and most successful teams. Their replica shirt for this season costs £95, which seems unbelievable until you come to their authentic shirt which costs *deep breath* £140. This doesn’t even include the cost of player name and number printing. Even their child’s shirt is £70, a price comparable to most premier league clubs’ adult shirts. At this point I’m just glad I’m not a Madrid fan.

Prices such as these have to be justified, and in fairness clubs only receive a small portion of what the shirt sells for. But £140 for a single shirt is bordering on the price you’d pay for a luxury brand, not exactly what football is meant to be about. The biggest clubs, however, are global brands, and that cannot be denied. You’re far more likely to see a Barcelona or Manchester United shirt in some far flung corner of the globe than Crystal Palace. And so football shirts become as much a fashion statement than one of support or a practical garment of sportswear. Perhaps the best example is Paris Saint-Germain, whose collaboration with Michael Jordan’s ‘Jumpman’ brand has turned the shirts into borderline streetwear. This is only compounded by the opening of a PSG club shop in New York, of course on 5th Avenue (the Google reviews are hilarious). The connection to football is minimal, and the intention is clear. It’s difficult not to view this collaboration as anything more than a cash grab. But, as I hope is clear, it shouldn’t be like this. Fans want to show their support for their team, but the price of a shirt is starting to become unfeasible for many. 

One solution is the enormous and rapidly growing market of fake shirts that are produced in China. On sites such as dhgate.com, the same aforementioned Real Madrid replica shirt is available for around £13, an offer which seems too good to be true. But reading the reviews of these fake shirts, the customers seem to be quite happy with the quality of them. Many even mention that they’ve bought one for their children, who are themselves happy with the shirt. For people who, understandably, can’t afford exorbitant shirt prices, these fakes seem to provide a viable and satisfying alternative. But there is a huge elephant in the room which is yet to be addressed; this is a completely illegal practice. People are mass producing designs which they don’t own the rights to and then selling counterfeit goods in their thousands. Further questions can also be raised over the ethics of large-scale factory production in China concerning the environmental damage and well-being of those who are actually making these shirts. On one hand, you can purchase a decent quality shirt for a very low price, but on the other hand you must consider what sort of possible exploitation and illegal activities you’re contributing to. On top of all this is the fan’s consideration as to whether they’re undermining their own club. Fake shirts are not really the perfect solution they seem to be. 

But fake shirts is not the only illegal practice that many fans decide to indulge in. For as as long as I can remember, illegal streaming sites have existed, promising an unstable connection, a million pop-ups and a few viruses, but ultimately allowing you to watch the game. These sites are extremely popular, with a 2017 article in The Guardian finding that 54% of Millennials surveyed had watched an illegal sports stream. A recent report by the Sports Business Journal reveals that in 2019 the Premier League had 210,000 illegal streams blocked, and that last season the number increased to a staggering 600,000. It goes without saying that illegal streaming represents something of an epidemic to broadcasters. But even watching football at home is becoming increasingly difficult. Sky Sports Premier League starts at £20 per month, admittedly not a huge amount, but this doesn’t include the installation fee. NowTV is £35 monthly, BT Sport £40 and Virgin Media is £70. You do get access to a great deal of football, but I can understand why people would rather use alternative, if questionable, means of streaming. With the enormous rise of streaming companies in the last decade, people are watching less TV. The problem, probably due to this, is that more football matches are being taken off the main channels and stuck behind something of a paywall. Despite my fear of sounding like some grumpy old man, I fully believe that when I was younger there was much more football available on the TV. For fans who live far from their teams, crowding around the TV to watch a match with friends or family can be an important moment. But with the rise of costly streaming, football matches are being made more exclusive and, so it seems, inaccessible. 

This has been a pretty pessimistic article so far, so I’d like to say that I genuinely believe there is hope for football. Football is, on the whole, very accessible. Footballs are relatively inexpensive, you can kick a ball around nearly anywhere, and when you factor in illegal streaming it’s technically very easy to watch. The lower down the leagues you go, the generally cheaper it becomes. Non-league football is brilliant, provides a much more intimate experience than the Premier League and is far cheaper. Non-league games might not be as flashy and pristine, but there is something almost reassuring about this. They embody the raw spirit of a football match; 22 sweaty people chasing after a ball on a large rectangle of grass. At my local non-league club, Salisbury FC, Adult tickets are £13 and Children’s are just £4. I’m not implying that Premier League clubs should be charging as little as this, that would be ridiculous, instead what is hopefully clear is that real football is very accessible to fans up and down the country for a low price. Many people, including myself, support a ‘Big Leagues’ team and their local Non-league club. But if we turn to Germany, First Division football is far more affordable than in England. Due to the ‘50+1’ rule in German football, Bundesliga clubs have to be at least 51% owned by their members in order to compete in the league. The potential for external ownership is thus far more limited than in the Premier League, and it ensures that the actual members of the club retain overall control. These member-led clubs are far more concerned with putting the fans first than their Premier League counterparts, and this has been the case for a while. Way back in 2010, the then CEO of the Bundesliga, Christian Seifert, stated that “The clubs don’t ask for money” and that “It’s not in the clubs’ culture so much [to raise ticket prices]”. This is still seen today, with Germany’s two biggest clubs, Borussia Dortmund and Bayern Munich, charging as little as €18.50 and €15 for a ticket respectively, largely due to the Bundesliga’s implementation of Safe Standing. Bayern Munich charge slightly more for their Champions League games, but the chance to see two of the world’s best teams play for €19 seems too good to be true. To add to this, Germans clubs restrict the number of season tickets sold, giving more fans the chance to watch their team at a reasonable price. In Germany, it seems that the fan truly does come first. 

Where, then, do we go from here? To dream up some way in which the Premier League could be remodelled based on the Bundesliga would be futile. That sort of change simply is not going to happen, and to be honest it’s difficult to suppose any change will happen at all. As the seasons progress, the Premier League could become more and more commercial and expensive, and thus inaccessible. There seems to be a trend towards a more American style of sport, with the increased pre-game and post-game coverage on streaming services and the alarming rate at which huge, but ultimately vacuous, stadiums are being built. It is a trend towards a menacingly corporate form of football, where sterile and luxurious stadium experiences at £1000 per ticket take priority over the average fan who could never dream of such things. As far back as 2017 the BBC reported that 82% of the 18-24 age group were put off football by the cost of tickets. Whether football, at the top level, is even losing its soul completely is up for debate.

Elite-level football is one of the greatest shows on earth. It is enthralling, full of drama and  includes many of the world’s greatest teams and players. But even at this level, the fans form the backbone of the clubs, and so without fans there can be no football. More and more people are being priced out of the game that they love, and elite football is no longer as readily accessible. The average fan, it seems, is gradually being left behind.

A bubble within a bubble?

By
Hassan Akram
-
Image Credit: John Loo / CC BY 2.0 Deed Via Flickr

A recent ‘View from Oxford’ survey polled students about which way they would vote in a general election. The results showed that 67.1% would vote Labour, 12.1% Liberal Democrat, 13.4% Other, and 7.4% Conservative. This poll raises important questions regarding Oxford’s students’ political make-up. Are we in our own bubble here? Or is something else at play?

Firstly, there is the argument as to whether Oxford reflects nationwide political feeling, or whether it’s contained in its own political sphere. Compare the above-given statistics to those from a national poll on the 20th of October undertaken by Politico. In this instance, Labour leads at 45%, with the Conservatives behind at 27%, Other at 15%, and the LibDems at 11%.

What the view from Oxford’s poll makes clear is that Oxford leans far more heavily towards the Left. But even further than that, there must be more to this trend than the general tide of anti-Tory feeling which has been swelling up everywhere since at least the start of Partygate. The divergence that exists between Oxford University and the country at large may simply be down to the general rule that young people are left-wing. Though, of course, the data is completely at odds with the rest of the country’s perception that in Oxford ‘they’re all Tories’. This then raises a further question: What about divergences in public opinion within Oxford itself? The bubble within a bubble debate.

Everyone knows the College stereotypes. Oriel is so keen on Rishi that it really ought to be named Toriel; though a close second for that title is Corpus Christi, with its unironic campaigns for a ‘Conservative rep’ on the Equal Opportunities Committee in the past. If we look the other way, Wadham’s ultra-left-wing reputation is also renowned as they seek to nationalise, among other heavy industries, our kebab vans.

Though, as widespread as these stereotypes are, I’m not convinced. To explain why, I’ll outline my own experiences with college stereotypes. I am at Christ Church. When I tell anybody in Oxford that I go there, they tend to give me a look of disgust. This is probably because they’ve made the usual false assumptions about how, with its disproportionate intake of private school pupils, it is a hotbed for Toryism. Or perhaps it’s that once you get there, you can barely move an inch without treading on some clone of Jacob Rees-Mogg. But as a creature of Christ Church myself – and one who has ‘talked politics’ to a number of fellow creatures – I’ve quickly realised that nearly everyone who keeps up with politics is a Labour supporter. I have yet to meet any fans of Reform UK, the National Front, or the Official Monster Raving Loony Party. Of the three Conservatives I have met, one pleaded that he was hoping for a Labour win at the election, another refused to elaborate, and the third began singing the national anthem.

In other words, the whole stereotype is nonsense.

If you disagree with my experience, the next best step is probably to approach the problem logically. Think of the improbability that each college, with a fresh slate of applicants every year, perfectly replicates its political make-up. Is it really convincing to suggest that they would go to the lengths of , selecting just the right number of pupils from the required persuasion, and discarding the rest, who would be taken up in equally perfect proportions by the other colleges? It’s absurd; what’s more, everyone probably knows it’s absurd.

Now, having established that it’s nonsense I wonder why these stereotypes persist year after year? And where did they originate?

Well, the stereotypes persist year after year because they are as much a part of the Oxford tradition as boat-racing or matriculation. It may be wrong to judge someone by their background, but in Oxford, it would be even more wrong not to do so.

As for their origin, it probably varies on a college-to-college basis. If I wanted to use a get-out-of-answering-free card, I would say that these bubbles within bubbles are down to wheels within wheels: it’s complicated and affected by disguised or indirect influences.

By this reasoning, Somerville’s reputation for diehard Toryism is probably down to the fact that Thatcher went there. Likewise, St John’s notoriety for launching illegal wars in Iraq may have something to do with Tony Blair having attended in the 70s. But because the issue is much more complex than this, these colleges obviously did not gain this reputation. The absurdity demonstrated in these two instances might as well reflect the stupidity of the others.

Harmless nonsense, though, and nonsense that I personally would back to last as long as the myth of the greatest of all folk devils: ‘the Other Place’.

Angels in America Interview: “Incredibly Challenging”

By
Kiaya Phillips
-
alt= angels in america
Image courtesy of Happier Year Productions

Kiaya Phillips in conversation with Andrew Raynes (director) and Will Shackleton (who plays Louis) of Happier Year Productions’ version of Tony Kushner’s award-winning play, Angels in America: Part One, Milennium Approaches.

Kiaya: For people who have not heard of this play, can you summarize what it is about?

Andrew Raynes (Director): Angels in America is an ensemble drama set in America in the 1980s. It’s mostly in New York and it examines the political state of America, primarily in terms of the rise of conservatism and the AIDS crisis. It contextualises them in a Jewish mystical belief in a millennium and the Mormon belief in a second coming. The play puts it in a doomsday context so they are looking towards the millennium as the end of the world and it considers all of the factors in American politics and society at the time.

Will Shackelton (Louis): More broadly it’s about two couples, a straight Mormon couple where the wife is struggling with a valium addiction and the husband is having issues with his relationship; and a gay couple, one of whom gets diagnosed with AIDS. All four of their lives and stories blend, cross over, intertwine as they come to terms with their new problems and struggles in their relationships.

Kiaya: Why did you pick it?

A: I picked it because it’s a play I have liked for years, but it also felt relevant too and I wanted to do it this year for a variety of reasons. I think the things it discusses in terms of the rise of conservatism and political polarization feel very relevant now. It also discusses queer liberation and intersectional queer identity in a way that I think is getting lost in contemporary discourse around queer identity. I think we’re in the age of identity politics, and one of the ways in which you can understand Angels is by promoting empathy and understanding all groups of people. So, even though it’s an ensemble piece with lots of different people, everyone in the play has something in common. It teaches a really important lesson about understanding people around you, finding points of connection. The idea that everyone is suffering, no one is actually better than anyone else on a spiritual level, that felt really important to me, but also I wanted to do it this year as opposed to any other because the state of oxford drama was looking really good. I thought we would get a good cast for it.

Kiaya: When did you start working on it?

A: We started thinking about doing it in February when you have to put in bid for the playhouse, then we looked at previous work and decided on this play. We got our crew together and started doing auditions (which were all fantastic). It’s been a real pleasure to work on.

W: As an actor I chose to do it because all of the characters are incredibly challenging, there are six big roles, and they are all more hard than each other every time you look at the play. There’s no clear moral good and bad, every character is cast in shades of gray. It’s not didactic – as Andrew said – and there is no real protagonist in this part (Part One). It puts this situation and asks the audience to try and empathize with everyone and come away with their own wider thoughts.

Kiaya: Are you doing anything interesting with set, lighting and tech?

A: In terms of lighting, we just had our paper tech yesterday so it’s all very fresh, but Lucas, our lighting designer, is going to do some interesting things with shape and color and the way he is throwing abstract patterns around. Our set is based on the set designs of Derek Jarman who was a new queer cinema director, working on film and set in the 70s and 80s. It is inspired by him because we wanted to bring in a bit of British queer history into this play that is mainly about American queer history. Its abstract, its representative, its multifunctional. Hopefully all of the tech will interact to create a coherent semi abstract, semi-naturalistic landscape.

Kiaya: What type of atmosphere are you trying to create?

A: Various throughout the play, dependent on what the scene demands. We have some very small and intimate scenes and we have huge expansive scenes.

W: I think the overall effect is going to be awesome, in the literal sense. Grand scale ideas. The building and the mythic and fantastical elements are all larger than life.

A: One element of tech I am really excited about is that we have original music composed for us by Maddy who is doing a music masters here.

Kiaya: Are you taking inspiration from the famous National Theatre version or not? Is It more modern, or are you keeping it with the time?

A: While angels in America has a rich performance history this production I feel is very much ours: every single element of the production has grown organically, every element of acting and characterisation we have devised in rehearsals. We are making everything our own, the way that we want it to be. If people wanted to watch the National Theatre version they could go and do that. I think if you’re doing a play then it’s no good copying an old one. Partly because I think it’s important to make this newer and more relevant as the themes it discusses, particularly the AIDS crisis, are things that occupy such little space in our cultural memory. So I wanted to make people consider their connections with lost generations.

Kiaya: As a director and actor what were some challenging choices you had to make, these themes are rather poignant and perhaps hard to show. Was there a moment that challenged you? Did you have a set vision going in?

W: I have a unique challenge in the play in that my character Louis is emotionally unable to deal very much at all, and will begin to break down crying and needing the support from everyone around him the second things don’t go the way he envisioned. There are lots of scenes that are very emotionally charged. All of my scenes I do with only one other actor so it’s been really challenging and fun getting to do really tight detailed work where I try to connect with the other actor and try to make it flow as organically as possible. Of course because all the scenes are emotionally charged it’s been nice that the second the scene is over we all start laughing, we really made that divide clear. It’s also an intense play, the script asks the actors to do a lot with their bodies and put themselves in vulnerable positions. Navigating through those in a way that has been comfortable and still able to hide those emotional beats has been a fun process to go through.

A: All of the acting is very fresh and natural. It’s new every time I watch it. It’s better every time I watch it.

W: I’ve also had to learn how to play the viennese waltz! Me and Danny fell over each other to start with but now it’s looking quite beautiful. It brings a tear to my eye doing it.

A: Highlight of the show! You mentioned that there are difficult themes and distressing things happening. But it’s not like people are not dealing with that already. Certainly me and a lot of other people working on the show are dealing, in their day to day lives, with the things that come up in the script. There is a coming out scene that we ended up rehearsing the day after I came out to my family.

Kiaya: Does that feel cathartic?

A: It feels very cathartic. Rather than going to rehearsals and dreading it, we turn up and we process and deal with these difficult things that are happening around us all the time.

W: Although it’s an emotionally charged show, there is also a lot of light and humour. One of the ways the characters process these things is by laughing and enjoying and playing with one another.

A: There is a lot of light and hope in this play.

W: It’s not going to be a whole show of crying and sobbing —

A: — there will be a bit of that.

W: There is a lot of crying and sobbing. (But there is a very good hot dog sausage joke to look out for!)

Kiaya: In a sentence, why do you want people to come and see your show?

W: I’ll give you nine reasons: Danny, Grace, Aravind, Manny, Essence, Nic, Vicky, Maya, Phoenix —

A: — and I’ll give you the tenth reason, Will.

W: All nine of my costars are putting in immense performances. They will have you captivated in the destruction from the very first minute to the very end of the show.

A: I don’t think I can say it better.

Kiaya: Finally, what’s the best quote from the show?

Andrew and Will: “The great work begins!”

Angels in America: Part One, Milennium Approaches is showing at the Oxford Playhouse from the 1st to 4th November. 7:30pm every evening except an 8pm Friday show, with matinees at 2:30pm.

Oxford researchers develop AI tool that can help predict viral outbreaks

By
Victor Cheung
-

In a groundbreaking study published in Nature, researchers at Oxford and Harvard have unveiled EVEscape, a state-of-the-art AI tool designed to predict the emergence of new viral variants. The study highlights the tool’s ability to anticipate variants solely from the data available at the start of an outbreak, aiding in preventative measures and vaccine design.

EVEscape combines a deep-learning model with a comprehensive collection of viral sequences. This synergy empowers the tool to forecast which viral variants are most likely to evolve, providing invaluable insights for vaccine and therapeutics developers.

The study’s co-lead author and DPhil student at Oxford, Pascal Notin, emphasized the value of EVEscape in pandemic tracking and vaccine development: “Our study shows that had EVEscape been deployed at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, it would have accurately predicted the most frequent mutations and the most concerning variants for SARS-CoV-2.”

Researchers also tested EVEscape’s versatility by feeding it data to predict mutations across various viruses. EVEscape successfully forecasted the mutations for viruses including influenza, HIV, and pandemic-potential viruses like Lassa and Nipah.

From Oxford’s Applied and Theoretical Machine Learning group, Associate Professor Yarin Gal shed light on what set EVEscape apart from its previous iterations: “We developed new AI methods that do not have to wait for relevant antibodies to arise in the population.”

The origins of EVEscape can be traced back to its predecessor, EVE (Evolutionary Model of Variant Effect). Initially designed to predict genetic mutations on non-contagious diseases such as cancer and heart diseases, EVE had already proven its mettle. However, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic galvanized efforts to leverage its potential for predicting viral variants.

For now, the researchers are monitoring COVID virus strains in real-time with EVEscape, providing biweekly updates on new variants and sharing their data with global entities like the World Health Organization (WHO). The complete code for EVEscape is publically available online.

With the potential to aid in designing resilient vaccines and treatments, EVEscape may soon play a vital role in predicting and mitigating the effects of both well-known viruses and lesser-known, yet potentially devastating ones.

Oxford report reveals enduring inequalities underlying maternal mortality

By
Anika Gupta
-
Maternal
Image credit: Freestocks via Unsplash

Oxford’s scientists from the Population Health’s National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, in collaboration with MBRRACE-UK, have published a report which helps identify improvements needed in the maternity sector. 

The study, Saving Lives, Improving Mothers’ Care report, comprehensively outlines the number of expecting women who died during, or up to a year after, pregnancy between 2019 – 2021. The report is unique in terms of covering the period of time in which the Delta variant of COVID-19 was most wide-spread and could have had an effect on maternal deaths.

The report carefully analyses and evaluates the care received by the women who died, and simultaneously suggests solutions to prevent deaths in the future. The data also draws attention to the underlying fact that disparities in maternal health currently endure.

The report highlighted racial factors, indicating that in the peak COVID-19 period (2019 – 2021) women from Black ethnic background were four times as likely as White women to die during or up to six weeks after their pregnancy. Additionally, compared to their White counterparts, women from Asian ethnic backgrounds were subjected to an almost two-fold increase in the rate of maternal deaths.

Data from the report has also revealed the impact of economic factors. Indeed, women living in the most deprived areas of the UK were twice as likely to die in comparison to women living in the least deprived regions. Further, 40% of maternal deaths can be associated with mental health related causes with maternal suicide remaining the main cause of direct deaths between in the period.

In addition, 12% of women who died during pregnancy, or up to a year after, were at several of multiple disadvantages. The report shed light on the concern that maternal healthcare staff were often expected to care for women with multiple vulnerabilities or complex medical conditions without proper training, which meant that specific care needs were not met. 

Between 2019 – 2021, the leading cause of maternal deaths, in excess of any other cause, was the COVID-19 virus. Vaccine hesitancy, confused and uncertain medical messaging on risks, coupled with being denied access to basic treatment for COVID – 19 were likely contributors to mortality figures.

Women were often uninformed when making choices regarding medication and care. In order to ensure better maternal care, the report’s key recommendations include that pregnant women must be included in medical and vaccine research, the need for tailored postnatal care and access to training resources in order to promote collaborative decision making on medication use during and after pregnancy.

Professor of Maternal and Child Population Health at Oxford Population Health, and maternal reporting lead, Marian Knight MBE, said: “This report shows persistent inequities impacting the care of pregnant, recently pregnant and breastfeeding women. Improvements in care may have been able to change the outcome for 52% of the women who died during or up to a year after pregnancy. This demonstrates an even greater need to focus on the implementation of the recommendations within this report to achieve a reduction in maternal deaths.”

Fallen Angels? Investigating Victoria’s Secret’s redemption arc

By
Ellen Rowlands
-
alt= victoria's secret
Image Credits: by Paul John Bayfield, via. Flickr, CC BY 2.0

Simultaneously iconic for its glorious displays and notorious for the impossible beauty standards it perpetuates, the Victoria Secret Fashion show was a cultural staple of the fashion world. From The Weeknd and Bella Hadid’s tense mid-runway reconciliation in 2016 to Gisele Bundchen in a $15 million jewel encrusted bra, it seemed the phantasmic allure and sex appeal of Victoria’s Secret held no limits. The first live streaming of the show in 2001 garnered over 1.5 million viewers and crashed the website. And at the centre of it all were the brands’ “Angels”, a heavenly set of models – all, of course, tall, tanned and toned – flaunting the latest designs and topped off with a set of wings.

However, facing a global closure of 250 stores and a 33% decrease in sales in
recent years, the lingerie house has since been forced to undergo a major rebrand,
cancelling their runway show and shifting their marketing to focus on promoting inclusivity and diversity. The crumbling of a once megalithic pillar of both fashion and pop culture begs the question: why did the Angels suddenly fall from grace?

Originally founded in 1977, Victoria’s Secret began as an outlet for men to purchase
lingerie in a more ‘comfortably masculine’ environment. From the 1990s onwards,
however, the pivoted from its boudoir-esque roots toward captivating an audience of
young women with its annual fashion show. The hook of Victoria’s Secret lay not in
their affordable, trendy lingerie, but in the myth building around these products. The
glitz, glamour and association with A-list faces that encircled the brand’s models
continued to draw in a younger audience. And even though it was no longer men
doing the fantasising, the heavenly image had not changed. The illusion that by
buying into the brand would somehow magically transform a customer into an Angel
propelled the brand to stardom. To millions, the Victoria’s Secret Angel epitomised
an impossible level of sensual, feminine beauty. And even as other lingerie brands
seemingly left behind Y2k’s body standards to reflect their audience’s growing desire
for inclusivity – Fenty x Savage, for example, saw queer, trans, and non-binary
models grace its first catwalk – Victoria’s Secret still seemed reluctant to expand its
tightly curated image. In a 2018 Vogue interview, Chief Marketing Officer Ed Razek
justified his aversion to body diversity by describing the show – which was cancelled
that same year – as ‘a fantasy…a 42-minute entertainment special”.

After a 5-year hiatus, the Victoria’s Secret fashion show has returned to our screens in a manner of speaking. Self-described as ‘part documentary, part fashion fantasy’, the new show premiered on Prime video earlier this month under the name “The Tour
23”. In the process of carving out a sleeker, more Gen-Z adjacent brand, elements
needed to be shaken off; there is a clear feeling that the essence of the original show
has been receded into a hazy, hyperfeminine dream. Instead of sporting the newest
designs, Gigi Hadid hosts a spotlight focusing on global independent designers
creating looks about what it means to be a woman in an ‘imperfect’ body.

Not only was the traditional format dropped, but the title “Angels” has been swapped
out for “VS Collective”. Self-consciously bridging the gap between old and new,
original Angel Naomi Campbell walked alongside Winnie Harlow, drag superstar
Honey Dijon and all-American soccer icon Megan Rapinoe. And while the
supermodels might not have graced the runway in wings, the show retained some of
its previous luxe allure with A-List faces on the carpet and a performance from
Rapper Doechii. This balancing act between retention and evolution makes it clear
Victoria’s Secret is being built anew- at least at surface level. Clearly, marketing has
realised the need to keep up with the “unbridled inclusivity” that Business Insider
described as Savage x Fenty’s USP. But it’s difficult to shake off a controversial past,
particularly when any success remains in part indebted to the lingering shadow of its
high-kitsch beginnings. And, during this rebranding saga, another- more problematic question:

if the brand’s original allure was premised on an unattainable vision, what
marks it out from the competition now? If the show now offers us a reality over
fantasy, will the audience be willing to buy in? Only time will tell if their revamping
successfully walks the tightrope between maintaining its allure whilst also moving
towards inclusivity.

Oxford Council’s Local Plan acknowledges housing shortfall

By
Bea Keady
-
Image credit: Stephen McKay / CC BY-SA 2.0 DEED

Oxford City Council approved the first draft of the Local Plan 2040 on 18 October, acknowledging that they can’t meet the housing demand of the next 17 years. The plan aims to tackle the climate crisis, build more affordable homes, and “make Oxford’s economy work for all residents”.

Following the Council’s approval, the Local Plan will go to public consultation between November and January, after which a final draft will be prepared for public inspection. The Local Plan could be adopted in the summer of 2025, making it the legal document that governs decision-making on all planning and development applications in Oxford, replacing the existing Oxford Local Plan 2036.

Investigations for the Plan identified a need for 26,400 homes in Oxford before 2040. However, the Plan only identifies 9,612 available sites for new homes within the city’s boundaries.

Oxford City Council has asked neighbouring districts to accommodate more than 2,500 of these homes, on top of the 14,300 homes that the districts have already agreed to.

The Local Plan includes new approaches to tackling housing issues in Oxford, including allowing homes to be built on all types of employment sites for the first time and continuing to limit student accommodation to the city centre, district centres (including Cowley Road, Summertown, and Headington) and land adjacent to existing University campuses.

This decision to ask neighbouring districts to take on thousands of extra homes has been criticised by local MPs including Layla Moran, who commented: “Oxford City Council repeatedly decides to use sites in the city for retail and employment rather than housing, and then claims that it can’t deliver the housing the city so desperately needs.”

This is not the first cross-council issue over housing that arose in the drafting stage. The Plan was initially expected to accompany the Oxfordshire Plan 2050 but councils across Oxfordshire were unable to agree on how many houses would be built and where in the county.

Additionally, the Local Plan 2040 only allocates 40% of developments over 10 properties as affordable housing, compared to the 50% it previously set in Local Plan 2036. 

The City Council’s Website states that this is because “residential use now has a lower land value than offices and lab space … Therefore, without this change it is very likely that developers would choose not to use land for housebuilding and there would be fewer affordable homes built in the future.”

The Plan also hopes to balance these housing goals with the council’s climate goals including requiring all new homes and businesses to be Carbon Zero by 2030.

Local Plan 2040 is the result of years of investigations as well as input from the local community with 1,730 Oxford residents’ and organisations’ comments having been considered as part of this draft.

1...697071...2,438Page 70 of 2,438

Explore

Follow us

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2024 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy