Wednesday 29th April 2026
Blog Page 712

The rise of lo-fi

0

Unprofessional, unsophisticated, and unpolished. No, it’s not my most recent essay feedback, but instead three words used to describe lo-fi music on its Wikipedia page. Lo-fi music is a genre which incorporates imperfections from the production and recording processes into the final piece. It’s asserted itself in various genres over the years, including indie, hip-hop, and more recently house. But why do artists like DJ Seinfeld, XXXtentacion, and blu choose to include these imperfections in their works, and more importantly why do we listen to them?

Part of the reason seems to lie in individuals’ affinity for certain ages of the past. The ‘mistakes’ in lo-fi music are reminiscent of a time when recording equipment was fallible and produced an imperfect sound. Embedding oneself within the past is an appealing way of dealing with anxieties of the present. It’s easy to look back nostalgically to a time we never actually experienced and filter out any of the epoch’s negatives, instead focusing on its aesthetic beauty, or social authenticity. This coping mechanism is also evident in the way the record player has reemerged as a popular way to listen to music, or imitation of the 80s/90s fashion sense. Lo-fi music plays a part in this culture of creating a possibility for the past within the present, particularly when one considers that many use music as a form of escapism. What better way to escape from the present than to pretend, just temporarily, that it doesn’t exist at all.

Above all, lo-fi’s popularity seems to stem from the way it adopts our own flaws and becomes harmonious with the anxieties and concerns we have about ourselves and our abilities. Lo-fi music embeds itself within the materiality of the music industry through its imperfections. It serves as a reminder of the equipment used to record it, and lets this material culture become a part of the genre. Humans’ fundamentally self-conscious and anxious state has intensified with the rise of social media, where airbrushing, filters, and selectively posting all provide an image of others’ lives which is quite dislocated from reality. High quality music can point to these insecurities, and attempt to convince us of the producer’s struggle with them. The Script can try and convince us they’ve felt what we’ve felt in a break-up, Kanye West can claim he’s experienced the same frustrations about friendship, and Adele that we truly will find someone like you. But it’s only lo-fi music that allows us to fully engage with a song’s meaning, as it stoops to our own levels of imperfection. The genre recognises our worries and recreates them on a meta-musical level, deepening the connection between listener and producer beyond just a surface level acknowledgment of each other’s insecurities.

It seems contradictory that anyone would enjoy listening to a genre which is defined by its imperfections, yet we do. We do because we too are imperfect. The perfect art form is quite alienating and intimidating, it doesn’t and can’t really feel particularly relevant to us. It’s a different spec, a different breed. The lo-fi genre accepts human’s fundamentally flawed nature by presenting itself as a material product of human fallibility. It’s a genre which we don’t just have to listen to, but can participate in.

Oxford SU backs PPH inclusion in College Contribution Scheme

0

Oxford SU have voted unanimously this
week to support the inclusion of Private Permanent Halls in the College Contribution Scheme. Regent’s Park JCR President William Robinson proposed the motion, and Mansfield College JCR President Saba Shakil
seconded it.

During the meeting, Robinson told the council, “I don’t know how you could possibly justify excluding literally the poorest institutions and poorest student bodies in Oxford.

“Essentially, this motion seeks in some small way to get the discussion going on why PPHs are not included in the college contribution scheme, and I hope to mandate the Student Union to push for the inclusion of PPHs in the next College Contribution Scheme.”

Private halls of study founded by Christian denominations have existed in Oxford since 1221, and in 1918, a University statute permitted non-profit private halls to gain permanent status. PPHs tend to be smaller than colleges and offer fewer courses, and although they are independently run, their students are full members of the University.

The CCS requires colleges with taxable assets exceeding £45 million to give to a fund from which poorer colleges can apply to receive grants. Cherwell previously reported that Christ Church, St John’s, and All Soul’s provided 38% of all contributions in 2016/17.

Currently, PPHs are not included in the CCS despite having fewer assets than any colleges. Documents obtained from the UK Charity Commission indicate that St Stephen’s House has the highest endowment of a PPH, with £17,829,000 in 2017. St Benet’s Hall has the least at £146,000. In comparison, the total assets of Harris Manchester— the poorest college — are 24,797,000.

The Council motion mandated that the SU President write to the Chair of Conference of Colleges on behalf of PPHs and poorer colleges to “see the benefits of a new College Contribution Scheme.”

It also encouraged JCR and MCR Presidents to lobby heads of houses for their inclusion.
Members of the audience voiced concerns during the question period about whether the motion would increase the amount that wealthier colleges would have to pay under the CCS.

Robinson replied, “The only change that I want to enact at this point is including PPHs, which may mean yes [there will be] potentially less money available for other poorer colleges in the pot. But this motion does not
ask for more money from the rich colleges.”

The motion passed without opposition.

Robinson told Cherwell in an interview after the meeting: “I’m very happy that the SU passed this motion. I think it’s going to be able to achieve good things for PPHs and go some of the way to addressing the fundamental problem that PPHs don’t get proper representation or any kind of decision-making capability at the highest level of central University governance. With the SU behind us, it’s a small step towards making the changes we can
at this moment.”

While expressing his pleasure with the vote’s outcome, Robinson is aware of the major challenges PPHs still face to receive a cut from the CCS. He added: “Getting PPHs involved in the College Contribution Scheme involves a bit of turkeys voting for Christmas. If we are included, the poorest colleges who currently have access to the fund that’s created by the tax on the richer colleges will have less money to apply for, because we will hopefully be taking a good proportion of it.

“That’s the biggest problem: It’s getting heads of houses to vote on something that fundamentally doesn’t benefit them or their student bodies but is something that is good for the wider university in ensuring that the student experience is positive at all colleges and PPHs.”

Chair of the Conference of Colleges, Rick Trainor, told Cherwell that: “a new College Contribution Scheme, if it is enacted, will be a scheme approved by, and administered under the auspices of the University; the Conference of Colleges is still debating proposals for the University’s consideration.

“For these reasons it would be inappropriate for Conference to make any comment on the issues.”

SU President, Joe Inwood, said on the issue, “Students are increasingly dissatisfied with the inconsistencies between colleges in provision for key aspects of the student experience.

“From college counsellors to travel grants, conference funds for graduate
students to sports funding, there is clearly wide variation at present between the richest and poorest colleges.

“Head of colleges need to pay attention to these concerns when a future College Contribution Scheme is discussed at governing bodies, and I encourage JCR and MCR Presidents to engage in this issues.”

MEP writes to University Vice-Chancellor after being disinvited by Polish Society

0


Lib Dem MEP Catherine Bearder has written to the University Vice-Chancellor after being ‘uninvited’ from a panel debate at the Congress of Polish Student Societies, which took place last weekend.

In the letter, seen by Cherwell, Bearder wrote: “I am sure you are aware that the Equality and Human Rights Commission recently released new guidance on defending free speech in universities and ensuring campuses remain a forum for open debate.

“I hope you are able to speak to the Congress of Polish Students organisers and the Oxford University Polish student society about the debate and explain to them that they must adhere to this guidance for future Congresses.”

Bearder was originally invited to debate the pro-Brexit Conservative MP Daniel Kawczynski on the impacts of Brexit on European countries on a panel called “Poland and Brexit – Friends or Foes”.

Bearder’s invitation to the conference was withdrawn on Friday after she tweeted: “I’m debating Daniel Kawczynski MP in Oxford this Saturday in front of Polish university students studying in the UK. When I say debating, I mean trying to put the little unicorns Daniel lets free every now and then back in their stables.”

The Congress, which happens annually, is a 2-day event aiming to debate issues relevant to Polish students in the UK, provide networking opportunities for Polish students and workshops with Polish young professionals to provide career opportunities. It attracts over 400 members of Polish student societies across the UK.

Oxford University Polish Society invited Stefan Kasprzyk, a Liberal Democrat who supported Remain, to replace Bearder.

The University Polish Society explained their decision, saying: “We decided to invite Mr Stefan Kasprzyk instead of Mrs Catherine Bearder to our discussion panel collectively, as the Conference’s organising committee. An online exchange, primarily concerned with issues irrelevant to the Polish student community in the UK, caused concerns that the panel debate would not be focused on the topic of Brexit in the Polish context, but instead it would be overshadowed by issues specific to internal British political controversies.”

In her letter to the Vice-Chancellor, Bearder continued: “I find it totally unacceptable that a debate held on University premises called the “Brexit debate” with two opposing viewpoints on the issue would deem it appropriate to drop a participant because of “negative attention towards a tweet.” Oxford University has a proud and world renowned tradition of free speech and should not accept this kind of behaviour, which looks like censorship on campus, lightly.”

“What was really shocking, though, is that when Polish journalist Jakub Krupa asked why I was uninvited, the organisers said that I “pulled out”.

Oxford University Polish Society said: “Firstly, we would like to apologise to Mrs Catherine Bearder and all concerned for the timing and manner in which we communicated the change of arrangements, and for any upset caused. We aim to hold ourselves to a high professional standard, which we failed to meet in the way the change was conducted.

“However, we strongly deny the charges of stifling free speech, let alone censorship. We are deeply committed to free speech and consider it to be an important part of our identity as a student body. In organising the conference, we are doing our utmost to ensure that the conditions for free debate are ensured and that a range of views are duly represented. We therefore invited Mr Stefan Kasprzyk, a Liberal Democrat and a vocal supporter of the Remain campaign, to represent views that are opposed to Mr Kawczynski’s. We therefore consider charges in that matter to be unfounded.

As a team responsible for continuing the 12 years of tradition of social activity of the Polish students’ diaspora in the United Kingdom, we would like to apologise. We hope that this unfortunate event will not overshadow the importance of debates held at the 12th Congress, focused on the role of Polish students and their organisations in British civil society.

“We have also reached out to apologise to Mrs Catherine Bearder personally.”

A University spokesperson said: “The University played no role in this decision. The University is strongly committed to freedom of speech and we encourage our students to debate and engage with a range of views.”

Restaurant Review: La Cucina

0

You could describe walking into La Cucina as a temporally transportive experience away to a cosy, rustic, ocean-washed ‘ristorante,’ not out of place among the sandy cobbles and sun-dried walls of an Italian fishing village. Anyway, that is how one of my friends jokingly described the setting as we sat waiting for our meal, and while such words probably reveal more about English students than the restaurant itself, there are certainly glimmers of truth in her words. 

Perhaps the first thing one notices about the restaurant is the wonderful sense of openness. Whether it is the dangling display of chillies and garlic that hang from the ceiling above the kitchen, or the carefully arranged bowls of tomatoes, peppers and aubergines spread out across the worktop, the visual frankness of the layout is immediately impressive. Seated next to an assortment of pasta packets, herb jars and innumerable wine bottles, the general impression was that ingredients could be picked out from the wall behind you and cooked up before your eyes. Indeed, the open-plan kitchen offers the delightful satisfaction of being able to both watch and smell your food being prepared, as well as the chance to chat to the chefs as they transform colourless malleable dough into mouth-wateringly delicious pizzas.

Coming to the food itself, it is not an exaggeration to say that I had one of the best pizzas I’ve eaten in a long time. Ordering the ‘Calzone pizza Vesuvio,’ I was intrigued by the presence of the words calzone and pizza in the same dish, and was curious to see whether it could live up to its volcanic name. Luckily my hopes were not misplaced, with the first slice into the calzone resulting in an eruption of creamy cheese, the sweetness of which was perfectly balanced by the fiery spices of the chilli and sausage within the bread. Other popular dishes were the ‘Pizza alle verdure,’ a tasty option for vegetarians, those with dairy intolerance, and fans of chopped aubergine, as well as the ‘Pizza de Frutti di Mare,’ for seafood loves. The only complaint that any of us could have related to our inability to finish the gigantic portion sizes. On top of this, the fact that all six of us at the table ordered some kind of pizza says something about the stand-out quality of their oven-baked speciality. 

When it came to dessert, the profiteroles were absolutely delicious, and the chocolate sauce they were drizzled in added just enough liquor to delicately contrast with the rich plumpness of the chou à la crème. I was also told that the ‘Torta di ricotta’ was another stand out, with another complimentary balancing of flavours, this time Italian cheese cake with candied grapefruit. When the bill arrived, everyone was satisfied with the reasonable price, and was more than a little bloated as we began our walk back to college. Perhaps on the logistics side La Cucina could up their game, however: blunt knives were provided to cut through the thick pizza bases, and a rather rickety table shook whenever anyone cut into their meal too vigorously. Nevertheless, to the credit of the staff, the table-leg was eventually rectified by one waiter’s innovative use of some folded paper order slips. As well as this, we were constantly looked after by the staff, with little details, such as offering breadsticks at the start of the meal and consistently replacing our empty water jug, exemplifying a brilliant level of care and attention for their customers. 

All in all, La Cucina offers a charming wealth of Mediterranean food into the rain-swept streets of Oxford, and while they can’t do anything to change our city’s weather, they can offer a brilliant taste of the Italian coast.  

A special place in hell?

0

Making the headlines last week was the unprecedented and frankly outrageous news that a certain politician has offended certain other politicians.

I am referring, of course (what else would it be?), to the news that Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, made a remark that those who advocated Brexit without a proper plan have a ‘special place in hell’.

By ‘plan’ he was largely inferring to the Tory Party’s chaos of opinion on the Northern Irish backstop.

Naturally, the victims of this malicious attack responded maturely, evidently disappointed that politics had descended to such name-calling and insulting.

Andrea Leadsom called Tusk ‘disgraceful’ and ‘spiteful’, former UKIP leader Nigel Farage labelled him an ‘unelected, arrogant bully’ while the DUP’s Brexit spokesman Sammy Wilson chose the rather quirky ‘devilish Euro-maniac’.

We should be so proud to have these good people in British politics and not the childish bureaucrats of the European Union!

The point is, insults such as these are thrown around all the time in the world of politics. Imagine if we swapped one Donald for another, and reported every insult that the President of the United States crammed into 280 characters?

Rhetoric is used to convince, and, as all public speakers will know, the more shocking and memorable, the more effective.

The late Liberal Democrat Lord Paddy Ashdown was famously reminded of the danger of this in 2015, when he said he would ‘eat his hat’ if his party lost the dozens of seats that the exit poll predicted. Tusk is doing nothing new, yet he faces enormous backlash.

This is because when a right-wing, anti-establishment figure uses this kind of language, no one bats an eyelid, yet when a centrist, establishment politician such as Tusk descends to the same level, it is a scandal. Tusk can’t win.

He is, in the eyes of the Brexit campaigners, a crooked enslaver of the British people disguised as your average establishment politician; don’t be fooled, beneath the receding hairline, plans for world domination are being hatched!

Yet, when he slips and resorts to the level of certain Brexiteers such as Nigel Farage, he is labelled as arrogant, divisive, and despotic. If Boris Johnson had said such a thing, he would be hailed by the right-wing media for speaking the truth. Donald Tusk using the very same language used by so many Brexiteers paradoxically ‘proves exactly why we should leave the EU’, according to Jacob Rees-Mogg in an article for The Sun. In other words; its only okay when we do it, Donald!

In the midst of all of this, Downing Street thought it time to weigh in on the drama, stating that Tusk’s remarks are ‘not helpful and have caused widespread dismay’.

The problem Theresa May faces is that the European Union is interested in securing the safety and prosperity of both Northern Ireland and the Republic. The Prime Minister, on the other hand, doesn’t really care what happens, as long as it can get through parliament.

In fact, this attitude forms the current nucleus of her rhetoric – my deal or no deal. Her entire game plan is built on bringing the whole country as close to the chaos and uncertainty of no deal as she can, so that MPs might decide to choose her deal as the marginally lesser of two evils.

But is this not a complete failure of democracy? May sees leaving the EU as an end in itself – once we’re out, then she has delivered on the ‘will of the people’. But this is completely twisted. MPs first responsibility is to work in the interest of the people; this is the principle representative government is founded on. ‘My deal or no deal’ is a threat – vote it through, or the country will suffer.

She may deliver Brexit, but nothing like the one people asked for, the one leave-vot- ers thought would make their lives better.

So, yes, for our master pragmatist Prime Minister, Donald Tusk’s deep concerns about the Irish border aren’t helpful.

He is being divisive and dogmatic, whereas May is the one calling for unity. But this unity has the sinister implication that MPs should abandon their own convictions about what is best for their country, that they should cease to represent those that voted them in.

That’s not to say division should always be welcomed with open arms, but instead that Brexit is simply too crucial to legitimately adopt such an ‘anything goes’ attitude.

Sure, Tusk’s remark is hostile, and inflammatory, but perhaps that’s what’s needed in order for hard-line Brexiteers to understand the grave potential for dangers facing Northern Ireland after leaving the European Union.

The backstop is an insurance policy, so that if the negotiations are not sorted out in the two-year transition period after March 29th, there won’t be a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. Given that the removal of security and checks at the border was a cornerstone of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, the Brexiteers who wantrid of it put peace between the Republic and Northern Ireland at risk.

This was barely even considered by the Leave campaign in the 2016 referendum, an ambivalence that has only strengthened as the ERG and others are willing to put the two decades of stability between the two countries on the line to achieve their deluded and damaging vision of Brexit.

So I don’t blame Donald Tusk for saying they deserve a special place in hell; it could be hell that is unleashed if they get their way.

Review: Waiting for Gary – ‘surpasses the Beckettian classic’

0

When I first saw the play’s evocative title, I was immediately reminded of Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot. However, Agnes Pethers’ finely calibrated production proved to be a pleasant surprise, as in certain ways, it surpasses the Beckettian classic.

The premise of Waiting for Gary is a simple one. Two adults in a NHS maternity ward. Three chairs. The Financial Times. And magic.

None of the surreal apocalyptic setting of Godot, nor the absurd slapstick, were needed. What we have instead is a universal humour that focuses on the simplicity of our everyday lives and the inherent funniness within.

Yet Waiting for Gary is not played only for laughs; it is entertaining because of the emotional truth underlying the humour. “Comedy is a powerful tool for discussing social issues,” explained Katie Sayer, the writer and President of the Oxford Revue: “once you’ve made an audience laugh, you can use comedy to disguise some quite serious points.”

Indeed, as the play moves fluidly between motifs such as pornography, parenthood, unplanned pregnancies and pooing during labour, the audience were confronted by shocking and often unheard truths, through the lens of our two main actors: Dorothy McDowell as Anya, and Tom Fisher as Chris. The two have been divorced for eighteen years but are finally reunited outside the maternity ward, waiting for Gary, their grandson.

Framed in the luminous white light of an intimate stage, the actors are constantly called to perform in a fantastic display of nervous energy. Anya, characterised by her sarcasm and incisive discourse, has a commanding presence on stage. The way she engages and interacts with the audience and the way she paces back and forth maintain a razor-sharp tension in her performance. I found it especially entertaining to witness her throwing Chris’s words back at him verbatim in her many passionate outbursts, much to the latter’s dumbstruck dismay. As the play progresses, it is heartwarming to see her attitude to her ex-husband changing from icy coldness to gradual reconciliation. Her position on stage reflects this fact, as she begins to sit next to Chris and even teasingly bumps his arm.

At times exasperated, at times tender, Chris has a certain Chaplinesque air about him. Not only does he farcically spark their interaction by reading a porn magazine under the Financial Times, but he is also the source of many blissfully funny moments throughout. Nervously crossing and uncrossing his legs, running his hand desperately through his hair, but also peeping at Anya when he thinks she is not looking, he was particularly masterful with his body language — in his character, the unspoken enjoys as much importance as the spoken lines.

At this point, I would like to give a honourable mention to the third most important ‘character’ — the Financial Times. Once a barrier and camouflage for the pair to hide behind in their awkwardness, one of the most iconic scenes in the play involves them repeatedly raising and lowering their newspapers, almost like a shield. However, as they warm to and reconcile with each other, the newspaper then duly served its purpose, and is left tattered on the seat.

Unlike Godot, Gary finally arrives after nearly an hour of tension and hilarity, and with him, the ending of the play. There is something satisfactory about its ending: unlike the numbing no show of Godot, the audience can join together in the celebration of new life. Both for Gary and our stars, Anya and Chris.

Urban Decay

0

The banner of ‘l’art pour l’art’ has been criticised for providing a shelter for the obscene and grotesque. Taking root from the French artistic movement championed by Baudelaire and Huysmans, the aesthetes’ emphasis on the pursuit of beauty went so far as to guide not just their views on the arts, but on life and pleasure generally, leading to the association of the movement with indulgence and excess.

There can be a beautiful chaos in decay, and the turn of the century saw a new generational anxiety encroaching around degeneration and mass upheaval. From the 1880s, French fin-de-siècle literature and the height of the Decadence movement would come to fruition around this pessimism, but it was pre-empted by Charles Baudelaire in the mid-19th century.

His 1857 Les Fleurs du Mal was a foundational text in bringing motifs of decay in line with delight – his ‘Spleen et Idéal’ examined the corrupted state of society and the boredom he associated with modern life. Baudelaire was fascinated by the contrast of the ephemeral and the eternal, founding his conception of modernity which he would later classify as “the transitory, the fugitive, the contingent”. Throughout the collection, his struggle with Catholicism is obvious and perhaps explains part of his draw towards sin. He describes how his soul delights in the fires of Hell in Horror Sympathique (Harmony of Horror), while in Destruction he laments how toy-like he feels at the hands of a demon. Whether this is literal or personal is never made clear, although we can assume the latter; this haunting seems to engender a separation from God and a feeling of spiritual isolation.

Despite its later publication date, French writer Joris-Karl Huysmans’ 1884 À Rebours (Against Nature) is equally seminal in the study of decadence and is best known for its profound influence on Oscar Wilde, specifically credited for being the poisonous volume which brings so much devastation in The Picture of Dorian Gray. Huysmans’ antihero, Des Esseintes, praises Baudelaire for having “shown the increasing decay of impressions while the enthusiasms and beliefs of youth are enfeebled”, leaving only “miseries borne, intolerances endured and affront suffered”. It’s evident that Baudelaire’s theories of ennui and the spleen permeated culture and birthed a generation of literature examining urban boredom, morbid curiosity and absolute amorality.

It seems paradoxical that Decadence would associate decay with growing urbanisation, and yet, across all such literature there is a tortured sense of anonymity and listlessness within a crowded metropolis. Baudelaire opens Le Cygne (The Swan) by pairing the metropolitan Paris with the classical exile of Andromache, and yet insists that this is a fertile breeding ground for creative inspiration and memory.

Huysmans’ Des Esseintes also portrays the desire for seclusion within the Parisian hordes, needing to be in the capital to confirm this solitude. Wilde follows this bridging theme of decadent literature in The Picture of Dorian Gray, juxtaposing the self-imposed loneliness of the portrait and the real-life Dorian’s anguished secrecy with the glittering social engagements he increasingly resents.This contrast between reality and artifice is usually associated with Gothic convention, but its prominence across the Decadent should not be underestimated.

However, the metropolis is more than just the culmination of creative exile in bustling society; the urban capital is presented as a place rife with opportunity for observing degeneration, making it the perfect seat of aesthete values and decadent living. For Baudelaire, Paris provided a place to ruminate upon the transitioning landscape and social decline he saw before him, and his famous Tableaux Parisiens are noted for their general absence of city-dwellers, and the later poems Les Aveugles (The Blind) and Les Sept Vieillards (Seven Old Men) are notable for their cruel apathy towards suffering. For Huysmans and Wilde alike, the crowded town provides a cover for hedonistic exploits and the pinnacle of decadent living for the upper classes – Huysmans is detailed in his listing of Parisian boudoirs and excess, while Wilde depicts the seedy underworld of the East End as the centre of vice and degeneration.

As doctor Max Nordau famously wrote of Wilde, the decadence movement was implicitly infatuated with “immorality, sin and crime”. There was something fascinating about social decay, and the complete abstraction of beauty from morality, context or critical analysis. A direct derivative from the Greek word for ‘pleasure’, hedonism is invariably tied up in decadence, but divorces indulgence from the degeneration decadence views as inevitable.

Lord Henry in The Picture of Dorian Gray is Wilde’s main mouthpiece for aesthete philosophising, and his separation of art from action as “superbly sterile” is symptomatic of Decadence. The aesthetes sought beauty in artistic expression completely liberated by traditional or contemporary standards, seeing social or political motivations as mediocre and distracting.

This led to decadent literature being seen as perverse, however, Baudelaire’s impassioned verse and the libertine living of Huysmans and Wilde’s heroes are proponents of the amorality of the genre, and all of these three champions of Decadence transgress – and offended – contemporary sensitivities. Huysmans’ Des Esseintes seeks the height of beauty at the expense of compassion in bejewelling a tortoise, describing the creature’s death in such emotionless detail in stark contrast to paragraphs of listing exotic jewels in grandiose luxury. Subjugating the living to the quest for pleasure is comparable to Baudelaire’s intertwining of Debauchery and Death as two good sisters of ‘terrible pleasures’, and Wilde’s tragedy of inevitable death and moral decay is equally intertwined with pleasure.

Though any study of decadence should be considered in the light of its indifference to morality and contemporary standards, the predilection of its literature to morbidity and depravity led to issues of censure, with Baudelaire being condemned “an insult to publicmorals”, fined, and the publication of Fleurs du Mal restricted. The Picture of Dorian Gray was similarly criticised for distorting Victorian standards, and the homoeroticism was obscured in a revised edition.

Though ultimately the French movement failed to sustain itself after the eclipse of its founders, the impact of the Decadence era was felt across Europe and was significant in encouraging the subversion of moral standards. While its ideals were increasingly distorted, betraying that earlier abstraction from reality through application of the decadents’ ideas to social and political exploits, figures such as Wilde still managed to emphasise pleasure above all else.

“Beauty, real Beauty ends where an intellectual expression begins”, claims Lord Henry in Wilde’s Dorian Gray – perhaps we should also appreciate the irony of criticising or reading too far into a movement solely based on sensuous delight.

University offers no deal Brexit advice for EU students

0

The University has released advice for EU staff and students in preparation for a no deal Brexit.

The new website explains that the University is now “making preparations” for the possibility that Britain leaves the EU without a deal, which will go ahead if no withdrawal agreement is in place by March 29th.

A no deal Brexit would be likely to include EU citizens entering the UK being treated as third country nationals, no longer subject to EEA immigration rules and requirements. This would mean EU students would pay higher tuition fees than they do now and may need new visas to conform with new immigration laws.

Research staff may lose the opportuning to access EU research funding, which totalled £78 million in the academic year 2017/18. The University may also lose the opportunity to participate in pan-European collaborations.

Given the growing uncertainty, the University is now advising EU students to ensure they have all relevant paperwork up to date.

The University stresses that EU citizens will still be able to apply to study at Oxford, and that “all Oxford University staff from the EU will have the same right to work in the UK whether a withdrawal deal is agreed or not.”

A spokesperson for the University said to Cherwell: “Given the ongoing uncertainty about the implications of the UK leaving the EU, the University is working hard to understand and manage the impact on our staff and students.

“Dedicated web pages with the latest information about the implications of Brexit have been set up for staff and students and these will be updated regularly. The pages consider all possible outcomes of the current negotiations, including the possibility of the UK leaving without a deal.

‘Whatever the outcome of current negotiations, the University of Oxford is, and intends to remain, a thriving, cosmopolitan community of scholars and students united in our commitment to education and research.

“The departure from the EU will not change this; our staff and students from all across the world are as warmly welcome as ever.”

The Students’ Union reaffirmed the need for advice, stating: “Students need guidance as soon as possible. If a no deal Brexit does happen, students want the University to quickly provide information about the impact it’s going to have on them.

“Graduate students from the EU could face serious disruption, particularly those studying for 1-year masters programmes. There are major issues outstanding, especially around the future of the Erasmus programme and future prospects for research students. The only way to avoid this mess is a People’s Vote with the option to remain.”

With just over six weeks left until the Brexit deadline, the University will continue to update their page with more information as it is available, and individual colleges may be providing specific information directly to students before the end of Hilary Term.

For more information, or to keep up to date on the University’s advice, visit the University’s Brexit advice page for students and for staff.

Time to emulate Eton?

0

Abolish:

Education secretary Damien Hinds has said he wishes to call time on the phrase ‘public school confidence’, mainly by introducing a programme of ‘five foundations’ which will build state school children’s confidence and sense of well-roundedness. Of course it would be lovely if every bog-standard comprehensive was able to offer its students yoga or rock climbing, but given that, in the weeks lead- ing up to GCSEs, my school paid certain students 50p a day in a desperate bid to get them to work for their exams, clearly money is severely needed elsewhere.

Having been to an elite grammar school for sixth-form, I couldn’t help but be acutely aware of the incredible range and quality of resources and opportunities open to students at more ‘prestigious’ schools, as opposed to my old comprehensive. A student coming out of the former type of school would have a much more rounded CV offering, as well as a far stronger and varied skillset, suggesting they were proactive and enthusiastic. Not only that, but I know for a fact that they would be perceived as having worked harder and being cleverer than a kid from a run-of-the-mill state comprehensive, despite the fact that both private and state school children often have no option other than to go anywhere but where their parents choose.

Why try to fix this deeply flawed, unfair system with a programme of activities that cannot possibly be implemented properly? The real issue here is private and grammar schools teaches some children that they are worthier of ‘better’ education, activities and opportunities than others. Even if the private/grammar school is not even academically that great, the system of segregation , a nicer building and uniform will have psychological impact on a child’s sense of worth. At grammar school, assemblies at the beginning of the year would open with commending the students on how high our place was in the Telegraph school rankings, cultivating in their students the thought that we were better, cleverer than those who came beneath us. 

If your parents are spending near £30,000 a year on your education, you’re obviously going to feel like you’re worthier of time and effort than if it was free. If, through some miracle, kids from a state comp could get to the same debating levels of kids at Eton, the confidence that Etonians have just from knowing they are Etonians will always give them a one-up, the sense that they are worthier of success because their parents have spent so much money on them. Abol- ishing such schools, not activity schedules in which no one has any real investment, is the only way to ensure all children have the same, appropriate level of confidence.

By Sophie Kilminster

Emulate:

It isn’t every day that I find myself writing in support of Damien Hinds. I went to a low performing state school. Every day I saw the devastating effects that Tory underfunding is having on our education system. 

My mum is a teaching assistant at a local primary, and many family friends are teach- ers, so the ‘G Word’ (Gove) is banned at the dinner-table 

I’m afraid to say, however, that he’s got a point this time. 

The media; politics; the arts; banking; law, all of the most prestigious industries in our society – not to mention this very university – are dominated by public school- boys and private school kids. 

I don’t think that’s right, but I don’t think the answer is to make private schools worse; I think it’s to make state schools better. 

I want to see a world in which private schools do not exist; not because they were necessarily banned, but because parents see no tangible advantage in forking out £27k to send their son to Eton when their local state comp is just as good. We’re clearly a long way off that goal, but the point is that instead of tearing the privileged down, I want us to focus on building the less- privileged up. 

With that in mind, why should we accept that I was never offered the experiences that my private school peers were? 

Damian Hinds is right that I should have been offered sports that I’ve never heard of (seriously, what is Eton Fives?) and talks from influential and inspiring figures and national debating competitions like many of the people reading this newspaper were when they were at secondary school. 

I don’t think that this should be viewed as trying to make state schools too much like public schools; the only thing about Eton that I want our state schools to emulate is the amount of students getting into Oxbridge and Russell Group universities, and I think Hind’s proposals will aid that. 

Here’s the thing though: Hinds will never be able to achieve these goals without a massive injection of funding, which quite clearly isn’t happening. 

Without that, his plans are nonsense. My school couldn’t afford printing or to fix the holes in the canteen roof, so how on earth was it ever going to send me rock climb- ing? Education reforms need to be paired with real increases in education spending, something the government has, so far, seemed unprepared to do. Overall, Hinds is right: The opportunities that are given to private school kids need to be given to state school kids too. But just announcing ‘five foundations’ isn’t enough; it will require money that I don’t believe this government is prepared to spend. 

By Joe Davies

Business School faculty join calls for Oxford to cut ties with Zimbabwean finance minister

0

The Said Business School has continued to take criticism from its professors for its association with Zimbabwean Finance and Economic Development Minister Mthuli Ncube.

Speaking to Cherwell, Simukai Chigudu, Associate Professor of African Politics at the Oxford Department of International Development, claimed that he had sent an email in protest to Professor Peter Tufano dean of the Business School.

Professor Chigudu also claimed that similar emails were sent to Professor Tufano by a number of his colleagues.

In particular, Professor Chigudu named Professor of Commonwealth Studies Jocelyn Alexander, Lecturer in African History and Politics Dan Hodgkinson, and Associate Professor in African Politics Miles Tendi as having made an appeal to Professor Tufano.

Cherwell has contacted Professor Alexander, Professor Hodgkinson, and Professor Tendi to confirm these claims.

Professor Alexander confirmed Chigudu’s claims to be true, and stated that Tufano had responded to her e-mail on Wednesday by “[defending] the ongoing value of the school’s association with Prof Ncube.”

Professor Alexander said: “My concern was and is that Prof Ncube’s association with the SBS accords him a status and legitimacy that he no longer deserves owing to his defence of the brutal crackdown by the ZANU(PF) government, of which he is a prominent and highly visible part, since 14 January this year.

“This crackdown is by no means over. A recent report by the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum (a highly reputed consortium of Zimbabwean human rights NGOS), called ‘On the Days of Darkness in Zimbabwe’, records 17 extra-judicial killings, the vast majority by soldier and police, 16 cases of rape by the same, 26 abductions by suspected security agents, nearly 600 assaults, some of them extremely serious, using whips, chains, iron rods and batons, and nearly 1,000 arbitrary arrests.

“The military continues to be deployed and the rule of law has been severely undermined. The Forum writes that, “Since 14 January 2019 there has been a wanton assault on the Constitution by the government, the police, the military, and some magistrates and prosecutors’ (p. 14).

“All of this has been defended publicly (or simply denied) by Professor Ncube. The US, UK, EU and others have condemned the Zimbabwean government’s actions.

“That Prof Ncube’s international standing is, under these circumstances, buttressed by his ongoing association with Oxford and the SBS is an affront to all those who have suffered the brunt of the ZANU(PF) crackdown in the past month.

Professor Chigudu elected to share the contents of his letter, which read as follows: “I am writing to you in relation to the deteriorating political and economic situation in my home country. As I am sure you are aware, trade unions and civil society leaders recently called for a mass stay away from work and a peaceful protest in response to a 250% hike in fuel prices instigated by the government.

“In response, the government has launched a systematic, violent and repressive campaign against those suspected to be involved with the stay away and the protests. In the last week, we have witnessed the shocking and entirely disproportionate use of state force to quell the protests and to punish protestors as well as opposition and civic leaders.

“The actions of the state are nothing short of abuse in the form of intimidation, beatings, and imprisonment without trial or due process of many hundreds of people. Indeed, there are reports coming out from human rights organisations — both local and international — confirming that children as young as 14 years old have been arrested and denied access to food, water or legal representation.

“Further still, state security forces have fired live ammunition into protesting crowds causing many to suffer from gunshot wounds and killing at least 15 people.

“I believe that these events are of concern to you given that Zimbabwe’s Minister of Finance, Professor Mthuli Ncube, is a visiting professor at SBS. As a member of the ZANU(PF) government, Prof Ncube bears indirect responsibility for state-led repression.

“Moreover, Prof Ncube has made no effort to distance himself from the ruling regime but will in fact attend Davos as a representative of President Emmerson Mnangagwa.

“I am writing to urge you to end SBSs association with Prof Ncube and to make clear that your institution condemns the actions of the Zimbabwean government in the strongest possible terms.

“Having been a student at here in Oxford during which time I worked with both the Africa Society and the Africa Business Network, I know that SBS has previously shown great moral concern for social and political justice in Africa. I urge you to show such moral leadership on this matter.”

Ncube, who holds a PhD from the University of Cambridge on “Pricing Options and Stochastic Volatility”, currently remains in his post as a visiting professor at the Said Business School.