Tuesday 5th May 2026
Blog Page 764

‘A Star Is Born’ as Bradley Cooper makes an impressive directorial debut

0

When a film is a remake of a remake of a remake, it tells you one of two things: either Hollywood is completely creatively bankrupt, or else the story underpinning these remakes is a heck of a good ‘un.

A Star Is Born definitely belongs to the latter grouping; in each incarnation, it chronicles the story of a male star who, while struggling with addiction and ageing out of the limelight, happens to meet a young female talent he can help along the road to superstardom.

It’s an infinitely adaptable tale which is able to reflect the trends and concerns of its age, but it’s been over 40 years since the last retelling saw Barbara Streisand and Kris Kristofferson rocking out in 1976.

This time Bradley Cooper stars as Jackson Maine, an old-school rocker who discovers Ally (Lady Gaga) in a drag bar performing the most showstopping rendition of La Vie En Rose imaginable. From there, he catapults her into the limelight while aided by a stellar Mark Ronson-produced soundtrack.

Where Judy Garland and James Mason’s 1954 ASIB sharply satirised the decline of Hollywood’s Golden Age, Cooper (making his directorial debut here, as well as producing the film and co-writing the script and portions of the soundtrack) gently explores the machinations of the music industry through Ally’s rise to fame. But he’s far more concerned with how Jackson and Ally relate to each other as characters than in any grand satirical or thematic ideas, and it’s here that the film shines.

Cooper has been consistently excellent in serious dramatic fare for a few years now, but it’s still impressive how completely he disappears into this role, from his beautiful country-rocker vocals to his reserved, fragile gruffness concealing his affection and admiration for Ally. Gaga, meanwhile, is a revelation – while Cooper’s character has complexity in the way he’s written, Gaga imbues incredible depth into a somewhat slighter-written role, and her chemistry with Cooper is off-the-charts. This latter point is crucial: the film would fall apart if it weren’t for the extraordinarily persuasive meet-cute between the two characters, upon which the film’s central and emotionally earnest relationship rests.

Cooper’s direction makes for an impressively assured and incredibly measured debut. He makes excellent use of coloured light through cleanly composed shots, and draws fantastic performances from his stunning cast, even if the film threatens to get a little bogged down towards the third act. Yet despite these reservations, the film managed to complete my holy trinity of indicators for what makes a good film: I became so engrossed that I forgot to write notes for the entire middle third, I cried my eyes out during the climax, and I’m now listening to the soundtrack as I write this review.

Make no mistake, this film will drive the conversation during awards season. But far more importantly, it’s a powerful, well-told love story that’s about to take the world by storm.

A look at the Cuppers draw

0

The start of the college season can be a difficult time for even the sagest of soccer skippers, as they scramble to assemble their squads to go to war with: battling contact hours, fitness concerns and selection dilemmas, just to get eleven players at the same ground in the same colour kit.

Throw in the fact that the holy grail of the Oxford footballing scene, Cuppers, has been handed an early term start commencing on Monday of 2nd week to allow for the Hassan’s Cup – the task for the captain has become more challenging than ever. Pre-season friendly plans have fallen through, the defence haven’t yet got each others names nailed, the mercurial forward has come down with a mystery virus; can the team stoke the fires within and rouse themselves for a victory that will define the season?

The first-round draw has been made, you can now see who your side will be taking on for a shot at conquering all.

On paper, the Premier Division behemoths have fared well avoiding taking on each other at a time where tactical plans are still embryonic, and scouts have yet to compile their extensive dossiers from hungover visits to the depths of Marston. In fact, four of the seven sides in the highest echelon of the college game have secured fixtures against relative minnows of the Third Division; the opportunity for a giant killing is a very real possibility, and in particular both of last season’s finalists, Worcester and New (facing Univ and Oriel respectively), will be wary of being upset on their travels so early in the tournament.

Another highlight of the draw is a match-up between the two erstwhile First Division sides Balliol and Queen’s. Both were relegated last season despite the former topping the division at the winter break and then registering just a sole point thereafter. They are eager to right their wrongs. Elsewhere in the division, Pembroke and Teddy Hall, historically teams who go deep into Cuppers, have been pitted against each other, but the triumvirate of St Anne’s, Exeter and Christ Church have all been handed the golden ticket of a first round bye. Anne’s – fresh from last year’s triumphant dual Hassan’s Cup campaign and League promotion, will play the red Exeter juggernaut in the second round.

Elsewhere, Lincoln College will take on St Hilda’s as they look to rebuild from a catastrophic slide right through to the bottom of the pyramid, and will do well to look to their Turl Street rivals for inspiration: Brasenose won the competition from a similarly low-lying position in 2016.

Rounding off the fixtures, newly promoted Hertford face off against a strong Somerville outfit in an all-Division-Two clash, Merton/Mansfield host Premier Division Champions St John’s, and Keble take on St Hugh’s.

On the Inside

CW: This article contains descriptions of self harm, violence, and mental health.

A national crisis escalates in the background, involving over 80,000 Brits: an epidemic of violence, drug abuse, disease, and mental health problems. Our prisons are at breaking point. Last year, there were a record 31,025 assaults, and 46,859 incidents of self-harm among inmates. Recent inspections have been damning, with 80 out of the 118 prisons examined providing insufficient or poor standards in at least one area, and only 7% of prisons receiving a ‘good’ rating across the board.

In January, HMP Liverpool made headlines with the “worst conditions inspectors have ever seen”, with damp, unfurnished cells, flooded toilets, piles of rubbish, broken windows, and infestations of rats and cockroaches. In August, HMP Birmingham, the first publicly-run prison to be privatised, was renationalised after just seven years. Private contractor G4S was found to have failed at preventing the “dramatic deterioration” into disorder and drug abuse.

For politicians, being seen as tough on crime is always popular. This has led to longer sentences, and now the highest incarceration rate in Western Europe, with the prison population doubling from 1993-2011.

England has repeatedly disobeyed the European Convention on Human Rights in relation to our prisoners. David Cameron’s government cut 7,000 prison officers, and the Ministry of Justice is the department most acutely hit by austerity measures, on course to have had a budget cut of over 40% from 2010-2020.

Prisons minister Rory Stewart recently claimed that he would resign after a year if he had not reduced violence and drug use. This sounds like a bold claim, but he’s aiming to do this only in ten selected prisons. His fifth role in four years, remaining in the undesirable position of prisons minister for twelve months would get him kudos from his party anyway. A known future Tory leadership hopeful, he’s been fast-tracking up the political ladder. However, the scale of these problems is vast, and very unlikely to be fixable in a year.

I spoke to Kyle, a prison officer. Kyle’s prison differs from those that most often make the news such as Birmingham and Liverpool, as it’s 20th rather than 19th century, and ‘Category C’ rather than ‘B’. C and B hold similar levels of offender, but B is more escape-proof. There are more ‘Cat C’ prisons like Kyle’s than any of the other categories in England and Wales.

I was interested to find out if the ‘typical’ prison experience differed drastically to the sensationalist scare-stories from the Victorian Cat Bs. Are Liverpool and Birmingham isolated cases of prisons that just need to be closed, or are the problems more systemic?

“Cat Bs are worse but it’s still a loud, chaotic, horrible place to live. Intimidation and violence are just everyday occurrences here.”

The officers don’t see a lot of the violence between inmates as it happens in cells behind closed doors. This is made worse for Kyle as the CCTV in one part of his wing has been scratched over.

“It’s been like that for a number of months and not been fixed. By and large no officers are in that area and so that’s where all the really rough guys are. I’ll approach and the first thing I hear is ‘WOOP WOOP!’ and everyone’s obviously stopped what they’re doing… there’ll be someone getting their jaw broken…people smoking, which is illegal in prison now. If I’m on my own, anything can happen there. I had a prisoner come up behind me the other day when I was there and sing, ‘Oh Kyle, Kyle, you think you’re safe at work, but you’re not…’”

And he probably isn’t. Every year papers report that the number of assaults on staff has reached record highs. According to The Express in April, one officer is assaulted every hour.

“Just this week one of the officers on my wing was punched twice, bleeding out of his face. A few weeks ago, a female officer in another wing got her eye split open with a flask. I know the job’s a ticking time bomb with me getting assaulted.”

Nevertheless, Kyle warns to be cautious with statistics in the papers. He carefully notes that in a number of cases: “Most of those numbers are probably minor, like a push. People get spat on a lot, that’s fairly common.”

Sure enough, in the full House of Commons briefing paper on prison statistics, only 864 out of 8429 assaults are classed as ‘serious’. But statistics can be conservative too. The same paper reports that drug use has halved from 18% of inmates in 1998/99 to 9% in 2016/17, but Kyle is suspicious.

“It’s got to be higher than that. A clean test result doesn’t always mean they’re clean. People hide piss that belongs to someone else and then they’ll use that in the test.”

Nine percent of inmates having drugs in their system on one particular day is also not an indicator of how many use drugs overall. Lots of ‘legal highs’ and synthetic cannabinoids are also difficult to detect. The paper misleads in not distinguishing between these and cannabis.

Cannabis is listed as the most frequently detected drug, although the most common drug in prison is almost certainly ‘spice’, which Kyle says is “not really anything like weed at all”.

“Occasionally you smell cannabis, but it’s nothing compared to spice,” he said. “People are genuinely addicted to it. They can’t stop smoking it but it’s so bad for them. When they’ve smoked too much, the prisoners call it ‘going over’. You have to call healthcare. There’s sick everywhere, and people become stuck doing repeat actions. I saw someone the other day trying to hang up the phone but the phone was just dangling below. “He wasn’t even conscious. People get carried back to their cell. It’s fucked up. I guess it’s just a cheap escape from prison.”

Rory Stewart has rightly linked the increase in violence and self-harm in prisons to the growing abundance of spice. He stated in February that he is “confident that we can do more to tackle the issue of drugs in our prisons”.

His methods? “We have invested heavily in technology and sniffer dogs to help improve detection. I am examining different models of body-scanner, increasing searching and fixing the prison windows, which are clearly a key entry point for drugs that are being transported by drones.”

In Cat C prisons such as Kyle’s however, drones and bodily smuggling aren’t even necessary: “It’s crazy. In a large amount of the areas the prisoners are in there’s only one fence, so anything that gets chucked over will land right in the prison.”

While Kyle says the vast majority of contraband is literally thrown in this way, there have been cases of corrupt staff: “There was one guy that turned out to have been bringing drugs in and smoking crack with prisoners. Apart from that I’m sure people bring in phones and tobacco all the time.

“There are so many drugs, phones, and contraband in the prison that it’s almost futile sometimes… someone will do a search and be like ‘we got a phone!’ and it’s like ‘great, but how many more are there’, you know? It’s not solved anything at all…”

Mobiles are important contraband for several reasons. Without them, prisoners in Kyle’s prison have to queue at a shared phone in the wing, for which they have a pin account that gives them access to a limited set of approved contacts: “You can’t just pick up the phone and dial any number, because obviously loads of them have restraining orders”.

Mobiles, then, give people the comfort of Skyping their relatives every night in their cell if they so wish, for example. It also gives prisoners unrestricted research capabilities: when a new guy enters the prison, others will have already Googled what he was convicted of, even where he’s from, and where his family live.

There are also official restrictions on how much money prisoners can spend per week. So to pay for drugs without a mobile, prisoners have to call one of their approved contacts and ask them to transfer money on their behalf from another account to whoever they’re paying. With a mobile, this clearly becomes easier. In prisons where drones are used in the way that Stewart mentioned, they’re controlled via a mobile app.

The result is that “in Cat C you spend all your time fucked up. If you play your cards right, you could be a raging heroin addict and people might not even notice because there are so many worse off people literally walking around the landings like zombies. That’s what spice is like. People smoke in their cells, and staff numbers don’t allow us to go around opening the doors of cell after cell looking in. You can just smell it all the time, just smoke.”

Spice can trigger a kind of acute psychosis nicknamed ‘spiceophrenia’ due to its similarities to schizophrenia symptoms. “I’ve seen people so mentally ill you can hardly comprehend what they’re thinking. Personality disorders are a big thing.” It can also trigger violent episodes.

All of this is accentuated by the prison environment: “I can’t think of a more paranoid place in existence than prison. Once I was on the landing and asked ‘Did one of you just say my name?’ and they were like ‘Oh look, it’s starting to happen to you as well’…Paranoia is huge there.”

There is an increasing awareness of the scale of mental health issues among offenders. The Criminal Justice Alliance estimates that 21,000 people suffering from mental illness are imprisoned; a quarter of the current prison population, while there are only 3600 beds reserved for patients with mental-health issues.

Kyle says that the mental health professionals in his prison are “overworked”, elaborating: “Certain prisoners use their time too much, and there are so many prisoners with mental health issues that are just ignored because they don’t speak up about it. There are certainly prisoners that should be in a psychiatric hospital, but are just left.”

Lots of these prisoners are on Imprisonment for Public Protection, or ‘IPP’ sentences. These were introduced by the Blair government to effectively give offenders extra prison time despite their crimes not warranting life sentences.

It gives them an indefinite sentence until they demonstrate improvement by meeting various conditions, conditions that are very hard for spice-users to meet.

“There are so many examples just in my prison alone where guys have been in there for maybe eight to ten years over tariff with no real hope of getting out. After that long in jail, you really can’t progress.”

Recent recruitment drives to compensate the coalition cuts have meant that staff are inexperienced, many having worked in the service for less than a year.

“You realise that everyone’s just winging it. There’s so little communication, not just between officers and the managers but between us and other departments. If a prisoner flips out in healthcare for instance, they’ll deal with it in a way where they just shut them out, often without meds. We end up having to escort them back to resolve it.

“Meds get stopped all the time. I’m always hearing ‘My meds have stopped and I need them to concentrate!’ Some do sell their meds, but obviously the point of putting someone on a methadone script is to eventually get them off methadone. Someone had their ADHD meds stopped the other day and that caused a scene.”

With nearly four thousand cases of self-harm in prison per month, an urgent review of policies is needed. Kyle tells me that fresh razors are given out regularly to offenders.

This even included an individual who regularly self-harms “with long hair and a big scruffy beard, who clearly doesn’t shave. He regularly said his goal is to die in prison by cutting himself. We had no reason to think he’s going to do anything but slice his skin with those razors.” But when officers tried refraining from giving him a razor, “he got angry, shouted at us, walked away, and ten minutes later he comes down gushing blood. He’d cut up because of it and blamed us.”

Kyle explains that some prisoners also use self-harm as a form of protest. “A really common thing is something like a gift will be sent in for the prisoner, and that has to go through our reception, because a lot of the time there’ll be contraband in the parcel. That takes time, arguably too much time. The prisoners want their stuff and feel like they’re being ignored. They’ll say ‘well I’m going to cut up then’ and slice themselves good and proper. Nine times out of ten, later that day they’ll have their Xbox or whatever because someone will process it due to that.

“I heard about a riot in one prison that happened because the prison service ran out of fans to give prisoners for their cells. As soon as they began to riot they had Argos vans pulling up with hundreds of fans. Bad behaviour gets good results in prison. Cutting yourself absolutely does get you what you want.”

Even before they get to prison, offenders are disproportionately likely to suffer from mental health issues or drug abuse. For these people, Kyle says “I can’t think of a worse place for them than prison. It’s easier to get drugs in prison than it is on the street, and the prison environment is in no way helpful to mental illness.

“I’m thinking of one prisoner on my wing who’s a prolific self-harmer. His face is mutilated, his body all scarred up. He just cuts and cuts and cuts. He’s IPP, over tariff. But if you go on his case notes you can see that when he came in he was a fresh faced, young, good-looking chap. You can click back over the years and see the demise of a man in his mugshots, because they get out of date every year or so. I think the only reason he hasn’t killed himself is that he’s got family on the out that he cares about enough to stay alive, but certainly his life is prison. His sentence has completely defiled him.”

A parliamentary justice committee has been investigating the prison crisis. Its Conservative chairman, Bob Neill, said earlier this year that “We really need to have a serious conversation about what we use prison for. Society has to think about that. “How much of our prisons now are just warehousing for people with mental health and other issues?” More needs fixing than broken windows. It is time to think about serious, systematic prison reform: a non-partisan issue, and one that urgently needs addressing.

Some names in this article have been changed.

If you have been affected by the issues raised in this article, please contact the Samaritans on 01865 722122

Copestake hat trick ensures victory for the Blues

0

A slow build-up meant that the start of this week’s match against Cardiff Met was a cagey affair, with both teams sitting deep, determined to give nothing away. The Blues managed to open the scoring through Dave Clarke, who took advantage of a rebound off Cardiff’s keeper and duly converted home.

Despite the goal unsettling Cardiff Met for a while, they soon bounced back with one of their own, a well taken deflection from a short corner, clearly a much practiced set-piece routine taken straight from the training ground that proved clinically effective, sending the Blues into the half-time break with a level score line.

The second half saw both teams come out playing much more aggressive and entertaining hockey, opening up the game and allowing more chances. Oxford took full advantage of this new style of play, piling the pressure onto Cardiff Met. The pressure soon paid off with a high-quality finish from Blues captain Alex Copestake who showed his flair with a one touch lob straight over the keeper’s head, putting the Blues 2-1 up in scintillating fashion.

The Blues now put their stamp on the game, not content with sitting back and defending their one goal lead, they played a high press, asking some serious questions of the Cardiff side. The tactic was rewarded when Sam Greenbank stole possession before unselfishly offloading the ball to Copestake who again showed his eye for goal with a clever finish on the reverse.

With the Blues now sitting comfortably at 3-1 up, concentration levels started to drop, and in the highest BUCS division, teams get punished for this. Cardiff Met handed out the punishment in the form of two counter-attacking goals, the speed of which caught Oxford on the back foot as their defence struggled to react.

After Cardiff’s spate of attacking play the Blues were looking like coming away with a single point from a match they had largely dominated. Enter stage Alex Copestake, who once again led by example, scoring Oxford’s fourth and claiming a hat-trick for himself.

A tense finish to the game saw the Blues continue to fend off efforts from Cardiff, with big saves from the keeper and Will Thompson embodying the spirit of the squad with his excellent running down of short corners.

After these uncertain stages of play, Oxford managed to close the game out well, keeping possession and showing some real professionalism to stop any potential danger from Cardiff Met, securing victory with a 4-3 result which puts them in second place ahead of their top-of-the-table clash with Exeter on Wednesday.

Captain and hat-trick hero Alex Copestake told Cherwell: “It was a good team performance, we showed a lot of character to get the win after Cardiff had come back from 3-1 down.

“On a personal level it’s always nice to score, but the main thing is that we’re connecting well as a forward unit and looking very dangerous when we break quickly.

“It bodes well for our next BUCS game at Iffley on Wednesday, where we have the chance to go top of the table if we beat Exeter.”

Bringing Doctor Who out of the past

0

Regeneration, one of Doctor Who’s most iconic plot ideas, bakes the theme of rebirth in the show’s very DNA, yet it is important to remember that when the show first started back in 1963, this was far from the case.

Just as rebirth – relaunching – is engrained in the show’s 55 year history, so is the challenge that faces each new lead-writer when their time comes to tell the audience what Doctor Who should mean to them.

The difficulty that faced writers in convincing viewers of Patrick Troughton’s second Doctor undoubtedly faced Chibnall in the case of Whittaker’s thirteenth. Although one episode may not have convinced me, I am certainly intrigued, and more importantly excited.

Whilst many aspects of the episode felt distinctly new (at least in the show’s modern history), from the grungier, blue-lit aesthetic to the inclusion of up to four companions, there was much that honored the show’s history. Composer Segun Akinola’s reworking of Ron Grainer’s iconic theme music is a gorgeously deferential new composition. Indeed, his score proved much more evocative of the classic series – with its soundscape of discordant bells and whooshing wind – than Murray Gold’s more bombastic scores ever did.

The episode’s ending, which left our four heroes stranded in deepest space after a botched teleport job, was also wholly reminiscent of the cliffhangers of classic ‘Who’.

It came off as a neat tribute to Tom Baker’s early seasons, where each story would link up with the next through a cliff-hanger. These cliff-hangers usually left our heroes displaced to a new location, and drew on the tradition of the ending of 1963’s first ever episode, ‘An Unearthly Child’.

But tradition aside, the episode had to stand out as an entertaining piece of television in its own right, regardless of the show’s history and the loyalty of its fans.

It ultimately achieved this, even if the true direction of the series seems as-yet obscure. There’s room to explore each of our companions and their worlds further, but we still know little about them.

Ryan (Tosin Cole) proved the most compelling, perhaps because Chibnall gave him the most time to shine; his vlog acted as the structural focal point of the episode, itself a clever play on the expectations of the audience. Grace (Sharon D. Clarke) died early in the episode, but I imagine we will be feeling the repercussions of that particular incident as the series develops over the nine episodes still to come. Yaz (Mandip Gill) was likeable enough, even if the subtler nuances of her character remain to be seen, whilst Bradley Walsh’s Graham provided some well-placed comic relief without risking undermining the tone of the episode as a whole.

Jodie Whittaker’s performance was faultless. She was loveable, funny without being too silly or unbelievable, convincing when it came to the more moralizing lines, and ultimately
engaging in a way that Peter Capaldi’s Doctor struggled to achieve until a good few episodes into his tenure.

Her performance served as the moral and emotional anchor to the episode, fusing together its differing parts into a compelling and cohesive whole. Whittaker so completely filled the shoes of her predecessors that seeing her as the Doctor was unquestionable.

As far as the story is concerned, the data-gathering monster was a nice nod to contemporary anxieties, whilst the tooth-faced antagonist of the piece looked more as if he’d stepped of the set of a Hollywood film than the BBC’s studios in Cardiff…

On the whole, however, the episode was surely a success.

It wasn’t a masterpiece, and not nearly as exciting as Steven Moffatt and Matt Smith’s debut of 2010, ‘The Eleventh Hour’. But it did what it needed to do: portrayed a convincing
and exciting new universe for our new Doctor to inhabit (and made charity shopping for clothes just that little bit more epic too).

Atop a crane over darkest Sheffield, Whittaker’s Doctor describes regeneration as follows: ‘There’s this moment when you’re sure you’re about to die, and then you’re born.’

In the same way. the show has been re-born, reinvigorated before our very eyes.

It’s an exciting time, especially after a period of somewhat sporadic quality and hiatus that marred the latter part of Moffatt’s tenure. Here’s hoping it’ll be a good one.

Interview: OUDS President Francesca Amewudah-Rivers

0

It’s 9am on a rather uninspiring, grey Tuesday morning in 0th week. But, as we begin the shoot in St John’s garden, our photographer, Laura, exclaims of our model in her hot orange metallic puffer jacket: “Wow, that’s amazing. As soon as you stepped into the shot the brightness rocketed.”

That’s how best to describe meeting Francesca Amewudah-Rivers for the first time. Her reputation certainly precedes her – as President of OUDS and director of the extremely successful all-BAME production of Medea at the Keble O’Reilly in Trinity, I expected to be intimidated at our first meeting. But Fran (as she is commonly known) has a way of making you feel really comfortable. Whilst she is clearly a talented person, she speaks about the issues we discuss with sensitivity, humility and real compassion.

Firstly, Fran explains how she became OUDS President. As she became more and more involved in the Oxford drama scene in her first and second year, friends began suggesting to her that she apply for the position. Initially, she was wary of the idea, but, reflecting on the problems within Oxford drama, she quickly began to realize how much she wanted to transform things. I am struck by how organic Fran’s path to leadership feels – it was without exaggerated presumption or ambition, but an intense desire to make the change she wanted to see.

An emphasis on access, diversity and representation feels central to Fran’s presidency, and this is a topic she speaks about with passion. Foundations for this kind of change were originally laid when Fran set up Oxford’s BAME Drama Society at the start of her second year with fellow students Riya Rana and Taiwo Oyebola, providing a space for people of colour to develop, explore and encourage dramatic ideas and impulses. From this society came the idea for the all-BAME production of Medea at the O’Reilly, which was met with critical acclaim.

This sensational production coincided with the publication of Oxford’s access statistics. These figures were disappointing to say the least – a shocking fact is that, in 2017, Oxford admitted more students from Westminster School than black students. As such, the representation of BAME people in Medea proved particularly poignant. Fran remembers seeing the effects of Medea, and insists that “the most rewarding thing” about the performances was “seeing diversity in the audience.” She recalls seeing people of colour, utterly enthusiastic, because normally “they’re not seeing their stories on stage.” Medea, with it’s all-BAME cast, references to the Windrush Scandal, and the consistent depiction of its protagonist as the “outsider”, brought into focus narratives that are too often pushed to the wayside when it comes to theatre.

Fran recalls the experience of putting on Medea joyfully, but also describes the feeling of immense pressure in the weeks before the performance. “It was terrifying…. It was literally like the inside of my head being put on stage for everyone to see.” But, the play, she says, took on a life of it’s own: “what was in my head”, she says, “wasn’t what it became. You can only imagine something to a certain extent in your head. That’s what’s so great about theatre.”

I find myself curious to ask her more about herself, and what she plans to do after university. She insists that, after university, she needs “to do what makes (her) happy” and that will not involve a “nine-to-five desk job.” Fran tells me that music is a central passion of hers – it is what she studies at St John’s College, and she used these skills to compose the beautiful music for Medea. Getting into the creative industry is inevitably difficult, and Fran explains the additional barriers for people of colour because, so often, “their parents have not had theatre empires” or perhaps because “most immigrant families don’t have the money to take their family to the theatre.” Thus, again we return to the problem of lack of diversity and representation both on the stage, and, crucially, in the audience.

So, as President, what does Fran want for the future of OUDS, and Oxford drama in general? First and foremost, she insists that “at the end of the day…it’s student theatre. It’s all about having fun… and taking risks.” She points out the potential for Oxford student drama to take itself too seriously, describing a “hierarchy” in the way venues are used. Students focus on a set path, starting with a BT (Burton-Taylor Studio) show and aiming eventually for a Playhouse show. Instead, Fran insists, we should do away with this, and think “what’s the best venue for this project?” Each project should be approached with as much respect and encouragement as the next. Crucially, Fran insists that Oxford drama should be an “inclusive” place, where we appreciate the “many blessings” we have. The drama community at our University should chiefly be “about supporting each other.”

“So what can we do to get more involved and push for change?” I ask her. For freshers, or those new to drama, – “If you want to act, audition for things, if you want to create anything, write. Create your own narratives and put yourself out there… If you really do care about something and want to see it happen, and if you fail or if it’s bad, you’ve learnt from it. You’ve not lost anything.” For those further down the line, and more established in the Oxford drama world, “really think about how you audition” and about making those who audition “feel comfortable.”

As our interview draws to a close, I feel a warm and all-encompassing feeling that can only be described as optimism. If this is the effect of this year’s OUDS President one-to-one, I can’t wait to see more of what she achieves with the full support of Oxford’s dramatic community behind her.

Sign up to the OUDS Newsletter at www.ouds.org

Telethon calling leaves students and alumni cold

0

The chances are that your college had a telethon this September. This form of fundraising is about as Oxford as punting or sub fusc.

I struggled to understand exactly why colleges with endowments larger than some hedge funds needed even more money, but I signed up anyway. Attempts were made early on to explain why the fundraising was necessary, and they were believable – if it were a poorer college with a smaller endowment. Why exactly colleges like Trinity College, Cambridge needed one, with an endowment of £1.1 billion, I’m not exactly sure. I didn’t question the ethics of it too much though (and I’m a sucker for free food). Telethons are sold to students as their feel-good nostalgia hit of the summer. An opportunity to reminisce with old alumni on their time there, and with any luck bag yourself an internship if they went into the city. The reality is far bleaker. Most evenings are spent essentially cold calling old members of the college, who are either in the pub or in bed.

Needless to say, most of them do not want to talk to you. After a day at work, the last thing people want to hear about are the new bike sheds behind the hall of a college they left 15 years ago. Many are also up to their eye-balls in student debt, so the thought of giving a monthly donation after having forked out over forty thousand on tuition fees already must feel a bit like a slap in the face.

I write not to moan about gripes of a soul-destroying job though, but rather shed some light on the industry that makes this level of fundraising possible. Yes, for all this complaining, telethons are phenomenally successful. They invariably raise six figure totals, and campaigns with targets of a quarter of a million are not uncommon. Not bad for a couple of students with headsets and notepads. Their success is not down to a deep affinity the alumni have for their college. While some loved their time there, many are at best indifferent, and the majority I believe would not give without prompt. Telethons are more than just a prompt, they are a big jab in your side, saying “give us some cash.” They’re the product of cleverly crafted, highly scripted phone calls, which aim to squeeze money out of you, say thank you and then do the same next year.

While the cause is always the college, the entire process is often outsourced to private fundraising companies who sometimes work on a commission basis. They have specially designed software and huge databases of individual’s donation history. Alumni are referred to as ‘prospects’ and commonly ranked by their earning capability and matched with students with similar interests.

Callers are essentially encouraged to bargain and maximise the amount they can get out of an individual. Charity is meant to be an active gesture, an individual showing they care enough about a cause to part with their money.

Telethons use scripts, guilt trips, and a refined formula to achieve this. While they are successful, incessant calling and bargaining can leave alumni with far fewer fond memories of their college.

So regardless of whether you think colleges are causes worthy of giving to, telethons are not the way to give to them. Save on the small talk, cut out the middle man, maximise your gift, and donate straight to the college.

In full: Vice Chancellor’s 90k expenses laid bare

1

Oxford University have published the expenses records of Vice Chancellor Louise Richardson on its website, revealing how she has racked up over £90,000 in expenses since her appointment in 2016.

Cherwell analysis of the new data shows that this figure includes almost £25,000 in fees for private drivers escorting the Vice Chancellor to and from events – despite University commitments to refrain from using such transport arrangements.

It follows a widespread media campaign urging for transparency over the full levels of the Vice Chancellor’s remuneration. Richardson has repeatedly defended her pay against this popular backlash, once comparing her £350,000 salary to those of footballers and bankers.

Oxford is believed to be the first university in the UK to publish its vice chancellor’s expenses online in this manner. However, the published records do not divulge the full details and instead categorise individual claims under general headings.

Nonetheless, Freedom of Information (FoI) requests sent and seen by Cherwell do help paint a fuller picture of the expense claims – as well as the as the as yet unpublished records of the University’s Pro Vice Chancellors.

In total, the University has spent just over £92,000 on the vice chancellor’s expenses. The largest portion of this is made up of long-haul flights, for which the Vice Chancellor travels in business class. Over the two and a half years for which there is data, this figure totals at over £48,000, or approximately half of her total expenses.

Another major contributor is the cost of hired cars and drivers. In total, the University has spent approximately £24,000 on personal drivers for the Vice Chancellor since Louise Richardson started the role. Over the months of May and June 2017, driver costs were particularly high, with each month seeing over £2,000 spent.

The University’s website states: “The Vice Chancellor travels by train where possible. In circumstances where the VC is travelling under strict time constraints, is attending numerous business engagements in multiple locations and/or is travelling very late at night or early in the morning, she travels by car.”

The records do show that the Vice Chancellor’s office has made clear efforts to reduce her expenses over the course of her tenure, however, perhaps a result of public and media pressure. Richardson no longer buying first class tickets when travelling on rail. While the current year is not over, it is also likely that 2018 will see less University money spent on personal drivers and the Vice Chancellor’s expenses more generally.

Beyond these main contributors, there are also the smaller peculiarities.

Almost £300 was spent of corporate gifts, with a similar figure being splashed on stationery. Richardson also charged her subscription to Foreign Affairs’ newsletter to the University.

The University also covers Richardson’s quarterly subscription to the Harvard Club, an association for alumni of the American university, coming to around £125 each quarter. The University told Cherwell that this gave access to accommodation and to meeting and hosting facilities below New York market rates, making a net saving.

A Cherwell FoI request also revealed that she spent £1,262 for a stay in the luxury Mandarin Oriental hotel in Hong Kong, while also claiming £145 for a trip to Wimbledon to watch the tennis championships.

An Oxford SU spokesperson told Cherwell: “It is deeply worrying to see such high levels of students money being spent on the expenses of senior management staff. We are seeing worsening conditions for students, from the quality of accommodation to a lack of welfare services but our money is being funnelled into expenses for senior management.”

A University spokesperson told Cherwell: “Oxford University is ranked as the world’s strongest university, generating some £5.8 billion annually for the UK economy. To help deliver this, the Vice Chancellor forges global research and education partnerships, raises funds from international supporters and recruits the outstanding academics and students on whom Oxford depends.

“The demands of keeping the University as a world leader are continual, involving sustained engagement with current potential funders, donors and partners, and extensive worldwide travel.

“These are all legitimate expenses raised in the cause of keeping Oxford in the forefront of the worldwide advancement of learning.”

While there have been extensive investigations into the renumeration of the Vice Chancellor by this paper, there has been little interest in that of the University’s Pro Vice Chancellors.

However, an FoI request seen by Cherwell outlining the corporate credit card statements of the various Pro Vice Chancellors does shed some light.

Pro Vice-Chancellor with specific responsibility for external affairs and development, Professor Nick Rawlins, spent £304.25 over five trips to The Anchor Inn, in an expense listed as ‘Drinking places (alcohol bev.) – bars, taverns, nightclubs’.

In similar fashion, former Pro Vice Chancellor with responsibility for research, Professor Ian Walmsley, spent £144 at Be At One on 2nd December 2016, in a filing again listed under ‘Drinking places’.

When pressed on this, a University spokesperson told Cherwell: “Oxford’s team of Pro Vice Chancellors play an essential role in the University’s global pre-eminent position. Their respective portfolios requirethem to meet and establish partnerships with the world’s leading players in education, in research, in national and international policy-making, as well as with the donors who support our outstanding contribution to understanding and the international economy.

“They all host key guests from their respective fields at Oxford and travel frequently to build the links which a modern, constantly innovating University requires.

“In so doing, they incur expenses which are a legitimate part of their work maintaining and enhancing Oxford’s exceptional academic environment.”

The salaries of the Pro Vice-Chancellors are not published by Oxford. The annual Oxford accounts do give a figure for the total and average remuneration of ‘Key Management Personnel’ – including the PVCs, the Registrar, the Heads of Division, and the Director of Finance, but excluding the Vice Chancellor.

In 2016/17 a total of £2.4m was paid to this group, comprising of 12.5 post-holders.

Union members in vote to trial slate ban

0

Oxford Union members have voted to abolish electoral slates on a temporary basis for the society’s Hilary and Trinity elections.

The trial period will be followed by a referendum of all members on the issue in Trinity, where it will be decided whether the move should be permanent.

The vote follows a long campaign throughout the last academic year, resulting in feisty exchanges and several inconclusive votes.

Last week’s late debate saw several experienced Union officials, who had benefitted from slates in their campaigns, voting in favour of the trial abolishment.

Anti-slate campaigner, Francesco Galvanetto, told Cherwell: “I’ve been working alongside Ray [Williams, fellow anti-slate campaigner] for a while now, many of us have put a lot of effort into trying to make the union a better place.

“It has been amazing to see those plans turn into reality tonight, the membership’s response to our plans has been fantastic and we cannot wait for the new trial period to begin.

“We believe that removing electoral pacts is the first step to allowing any member to take part in the Union’s administration through their merits and their passion.

“We can’t wait for next term, when such proposals will come into effect and we hope that many members will put forward their names now that unfair advantages to certain candidates have been removed.

“What an honour it was to share the debate with a cabinet minister, and to defeat him as well.”

The government’s Universities Minister, Sam Gyiamah, stayed behind after the annual ‘No Confidence’ debate to watch the procedural motion. Cherwell understands he voted against the abolishment of slates.

At the end of last term, a motion advocating the banning of slates provisionally passed but then failed to acquire the necessary 150 signatures to bind the ruling.

Prior to this, a proposal for debate was rejected on grounds of a ruling that any meeting at the Union can only take place if members have been given a few days’ notice.

From 1998 to 2015, slates and electoral-pacts were officially banned, though pro-slate campaigners make the point that they continued to exist informally regardless.

Vice chancellor says ‘majority’ of UK politicians believe Oxford admissions are unfair

0

An Oxford University-sponsored public survey shows “most” Westminster politicians believe Oxford’s admissions are “very unfair”, according to Vice-Chancellor Louise Richardson, who disclosed the information during a panel discussion yesterday.

Richardson, speaking at a conference hosted by the University’s Bonavero Institute of Human Rights, said the survey indicated a “broad perception” of “deeply unfair” admissions procedures at Oxford.

She also alleged that it showed “most people” in the north of England believe more than 90% of Oxford students are privately educated. In reality, this group represents 41.8% of Oxford’s 2017 intake.

A spokesperson for the University confirmed the existence of the unpublished survey. During the conference, Richardson audibly questioned whether she “wanted to make this public, since it is so damming.”

On panel, Richardson also said that although “our admissions aren’t nearly as bad as they’re painted, [Oxford admission statistics] reflect the social inequalities outside the University.”  The results of the survey, she claimed, show that “most” UK politicians “don’t trust us [the University] to be fair with our admissions practices and have views of our admissions that are completely contrary to the reality.”

Stating, “this is our fault,” she placed the burden on the University to more effectively communicate Oxford’s admissions practices to the larger community. Improved communication of Oxford’s admissions, Richardson suggested, is both an ethical responsibility in attracting quality candidates and a pragmatic defense against political attacks.

Perception of unfairness in admissions, Richardson argued, “will make it so much easier for politicians to continue to attack us or use us as a whipping boy.” She also suggested that the University needs to “find a way to communicate [Oxford’s admission practices] much more effectively than we have done [in the past].”

Richardson made these comments during a panel discussion on ‘Universities and Illiberalism’, where she sat with five other global leaders in education. The discussion was part of the Bonavero Institute’s conference, ‘Confronting Illiberalism: The role of the Media, Civil Society and Universities,’ for which Secretary Hillary Clinton gave the keynote address.

During the talk, Richardson reiterated her belief in Brexit as a symptom of illiberalism and expressed concerns over it’s effects on the student body at Oxford. She emphasized the unknown but potential impact on the makeup of the student body and internationally-oriented or financed research.

The University have been contacted for further comment on Richardson’s statements.