Wednesday 16th July 2025
Blog Page 804

Oxford announces new German research partnerships

0

Oxford University has announced a new research partnership with four German institutions, beginning what Berlin’s Mayor has called “a new era of cooperation for Berlin and Oxford”.

The partnership will span across the sciences, humanities, and social sciences, consolidating existing research links as well as providing opportunities for new projects.

The collaborating institutions — Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Technische Universität Berlin, and the Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin — have already begun a programme of academic workshops in several fields.

It is also anticipated that an Oxford-Berlin Research Centre will be built in Berlin and a Berliner Haus in Oxford.

Louise Richardson, vice chancellor of the University, said: “Although the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union, it is not leaving Europe.”

These new collaborative research projects may also be eligible for common funding not only from British, but also from German foundations and funding agencies.

Oxford also hopes to introduce new investment streams to the Berlin institutions through its experience in fundraising and knowledge transfers.

Professor Dr.-Ing Sabine Kunst, President of the Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, said: “we hope to put together a targeted collective strategy in order to circumvent any possible consequences of Brexit.”

The UK government’s current Brexit negotiating position has caused concern among some academics, who fear it may limit research and funding opportunities.

Dr Rob Davidson, Director and Co-Founder of Scientists for EU and Healthier IN the EU, told Cherwell: “when a PI (principal investigator, or research group leader) applies to participate in an EU program like Horizon 2020, there is a question on the form that asks, ‘do you foresee that your national government would accept the jurisdiction of the ECJ?’ — under current plans, even if we were paying to access EU science, we would be excluding ourselves from completing the forms for participation.”

Whilst Dr Davidson praised the partnership, saying that scientific research in general required such “strong international links”, he expressed reservations about these kind of partnerships becoming the norm for UK and European institutions after Brexit.

Such partnerships, he said: “would likely reduce the chance of close ties with all the other institutions.”

“We also need to remember that while institutions can develop specialisms, even well secured professors move on. Should we not think having special relationships through consortia of mobile researchers, rather than special links between brick buildings?”

“We’ve seen major cuts announced this year from Durham, Heriot Watt, Aberystwyth and several more. They have all cited existing conditions and the certain damage of Brexit as their reasoning. Most of our universities will not have funds to create special partnerships like this one.”

Alastair Buchan, Oxford University’s Head of Brexit strategy, told The Telegraph in January this year how institutional partnerships will not just be limited to European countries in the future.

“One of the things that we did lose [after joining the EU] was that nice and easy flow of clinicians and clinician science from Canada, the US, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa,” he said.

“We had really good collaborations, which hopefully in this Brexit climate might be reinvented, because that movement of English-speaking medicine was actually a casualty of joining Europe.”

Pinocchio review – “a visual and acoustic marvel”

0

As primarily a reviewer of student drama, it was strange to be reviewing a production with the budget to do whatever the producers wanted, imagination permitting. Fortunately, the National Theatre’s production of Pinocchio is much more than a shallow, flashy pantomime, the likes of which are common during this festive season. It sets itself above the rank and file of Christmas productions through thoughtful alterations to, and expansions of, Walt Disney’s beloved classic.

Upon collecting my ticket, I was promptly handed a programme which doubled as a clever children’s notebook of fun activities – rest assured, mine is completely full of scribblings and I’m very proud of my personally crafted puppet, Amadeo. What immediately became apparent once I had prised myself from my booklet, however, was that Pinocchio himself is, ironically enough, one of the few main characters in the production who is not played by a puppet.

However, the puppets are more than a larger-than-life novelty to catch children’s eyes, as they not only solve the problem of Pinocchio needing to be smaller than the rest of the cast, but they also effectively convey the oppressiveness of the world Pinocchio inhabits and accentuate the grotesque nature of the play’s villains. In motion, the puppets are beautifully animated and emoted, a feat which makes one almost entirely forget the group of people onstage required to operate them. This is especially impressive in the case of Jiminy Cricket (lovingly animated and voiced by Audrey Brisson), considering how small the puppet is compared to the human actor.

Elsewhere, the world of Pinocchio is stunningly staged, and Joe Idris-Roberts navigates it very convincingly as the wooden boy. Stage transitions are used to great effect to depict how the frightening world shifts around Pinocchio as he is exchanged from one evil crook to another: the Pleasure Island scene, in particular, is a ‘pleasure’ to watch.

It is also difficult to express the extent to which Disney soundtrack scores benefit from a full orchestra, although I could sometimes catch glimpses of the conductor’s hand peeping through the floor during certain sequences, which slightly broke the immersion. Disney favourites such as ‘When You Wish Upon a Star’ and ‘An Actor’s Life for Me’ gain immeasurable potency when performed in this way, heightened by the choreography onstage. ‘I’ve Got No Strings’ was even expanded to chart the whole story of Pinocchio’s exploitation at the hand of the gleefully wicked puppet-master, Stromboli (Gershwyn Eustache Jnr.), through to his performance, becoming more dissonant and minor as the mood requires. Such choreography displays creative storytelling and only serves to accentuate the disturbing nature of a scene in which Pinocchio sings about freedom whilst being threatened and imprisoned by his master.

In fact, most of the additions to, and modernisations of, the original script are welcome and help to flesh out character relationships and comic moments. The dynamic between Geppetto and Pinocchio is profound, and Mark Hadfield’s acting prevents the more touching moments from straying into melodrama. The standout star, without a doubt, though, is David Langham’s Honest John the Fox. While he now lacks a companion in Gideon, his enigmatic performance is more than enough to allow the character to stand alone. The modified script transforms the Fox into a charismatically flamboyant and verbose trickster who owns every scene in which he appears. Although he is no longer motivated by money, now just being pure evil, this pantomimic interpretation of the character breathes new life into the role.

Other editorial tweaks fail to connect, however, as some jokes are too complex for most children to understand and not particularly funny for adults. Jiminy Cricket’s obsession with cleanliness is overdone and jokes about bacterial disinfectant come across as nonsensical and do not benefit the depiction of the character. Other changes, such as how Pinocchio, Gepetto and Jiminy escape from Monstro, seem illogical. It was probably done to reuse Pinocchio’s famous quirk of his nose growing when he tells a lie in an attempt to create a more emotional scene; either that, or the producers were worried about lighting a fire onstage, but given the quality of the pyrotechnics and illusory gags elsewhere in the show, this seems like a missed opportunity. The Monstro scene in general marks a downgrade from the Disney film. Although it would be difficult to adapt for the stage a scene which was so ground-breaking in its original animation, the amount of creativity injected into the rest of the adaptation only highlights how disappointing this episode is in comparison. That said, this small blemish on an otherwise near-perfect production does little to detract from the whole.

Pinocchio is a visual and acoustic marvel, and the fact that Dennis Kelly and company have so seamlessly translated a Disney classic into such an effective piece of drama is commendable. Bold creative decisions and additions to the original tease out some of the film’s darker and more intriguing implications and, more often than not, innovate and improve upon the story. The result is a production which, like all the best Disney films, appeals to people of all ages.

The Twilight Zone – ‘dizzyingly strange’

0

“There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man’s fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call the Twilight Zone.”

This, for those who do not know, is Rod Serling’s opening monologue to the iconic sixties TV show, The Twilight Zone, an anthology of unrelated stories, each interrogating one or more of contemporary America’s social anxieties. Taken altogether, the 156 instalments act as a collection of post-modern fables, Serling’s narrator a Hans Christian-Anderson for the age of nuclear war, race-riots and space-travel.

Despite the relevance of these issues in the current period of political mayhem, the new adaptation of the show for the Almeida Theatre may still come as a bit of a surprise. Screen-to-stage transformation are not wholly uncommon, in fact there is a whole range of examples in London this winter what with Network at the National as well as The Exorcist and Young Frankenstein in the West-End.

However, what makes this show such a curiosity is the fact that the source material remains mostly unknown in the UK. Sitting next to me in the theatre was an American fan who described how popular the show is in on the other side of the Atlantic, episodes played non-stop for 24 hours every Christmas. But although it has a huge cultural legacy, making its influence known in shows like Twin Peaks, Black Mirror or in Jordan Peele’s hit film Get Out, it is a product that simply does not command the same prestige over here.

For this theatrical version, Anne Washburn has chosen to weave together 8 popular episodes, dipping and diving across storylines with recurring motifs that seep between them. We are shown the hunt for an Alien among a group of stranded bus-passengers and meet a man who cannot sleep for fear of being killed by a female circus performer. We see a woman invite a little girl into her house only to realise it is a version of her younger self, and two parents who lose their daughter through a worm-hole in her bedroom wall. Each vignette is surreal and disturbing and when melded together as they are here have a collective effect which is dizzyingly strange.

Of course, one of the problems of including so many different stories in one show is that it invites unfavourable comparison between segments as well as potential criticisms of incoherence. Certainly, some of the different sections are more effective at getting under your skin than others. A story about a slowly disappearing crew of pilots requires alot of exposition and is undermined by its necessarily detached characters and inconclusive ending. It is noticeably inferior to another sketch about a family who refuse to share their bunker with their neighbours, triggering a searing argument about race, class and nationality.

Whilst the former feels crammed in, failing to compliment any of the other stories, the latter is clearly chosen to resonate with today’s audience, something the nervous laughter and groans of recognition do something to prove. Similarly, a particularly famous episode from the original series about a woman with a bandaged face is reduced to a tiny side-show during a transition between scenes, barely comprehensible for those not familiar with Serling’s original.

Indeed, the show works best when it treats its material with good faith. For this production, the Almeida has had a proscenium arch built, framing the performance space in a way that replicates a television screen. It has the effect of distancing spectators and morphing the action into a kind of pastiche, patronising the very earnest subject matter through the act of mimicry and exaggeration. Serling’s monologue, for instance, is repeatedly interrupted in a quasi-slapstick way. The scenes that make the biggest impression however are those that break through these mannered, sometimes farcical, stylisations. Although a lovestory between astronaut and mission controller seems a tad unbelievable, for example, the straightness with which it is played renders it more moving than much of the rest.

With a brilliantly evocative sound and lighting design, and several magic-tricks up its sleeves, The Twilight Zone still thrills in the scenes which might not live up to the incisive TV original. Although you are sometimes wondering how much of the action qualifies as filler, you are never close to switching off. This is a good winter-show: something fun, clever and accessible. Whimsical in its worse moments but not without teeth, anyone in possession of a ticket to The Twilight Zone should know they’re holding a passport to another dimension.

Oxford defends don accused of “whitewashing” the British empire

4

Oxford University has defended a professor after student campaigners accused him of using a “racist trope” to “whitewash” the history of empire.

Common Ground condemned Nigel Biggar’s “historical amnesia” towards British imperialism, questioning his suitability to lead the recently launched ‘Ethics and Empire’ project.

But an Oxford spokesperson has now hit back at the charge, stating that the University supports “academic freedom of speech”, and that the history of empire is a “complex topic” that must be considered “from a variety of perspectives”.

They said: “This is a valid, evidence-led academic project and Professor Biggar, who is an internationally-recognised authority on the ethics of empire, is an entirely suitable person to lead it.”

Writing in The Times on November 30, Biggar, Regius Professor of Moral and Pastoral Theology at Christ Church, published an article entitled ‘Don’t feel guilty about our colonial history’.

While admitting that inexcusable atrocities were overseen by the British Empire, he claimed it left a legacy in other countries which many people value. He emphasised the “goods of security and the rule of law” that British colonialism brought, which he claimed gave imperial rule “popular legitimacy”.

On Thursday, Common Ground Oxford released a public statement denouncing Biggar’s views.

They stated his implication that pre-colonial societies had no political order was a “hackneyed and fictional trope”.

Highlighting his call to “moderate our post-imperial guilt” as being the most dangerous, they claim it would make Britain feel it had a “right to meddle in other countries’ affairs”.

Further concerns were raised at Biggar’s co-leading of a project on ‘Ethics and Empire’, with an aim “to measure apologies and critiques of empire against historical data from antiquity to modernity across the globe”.

In a statement, Common Ground said: “Is this what is needed at the University of Oxford – a project led by someone pushing to ‘moderate our post-imperial guilt’ – when Oxford continues to memorialise celebrating slave-owners such as Christopher Codrington and imperialists such as Cecil Rhodes, and when Oxford continues to fail to act to address current-day racism, as demonstrated by the fact that nearly 1 in 3 Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British student in the last year?”

Since Common Ground’s statement, further information has been released about the nature of the project.

The McDonald Centre, the University organisation which announced the project, has stated that it was formed in response to the widespread consensus that “‘empire’ is imperialist; imperialism is wicked; and empire is therefore unethical. Nothing of interest remains to be explored.”

It stresses that the ethics of empires is mixed, pointing out how the the British Empire “suppressed the Atlantic and African slave-trades after 1833, granted black Africans the vote in Cape Colony seventeen years before the United States granted it to African Americans, and offered the only centre of armed resistance to European fascism between May 1940 and June 1941”.

The project is scheduled to run over five years and include five different workshops. The first workshop, ‘Ethics and Empire: The Ancient Period’, has already taken place in July.

The themes of the workshop will progress chronologically, with the the series culminating by considering post-colonial critiques of imperialism.  A central question in all the workshops will be: “How well did empire’s critics or supporters actually understand the historical phenomenon?”

Dan Iley-Williamson – a Queens college politics lecturer and Labour City Councillor – described Biggar as an “ardent apologist for colonialism”.

He attacked the University’s response, telling Cherwell: “Colonialism has no respectable defence. It has ignorant apologists and it has racist apologists.

“If the University cared about amplifying the voices of the marginalised, it wouldn’t give a platform to the likes of Biggar. It would support groups like Rhodes Must Fall, Common Ground, and others who challenge the glorification of Europe’s colonial past.”

Professor Biggar did not respond to a request for comment.

War Horse – ‘Technically brilliant, but lacks the acting to match’

0

Going into the New Theatre last night, nothing could have prepared me for the experience that is reviewing War Horse. I had come with a friend and we had split the price of a ticket as mine was free, and we felt quite chuffed catching a West End show for a tenner. But the minute we got to the theatre, we were guided to a VIP side entrance and handed a golden envelope containing two free tickets to the show, a complementary program, and an invitation to press night gala. We descended the carpeted stairs and were greeted by waiters serving free wine (I think it was merlot but I liked neither the red nor the white, it just felt fancy). There were a lot of old and important-looking people, pink mood lighting, and easy jazz coming from the grand piano in the corner. In the interval we were given a selection of free ice cream. After the show, we were served vegan-and-gluten-free canapes as we mingled with the cast of the show.

I discovered I have a hidden talent for mingling (or else the cast were just really nice).

My friend and other people there said a lot of very good things about the show before we went in, though I had never seen it, read it or watched the film. So as we settled in our seats, I tried to be purposefully sceptical.

The play started with an old man singing a folk song. This man made the show. War Horse is an intense story about the first world war, love, loss and friendship, and Bob Fox’s pure singing voice broke up the tension in absolute relief. He captured the stage with an expressive yet understated presence, and an irony that winked to the audience in spite of the story. The acting in the first half didn’t excite me – Albert was a two-dimensional stereotype of innocence, and his relationship with his parents was unconvincing. But the rest of the action on stage – the lights, the set design, the music and the puppetry – was beautifully done with incredible attention to detail. I remember a particular recurring moment in which a puppet goose ran into a door, and each time it crashed it would just steal a little look to the side, as though it was checking that it hadn’t embarrassed itself before going on its way again. The subtleties in the first half were really the strength of the piece, and gave it a kind of sparkle in spite of the weak characterisation.

(After our free ice cream) the second half was much more powerful than the first. The acting improved with the intensifying storyline, and the choreography of the war scenes was skilfully done. A special mention must be given to Peter Becker, who shone in the role of Friedrich Müller. There was a beautiful vulnerability to his character, and a varied emotional range, which flourished as the story progressed. And naturally, the puppeteering was incredible. In the scene when Joey is alone in no man’s land, I was struck by how well a horse’s experience of life could be expressed using only music, puppetry and physical theatre. By the end, there was a definite sense of or awe in the show. The puppetry, film and music gave a kind of magnitude to the story that left me thinking ‘wow, this is really something’.

Still, I didn’t cry and I laughed infrequently. But War Horse was a really special and entertaining night out. Though the acting was variable, the show was carried with its head held high by the technical elements. The puppetry, the film, the set, and Bob Fox were just astonishing. If you’re looking for a clear message, it’s this: guys, go for the horse.

Parliament Square – ‘an assemblage of half-formed thoughts’

0

In this moment of political crisis, art is one of the essential ways we can make sense of the chaos. Theatres in particular are perfect spaces for exploring the interaction between private lives and public affairs, between individuals and the world that spins around them. An auditorium is both contained and universal. It might present itself as a domestic locus one moment and yet symbolize a global setting the next. From where we sit we swallow stories about specific characters and their experiences whilst simultaneously learning about ourselves and the rest of the world outside. The expansiveness of storytelling means everyone gets an invite to the conversation.

Parliament Square, playing at the Bush Theatre until the 6th January, is one play that not only urges us to think about how the outside world is implicated, but whose very subject is the interplay of our individual and collective circumstances. At the centre of the piece is one drastic and theatrical act of protest. We follow one woman’s journey to this decisive moment and are then presented with the consequences of her decision. The audience sees the ways it effects those she loves, and slowly get a sense of the impact (or lack thereof) it has had on wider society.

The play, written by James Fritz, juggles numerous themes and, in the process, employs a range of stylistic devices: internal monologue, recorded dialogue and time-hopping set-pieces. It is amongst all this variety, however, that the one essential flaw emerges. With so much to say, Fritz’s writing fails to examine any of his ideas in serious depth. It is unclear what is actually being said, or indeed what questions Fritz is trying to lend his focus to. The script is undoubtedly interesting but it falls somewhat short of being genuinely penetrating.

The production takes place in the round, ensuring intimacy and complicity and once again affirming the ubiquitous relevance of an otherwise personal story. When the play starts, our protagonist is sleeping, roused by the cries of another actress, seemingly some sort of inner-voice. For the first-half, these two women move fluidly around the stage as we witness the different obstacles encountered and lies told on Kat’s journey to the center of British government, waiting for the ’15 seconds’ in which she intends to carry out her plans. Recalling Warhol’s ’15 minutes of fame’, this public event that the action accelerates rapidly towards is only revealed at the last moment. It is an upsetting and macabre spectacle, but given how frequently it has been invoked beforehand is somewhat disappointing in its staging which proves unoriginal and undramatic.

Esther Smith is mostly successful at drawing a portrait of a women beset by private and political dilemmas although, at some points, lacked drive. One does not get the impression that this was a radical who would genuinely resort to extremist protest, nor even someone with any clear ideological bent. Joanne Howarth on the other hand is impressive as a mother trying to come to terms with what her daughter has done. Understated and convincing, she cleverly balances an unconditional maternal care with disapproval and even anger. Likewise, Kelly Hotten is great as a recovery physiotherapist. Offered far too little stage-time, she is an engaging and likeable presence.

Watching this play that acknowledges a country that ‘feels sick’, it is hard not to admire Fritz’s attempt to begin a much needed conversation on the nature, effects and ethics of protest in Britain.  Ultimately, he seems to say, it is the simple pleasures of life that pull us towards  defensive activism but that can also lure us into the relative safety of political apathy. If all we really want to do is ‘have a bath, have sex, eat lasagna’, the question remains: is that something to fight for? Or is it something to indulge in while we have it, even if such a life remains exclusive and unsustainable?

Parliament Square has its moment but too often shies away from taking any explicit standpoints on the issues it explores. The stage when the play opens is bedecked with a jumble of household objects. Ultimately, it is this image that the production most resembles. It lacks clarity and achieves only an assemblage of half-formed thoughts. Although it gestures to the moment we are living through, it still fails to decode the chaos.

‘Cat Person’ — how does literature survive in a viral age?

1

“Cat Person”, Kristen Roupenian’s ubiquitous short story about the difficulties of modern relationships and unwanted sex, has captured the internet consciousness with a speed and virulence unlike any other piece of literature that has emerged online. The piece feels entirely germane to the current zeitgeist, released within the ongoing discourse on sexual harassment and abuse within the media.

Its is a piece of fiction that resonates with online dating experiences, where people are constantly contactable, and the resulting ease at which the actual people involved can be overlooked. Roupenian states in an interview: “our initial impression of a person is pretty much entirely a mirage of guesswork and projection”. Being online only magnifies these projections, where personal profiles signify superficial images of individuals. Social media has helped to craft this story from within and without. People and content are so easily consumable on the internet, and thus, especially given our current cultural moment, “Cat Person” is suddenly everywhere, and everyone has an opinion on it.

The purpose of fiction in the internet age has entered the keyboard battlefield. Emily Temple writes that the problem with many reactions to “Cat Person” is the rhetoric of relatability that it is criticised or praised with. “Cat Person” is about the pressures facing women who find themselves in situations where they feel threatened. The positive reaction to the story, driven by young women, is largely a gut-sense of ‘I know how this experience feels’.

Temple’s point is that it becomes problematic when people are using relatability as the sole way to gauge whether this story has meaning. Is literature more important when it stimulates conversation than when it achieves a certain degree literary quality? Internet culture has turned relatability into a currency. In the case of “Cat Person”, this seems to have happened at the expense of the piece’s innate status as literature.

As a piece of fiction, there is specific intent and creative capital with which the story is crafted and in whose experience the reader partakes. This is lost when the piece is interpreted and discussed as a relatable think-piece or essay to be toyed with.

Enter “Cat Person: What Robert (probably) thought”. Published a week later by BBC Three, the piece is an egregious attempt to produce an alternative narrative and turn Robert into a character to empathise with. Dangerously, the text isn’t presented as an accompanying short story, but as a hypothetical response excusing a character who is purposefully underwritten in the original. In doing so, the piece violently negates the validity of Roupenian’s narrative of female interior experience and her reader’s response.

The fact “Cat Person: What Robert (probably) thought” has been published without an author abuses Roupenian’s status as one. Her name and details of the original publication are not mentioned until the piece ends: its subtitle, “The New Yorker told Margot’s story. Here’s Robert’s”, nullifies the function of “Cat Person” as fiction and asks Roupenian’s characters to be real people and, thus, accountable. The criticism that “Cat Person” is biased against Robert is unproductive. It is a story of female experience, Margot’s interaction with Robert’s character is driven by his ambiguity and how she projects a persona for him to inhabit. BBC Three shatters this narrative by developing Robert beyond this projection.

Most distressingly, however, “Cat Person: What Robert (probably) thought” seems to be jumping on the fact that “Cat Person” is viral more than trying to engage in a discussion with its content. Fundamentally, this ‘developed’ Robert is an extended projection of the persona created by Margot in the original, but only this time on part of the reader. As we only have Margot’s impressions from Roupenian’s story to compare with, “Cat Person: What Robert (probably) thought” fails in its attempt to attack Margot’s accountability because it forgets that neither character is real. Fiction does not have to present rounded individuals to make a point.

“Cat Person” is a formidable cultural monument for our present political and social landscape. In the world of post-truth and fake-news, the fact that fiction is driving our current debate is pertinent. We don’t yet know how to talk about viral fiction. But the development of a critical framework online is exciting, relevant, and most importantly accessible. Literature matters, and the importance of “Cat Person” to the evolving language with which we analyse online fiction is unprecedented.

Evidence of magic at the British Library

0

Upon entering the first room of the British Library exhibition, Harry Potter: a History of Magic, one’s attention is immediately captured by the pencil drawing of a familiar-looking boy, wearing round glasses kept together by a certain amount of sellotape.

A mass of unkempt dark hair falls disorderly on his forehead, hiding, as the viewer must know, a thin, lightning-shaped scar: the only mark of the boy’s survival, and one of the many symbols the world has learned to associate with Harry Potter.

The eyes in Jim Kay’s portrait of Harry have an almost entrancing quality, forcing the visitor to take a closer look, inviting them to start the journey. This is the name of the first room in the exhibition, ‘Journey’, and a very appropriate name it is, too. Just past Harry’s portrait, we find the premise of the first volume in the saga, typed by J.K. Rowling in 1995,

“Harry Potter lives with his aunt, uncle and cousins because his par- ents died in a car-crash – or so he has always been told …”. Next to it hangs the extraordinary reader’s report of Alice Newton, the (at the time) eight-year-old daughter of the founder and Chief Executive of Bloomsbury, reading: “The excitement of this book made me feel warm inside. I think it is possibly one of the best books an 8/9 year old could read”.

Together with the Rowling’s premise, this note, scribbled in pencil all those years ago, helps the viewer truly perceive how far J.K. Rowling’s story has come, how long and fraught with dangers its journey.

The first room, then, puts us in the right mind set to want to learn more, and to explore not only the history of the story, in terms of how it was conceived and written and published, but the past before the story, the hoard of history and myth that is buried at the very foundation of the Harry Potter universe, and that which distinguishes it from all other imaginary worlds.

The crowd of books flying against the black ceiling leads us forward, towards two of Jim Kay’s portraits at the end of the corridor, respectively depicting Professor Dumbledore eating sherbet lemons and Professor McGonagall looking serenely intimidating.

These seem to be inviting us to peer into the next room, and to the portrait at its entrance. This belongs to another Hogwarts headmaster, Severus Snape (or Snivellus, as we like to call him in the Gryffindor common room), as part of the ‘Potions’ room.

Indeed each room in the exhibition is associated with a Hogwarts subject, allowing those who feel firmly part of the the Wizarding world to indulge in the nostalgia of Hogwarts school, while at the same time helping the crowds of Muggles find their way among objects like Iron Age cauldrons and scrolls detailing the making of the philosopher’s stone.

While it is certainly pieces like the golden-enclosed bezoar (apparently, a mass of undigested fibre actually found in the stomach of goats!) which immediately attract the attention of unashamed, hardcore potterheads (like the writer of this article), the magic of the British Library exhibition is that all its items, apart from their Potter associations, are incredibly fascinating in their own right.

In fact, a beautiful balance is achieved between all that is Rowling-related, such as the writer’s notes and plans and the lovely sketches she drew while working on the books, and items whose only association with Harry Potter is their existence in the same world of magic and mystery.

Moreover, Jim Kay’s superb illustrations of the first three books act as thread all through this wonderful assemblage of enchanting objects. However, the success of Harry Potter: a History of Magic is more than the sum of its parts. It is due at least in part to its bewitching atmosphere, which manages incredibly well to capture the subtle irony of the books.

With its star-ridden ceilings, its floating cups, its invisibility cloak “only visible as a slight shimmer if you look at it out of the corner of your eye”, it truly respects the character of the story it aims to bring to life.

A woman weaving herself into history

Hanging midway through Modern Art Oxford’s latest exhibition, ‘Blood in the Grass’ (1966) is a piece unlike any of Hannah Ryggen’s other tapestries. Perhaps that’s why it’s so poignant. The emerald matted grass-like threads are intersected by violent, red stripes – hypnotising acidic colours screaming out at their audience for attention.

Lyndon B. Johnson stands rigidly to the right: adorned in crimson Navajo prints, and mouth drawn in a tight frown, he dangles his dog by the ears. To viewers of the ‘60s, this image would have been familiar, as it recalls a 1964 photograph of the President, widely circulated in the press.

‘Blood in the Grass’ is the only work in which Ryggen made use of manufactured dye, straying from her practice of natural colouring. And everything about it – from the vigorous colours to repurposing of a symbolic press image – reflects the excitable spirit of the new protest decade in which it was woven.

In fact, the Norwegian artist was herself taking a stand against Western media in this work: in Ryggen’s eyes, the papers’ focus on Johnson mistreating his pooch over escalating US airstrikes on Vietnam indicated a disingenuous focus of the press.

Ryggen was no stranger to protest though, taking up objection and opposition through her weaving long before the 60s. Born in 1894, she lived through the economic crises of the 1930s, Nazi occupation of Norway the following decade, and the Vietnam War. She was a member of Norway’s Communist Party and a fierce defender of democracy, her husband was imprisoned in the labour camp Grini, and her only daughter was diagnosed with the then little understood condition, epilepsy.

The overwhelming weavings on the walls chart this political and personal upheaval of her lifetime, visualising the struggle against oppression. Both the mental and physical brutality of the Nazi regime are brought out in ‘Death of Dreams’ (1936) for instance, in which a lifeless corpse is dragged by Hitler, Hermann Göring, and Joseph Goebbels over a pit of Swastikas, towards a cage of incarcerated, comatose souls.

Nobel Peace Prize winner Carl von Ossietzky chillingly shakes his shackled hands at us from behind bars on the far left – reflecting the artist’s defence of pacifism. Activism for peace again arises in later weavings, notably the symbolic ‘Mr Atom’ (1952). Here, the haloed Atom King – a personification of nuclear weapons – floats cross-legged above Adam and Eve.

Seen as an almighty God-like figure, and attributed the Norwegian abbreviation of HRH, the focal figure suggests Ryggen views nuclear power as an undemocratic and unassailable threat to the human race.

‘Mr Atom’ depicts one more figure of note – the artist herself. Clutching Eve in one hand, and her tapestry needle in the other, this was not the first time Ryggen had woven herself into her work. She appears in ‘Jul Kvale’ (1956), grabbing the Communist politician’s arm. In ‘6 October 1942’ (1943), in a small boat in choppy waters, floating among the heads of local police leaders who had betrayed Norway to the Nazis, and in ‘A Free One’ (1947/8), amidst struggling workers, holding a shining sunflower. Encasing oneself in political pieces like this is not all too common for artists, and Ryggen writing herself into the protest raises an interesting point, especially given her gender.

In directly tying herself to the issue at stake – be it nuclear armament, Nazi occupation, or dissolution of class boundaries – Ryggen makes a point of bringing women visibly into the public, political sphere.

And though her medium may be traditional ‘women’s work’, her compositions and subjects are anything but. Tapestries of this scale and ambition resemble history paintings by the likes of David and Goya.

Recording events of the twentieth century, Ryggen too was depicting history. Yet through her woven works, with the presence of the female artist, she ensured there would now be space for women in the writing. Interestingly, Ryggen never described herself as a weaver, always as a painter. It just so happened that her tool was “not the brush, but the loom”.

Unfazed by contemporary gender norms, it seems she was an unknowing pioneer for women in the art – and wider world, long before the feminist movement of the 1970s broke out. And as activist feminist art seems recently to have peaked once more, this relatively unknown artist’s work is the perfect source of reflection and inspiration we all need.

The legend of Sherlock Holmes

0

In 1893, swarms of English citizens wore grieving black armbands. There was a sombre mood in the air; one even described it as ‘life’s darkest hour’. What national hero had died to create such a reaction? It was none other than the cleverest hero of them all, Sherlock Holmes.

Obviously Sherlock could never die in a literal sense, after all, he was a work of fiction. But he was not dead in a canonical sense either.

To those Victorian fanboys and fangirls, and subsequent generations, Sherlock was, and always will be, an extraordinary figure. His powers of deduction have earned him a status that has extended beyond literature, achieved only by select others such as Dracula. Holmes is no longer just a Doylean creation – he is an icon of British culture, and a type upon which to base fictional creations, such as Dr Gregory House.

Thanks to the character becoming public domain in the UK and USA, Sherlock has been listed in the Guinness World Records as the ‘most portrayed movie character’, having had 70 actors play him in over 200 films. The most recent of these starred Robert Downey Jr. as Sherlock, and reinvented Sherlock into a bare-knuckle fighting hero more in line with contemporary action heroes. It is this ability for reinvention that is his lasting genius. Sherlock can be a gun-wielding fighter, or a pipe-wielding gentleman, or an animated gnome, but he remains recognisable as the shrewd and sassy detective.

It is not only in film we see evidence of this; Sherlock’s ability to be transported into different media forms has kept the character thriving in our technological climate. Apart from books, magazines and theatre, Sherlock has been brought to life in comics, computer games, and perhaps most famously in recent years, television.

The BBC’s Sherlock is the perfect example of the adaptable nature of the character. Not only is Sherlock independently humanised alongside the foil of Watson, but he is brought into the modern world in a seamless translation that does not infringe on his character. This unique timelessness and mutability is what allows the recreation of Sherlock again and again without damaging his figure.

In short, detective Holmes continues to be reborn, in what has now become not only The Return of Sherlock Holmes, but The Legend of Sherlock Holmes. Conan Doyle, however, would probably not have approved of Sherlock’s continuing legend – after all, he did try to kill the character off in The Final Problem. But perhaps Sherlock’s now iconic status would change his mind.