Friday 18th July 2025
Blog Page 859

OxView: Top Horrors

Sandy Elliot
-
0
OxView: Top Horrors

Pan’s Labyrinth

This dark fairy tale interweaves two plots, and it is often difficult to tell where one ends and the other begins. The horrifying depiction of ‘paleface’ – one of the most frightening scenes in all of cinema – is perhaps itself less horrifying than the cold, calculating malice of the fascist colonel, and the resulting stomach-churning violence.

 

Requiem for a Dream

Darren Aronofsky’s films are known for their jarring aesthetic. In this film, it seems to be the small things—the unnerving sudden disappearance of a half-grapefruit and black coffee with ‘gulp’ sound effects, for instance. But, by the end of the film, the entire thing feels like a nightmare, complete with a raging fridge-monster trying to devour a hapless dieting grandmother.

 

The Elephant Man

Though sometimes called ‘body horror’, the true horror of this film is its study of the dark underbelly of the human psyche. It is our penchant towards ‘othering’, our insatiable desire for a freak show (even when we are ourselves the freaks), which is dissected in this devastating film.

Yes, the tabloids report fairly on Oxford

Jordan Bernstein
-
0
Yes, the tabloids report fairly on Oxford

My family, a year after I started studying here, are still incredibly excited about the whole Oxford thing. They’ll boast about it to friends, support Oxford in the Boat Race and, of course, save clippings from newspapers that mention the latest news from in and around the University.

It was in this spirit that I was greeted by a family member in an airport last week by being handed Friday’s copy of The Sun. Whether she was expressing hope that I’d be equally startled by the Oxford story on the front page, or she was seeking reassurance that I wasn’t in Piers Gav, I sadly don’t know. But there, sprawled across the paper, was a bunch of students from my University scantily clad in a picture that few of them could ever have hoped would end up in the national press.

Cue a renewed campaign to ban The Sun from campuses.

In any case, I wasn’t particularly surprised. Just like Bullingdon drinking parties, just like cloak-and-dagger Union politics, and just like quidditch club, we all know this sort of stuff goes on, even if we’ve never been to a meeting (sigh).

Does the media have a right to report on Piers Gav? Of course. Is such a story fair to the University, its staff and its students? You bet.

First of all we shouldn’t pretend that it’s only a practiced sensationalism from the country’s top educational establishments that makes it into the papers. The Mail last week ran a story on a move to ban scholars’ gowns (rightly ridiculing the initiative). Large swathes of newspapers’ spreads are annually devoted to reporting on league tables. And yet some among the student body have the audacity to claim that the fairest coverage of the University is shown only when the general public are fed an idyllic view of the University? When people who have spent £200 on a party aren’t presented as people who have spent £200 on a party? When attention isn’t drawn to the fact that members of an orgy club were out in public in broad daylight and dominatrix gear? What ever happened to balanced and unbiased reporting by a free press being the cornerstone of democracy?

It might not be the University all of us like, and it might not be the University all of us know. But it’s the University all of us attend. And to argue the contrary is to solemnly wish that we could have our cake and eat it too. After all, where else in life could we present a view of our experience that focused only on the good? I suspect that despite current media coverage, Oxbridge CVs will still find their way to the top of recruitment pile. If you want something to moan about, why not that? People make assumptions the whole time when meeting someone who was at Oxford. The reputation is still alive, if slightly elevated by anecdotes from the middle of a field somewhere.

The use of the picture, specifically, is more controversial. But to expect anything more of The Sun is either to launch a tirade against tabloid journalism more generally, or else demand that because of the pomp, circumstance and privilege on which most of the students at this University spend their time capitalising we should be given special treatment, no matter what we wear or where we choose to wear it. In any case, regardless of whether the printing was fair to individuals, it was not unfair to the University.

Something I believe lies behind this reaction to recent media coverage is a protest at the type of salacious stories on which the tabloids are choosing to report. We were all happy to ridicule David Cameron when seedy allegations of his time at the Piers Gaveston society were published. Students enjoy distancing themselves from the ‘Oxford’ type of posh, straight, white men all the while publicising the fact that institutions such as the Bullingdon still exist. What I think is unique to the coverage of Piers Gav, trashings and post-ball pictures is that suddenly it’s not just the posh student that’s fair game, but everyone at Oxford, whether coming from a position of supposed ‘privilege’ or not, is now being gawked at for their exploits here. The Sun has managed what many of its Oxford critics have rightly railed against for years. It has shattered any illusion of an Oxford archetype.

Long-term, what do we even mean to say that press coverage of Oxford is unfair? Imagine the wonders that this will do for the diversity of applications next year.

Oxford English Dictionary adds ‘woke’ to its list of new words

Fred Dimbleby
-
0
Oxford English Dictionary adds ‘woke’ to its list of new words

The Oxford English Dictionary has added a new meaning to the word ‘woke’ in its June update of the dictionary.

The word was originally in the dictionary as a past participle of ‘awake’, but the new definition includes a modern political use of the term.

“By the mid-20th century, woke had been extended figuratively to refer to being ‘aware’ or ‘well informed’ in a political or cultural sense,” Katherine Connor Martin, OED’s Head of US dictionaries said.

“In the past decade, that meaning has been catapulted into mainstream use with a particular nuance of ‘alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice’, popularized through the lyrics of the 2008 song Master Teacher by Erykah Badu, in which the words ‘I stay woke’ serve as a refrain, and more recently through its association with the Black Lives Matter movement, especially on social media.”

Black Lives Matter demonstrators.

The update added over 1,200 terms to the dictionary, which is published by Oxford University Press. ‘Post-truth’, which was the 2016 word of the year, was also added – referencing the modern political phenomenon of a style of politics that gives less attention to facts.

The update was good news for Aaron Sorkin fans, as the West Wing was referenced as the first use of a new term. The definition of the noun ‘thing’ was updated to include the sense of “a genuine or established phenomenon or practice”.

The dictionary referenced the term’s first recorded use in a 2000 West Wing walk and talk when the characters ask ‘‘did you know that ‘leaf peeping’ was a thing?”

The update was less good news for enthusiasts of the ancient Egyptian beer ‘zythum’. The beverage was replaced as the last word of the dictionary by ‘Zyzzyva’, which refers to a species of South American weevils.

A number of other traditional and modern words were added:

Boston marriage: U.S. used euphemistically to refer to the cohabitation of two women, esp. in a romantic relationship or intimate friendship; now chiefly historical

Son of a bachelor: used as a term of abuse or contempt

Baltic: Chiefly of weather conditions: bitterly cold, freezing

Woke: Originally: well-informed, up-to-date. Now chiefly: alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice; frequently in stay woke (often used as an exhortation).

Thing: colloq. (orig. U.S.). A genuine or established phenomenon or practice. Typically somewhat depreciative, often in questions conveying surprise or incredulity, as is that (even) a thing?, how can that be a thing?, etc.

Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip – a neglected Sorkin revisited

Becky Cook
-
0
Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip – a neglected Sorkin revisited

Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip premiered on American television screens over a decade ago, as Aaron Sorkin’s new and distinctive offering of brisk dialogue and erudite allusions. It was instantly hailed by critics as another triumph of Sorkin’s, fresh off the finale of The West Wing. However, it was then axed after a sole series, subsequently raising questions over whether it was really that good.

Studio 60 followed the employees of a late night sketch show, similar to its real-life counterpart Saturday Night Live, that is at risk of compromising comedic integrity for the commercialist agenda of their network. The droll heroes, played by Bradley Whitford and Matthew Perry, are reemployed four years after departing the show with hopes of revitalising it, with the help of a new network executive. Sorkin’s argument is clear: the art form of television has the capacity to do good.

From the outset the brooding cinematography matches the effervescent dialogue, replete with witticisms that beg to be written down and memorised by viewers. The rich dialogue is complemented by the characters. Even the villainous network chairman refuses to remain peripheral and insensitive, boasting a modest sense of humour that even begins to steal scenes. Studio 60 seems to posit an optimistic world where even the crooked have a hidden heroism.

Eyebrows are raised over why this quick, rich and bold piece of television was cancelled. While, in Sorkin fashion, it resorts to moralising at points, it is compelling viewing from the outset. It seems to have sadly been affected by the success of its predecessor, The West Wing. Comparison is inevitable, and sadly Studio 60 falls short.

The irony of the show lies in its status as a polemic on the cultural wasteland of television; this was becoming and has since become groundless.  Television is now a fertile ground, with fresh shows constantly emerging to quash the mediocre and false. Sadly it seems that Studio 60, despite its distinct potential, fell prey to this persistent substitution.

Bullingdon Club kicked out of Christ Church by college porters – video

Jack Hunter
-
0
Bullingdon Club kicked out of Christ Church by college porters – video

Members of Oxford’s notorious drinking society the Bullingdon Club were marched out of Christ Church last weekend because they did not have permission to take their annual group photograph on college grounds.

Each year, the Bullingdon Club assembles to pose for their group photo on the steps of Christ Church’s Canterbury Quad – in the hope of replicating David Cameron and Boris Johnson’s infamous shot.

But when members gathered in Christ Church on Sunday 18 June with a professional photographer to take this year’s photo, they were removed by college porters after students protested.

Footage of the incident, obtained by Cherwell, shows the Bullingdon’s members in their blue bow ties being escorted out the college by staff members, while mocked by Christ Church students.

The video shows a delighted group of Christ Church students watch the Bullingdon members leave to the tune of the Benny Hill theme. One of those present, second year Prismo Marchant, told Cherwell: “They do not represent the values of our student body and we have made very clear that they are not welcome in our college.

“They left with their tails between their legs and Christ Church doesn’t want them back.”

Members of the group are confronted by Christ Church staff

Following the ejection, the Bullingdon Club have now reportedly been “banned” from Christ Church.

The Christ Church Dean, Prof Martyn Percy, told Cherwell: “In common with other colleges, we don’t allow groups to use college buildings for self-promoting photography unless permission has been requested in advance, and then agreed.

“Such permission was not sought, and the group therefore requested to leave.”

It is the latest setback for the secretive drinking society, which has reportedly faced torrid times in recent years. Reports last year suggested the club may be on the verge of extinction with only two members left, after a spell of bad publicity deterred many from joining.

The Bullingdon Club had been hoping to take their picture on the steps.

The incident is the second time in recent weeks that past or present Bullingdon Club members have faced embarrassment on Oxford college premises. In May, ex-Bullingdon Club member Boris Johnson was heckled by students upon returning to his old college Balliol.

One student shouted at Boris: “Do you want to smash a restaurant? Do you want to burn £50 in front of a homeless person,” in reference to the reported debauched behaviour of the club’s members.

Fire crews called to acid leak at Engineering Department

Matthew Roller
-
0
Fire crews called to acid leak at Engineering Department

Four staff at the University’s Department of Engineering Science were treated by firefighters and paramedics on Friday morning, following exposure to sulphuric acid fumes.

46 batteries in the basement of the department had overheated and swelled to cause the leak, and Oxfordshire County Council Fire and Rescue services were called to the scene within minutes.

Those who had been exposed to the fumes were treated on the scene, with one man taken to hospital for further precautionary checks.

The fire crews consulted with on-site management and the battery manufacturer to create a plan to deal with the incident, and firefighters were sent into the basement wearing breathing apparatus with a gas monitor and thermal image camera.

It was apparent that water could not be used to cool the batteries down, as despite the fact they were unconnected form their power supply, they were still holding electric charge.

Therefore, a cooling fan had to be used, extending the time before the building could be safely handed back to the University.

The crews left the scene at around 5:15pm, almost five hours after they had been summoned.

Incident Commander, Station Manager Paul Webster said: “This was an unusual incident as most people expect that if you apply water to something hot it will cool it down – this is not always the case, especially when electricity or chemicals are involved.

“I would like to thank the staff and students for their co-operation during this lengthy incident”.

Life Divided: Oxlove

Maxim Parr-Reid and James Lamming
-
0
Life Divided: Oxlove

Maxim Parr-Reid: For

Sandwiched between a cornucopia of confession (Oxfess) and a fissure of ferocity (Oxfeud), Oxlove comes as both a welcome break from the stupor of revision, and a wickedly effective means of procrastination. It is an antidote to the banality of Oxfeud and the neurotic nature of Oxfess, and the perfect excuse to liberally dust my Facebook news feed with the warm hue of ‘love reacts’.

There is not a library in the University where you won’t see undergrads ferociously scrolling, essay forgotten, in search of a personal post. All I can say is—long live the chirpse. I’ve never received one myself (nor am I fishing for one here, I hasten to add). Maybe you’ve been lucky on that front. Yet I have made use of the page. Obviously I don’t want to embarrass the subject of my submissions, but Oxlove allows us to pour forth a welter of words expressing the way we feel in the comfort of complete anonymity (most of the time).

What a joy it is to use anonymous epistles to be open about chirpses and crushes without the slightest chance of being unmasked. Oxlove allows us to pen dreamy missives to our love interests and explain how we really feel. In this sense, it is a truly liberating platform.

Who needs Tinder for time wasting? You could scroll through Oxlove forever and never cease to be bemused, bedazzled even, by the effervescent waves of emotion zooming through this university. No visit to the RadCam (something itself supposedly done in a vain attempt to elicit an Oxlove post—who’d have thought it?) would be complete without perusing the poetry of that page—and of course hunting for something written about you no doubt.

The vexed question of what women want has finally been answered, it seems. Keep your drunken advances in “el Brigo” or your attempts to pull in Park End—all that she wants is an Oxlove.

James Lamming: Against

To the terrible page,
With some dubious chat,
Your poetry’s bad,
And your rhyme scheme is clapped.

Oxlove’s your name
But you’re no Casanova-
Your time in the spotlight
Is soon to be over.

You no longer rhyme
And your quality’s worse,
Is it really poetry
If it’s just in blank verse?

I’m bitter, I know,
I didn’t find love,
Though I posted so often
In the form of above.

Anonymity was heaven,
I wrote odes to a few
of my favourite part-time flings,
And my girlfried never knew.

But please, Oxlove, please,
Let’s rekindle our flame,
The recent content
Has been exceedingly tame.

Please, Oxlove, please,
Take me back in your arms,
Display once again
Your amorous charms.

I’ll be good to you, Oxlove,
In my heart and the sack,
O please, dear Oxlove,
I just want you back,

Yours most sincerely,
one heart-broken hack

View from Northern Ireland: a caveat for the Conservatives

Daniel Xu
-
0
View from Northern Ireland: a caveat for the Conservatives

Before June 9, most in Britain probably hadn’t heard of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). Yet with ten MPs, they’ve been the largest party in Northern Ireland for the past decade, and are set to play a crucial role in propping up a Conservative minority government.

Since then, you’ve no doubt learned that they are fervently anti-abortion and strongly oppose the rights of the LGBTQ community. You may even have seen the video of Reverend Ian Paisley (the party’s founder) heckle Pope John Paul II and denounce him as the “Antichrist.” It’s no secret that the party’s founder and many of their senior leadership are fundamentalist Calvinists.

The aim of this article is not to expose the DUP’s fanatical conservatism or how a Conservative-DUP deal could jeopardise the Northern Ireland peace process; these are concerns which have been addressed in writing by countless others. Rather I want to give my opinion, having lived in Northern Ireland and observed the DUP way of politics, of why the Conservatives should beware of their new political bedfellows.

The first thing to understand is that the DUP are popular, not because of their conservative views, but despite them. They have a large and dedicated following who will support them despite their contentious economic or social policies, so long as they present themselves as protectors of the Union with Great Britain and as a bastion against Sinn Fein.

For example, late last year it emerged that current DUP leader and former First Minister Arlene Foster had overseen a mismanaged renewable heat incentive scheme that will cost the public purse £400 million. Under this scheme one farmer was set to receive £1 million over 20 years for heating an empty shed. The scheme was allowed to continue for years despite concerns being raised by multiple whistle-blowers. Foster resisted all calls to resign or step aside temporarily, amidst allegations of corruption and cover-up — even from one of her own ministers. Such a political scandal would have felled the leader of any other British political party, but didn’t cause so much as a dent in the DUP’s popularity at the polls. In fact, the party received more votes than ever at the snap assembly election called after the botched heating scheme was exposed.

Given their unwavering base and the extraordinary power they now wield in Westminster, the DUP are now stronger and bolder than ever before. On the other hand, as a consequence of a disastrous general election result, the Conservatives are weak and exposed to attack from within.

Conservatives may take consolation in the fact that the two parties are “natural allies”, as described by one Conservative MP. Both parties are right of centre, pro-Brexit, and Unionist. Moreover, the DUP are intensely antipathetic to Jeremy Corbyn due to his perceived sympathies with the IRA. However, this does not mean that the DUP will yield easily, and do the Conservative’s bidding. To the contrary, a senior DUP source warned that they should not be “taken for granted”.

Moreover, closer examination reveals that the two parties are less politically aligned than many might think. Socially, the DUP are far more conservative. It was recently revealed that Arlene Foster had asked the Scottish government to curtail access of Northern Irish citizens to Scottish same-sex marriages. By contrast, Scotland’s Conservative leader is openly lesbian. Economically, the DUP are less conservative — they opposed rises to tuition fees, the bedroom tax, and cuts to the winter fuel allowance. On Brexit, the DUP are keen for a softer Brexit to protect trade and travel with the Republic of Ireland.

The Conservatives should also not mistake the DUP’s unionism as a desire to act in the best interests of the UK as a whole. For the DUP, unionism means to fight for the Union flag to fly on Belfast City Hall every day of the year (instead of just on designated days, as is the practice in most British councils). It means ignoring the importance of the Irish language by opposing an Irish Language Act (even though both Scotland and Wales have a Gaelic and Welsh Language Act). Furthermore, the DUP may also be described as Ulster Nationalists — they desire what’s best for Northern Ireland within the UK, and it is certain that they will press for increased funding. Given that Northern Ireland already receives 24 per cent more public spending per person than England, this would undoubtedly be an unpalatable request for the Conservatives.

As a final caveat, those of us in Northern Ireland have lived without a devolved government since the Northern Ireland Executive collapsed in January, triggered in part by Arlene Foster’s refusal to resign after the heating scheme scandal. Talks between the DUP and Sinn Fein (their power-sharing partners) to restore a functioning government have resulted in nothing but mudslinging and missed deadlines.

Perhaps it’s not too difficult to understand why after almost two weeks of talks, and despite early Conservative optimism that a deal would be concluded before the Queen’s Speech, one has yet to materialise. In contrast, it took only five days for the Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition to be agreed. It would appear that the Conservatives are beginning to realise that Arlene Foster, too, is a “bloody difficult woman”, much more so than Theresa May.

Oxford exact revenge at Lord’s

Tom Goodwin
-
0
Oxford exact revenge at Lord’s

Oxford secured a nine run victory over Cambridge at Lord’s, a satisfying result after last week’s ten run defeat in the 20-over format.

Despite a green wicket and light cloud coverage, Oxford chose to bat first upon winning the toss. This decision was validated as the openers began well, withstanding some probing bowling, tallying a patient 35 without loss from the first eight overs.

Moses was the pick of the bowlers early, conceding just 18 runs off his first five overs. Despite a few nervous flashes past second slip, Oxford looked comfortable before Escott chopped onto his own stumps for 21.

Naylor and Hughes consolidated nicely, battling a workman-like Poulson, who bowled a 9 over spell of 0/32.  The pair built an impressive 52 run partnership before the captain Hughes was unluckily run out for 32. A strong straight drive from Naylor was finger-tipped by Poulson before hitting the stumps at the non-striker’s end, where Hughes was out of his ground.

Gnodde arrived at the crease with the intent of upping the run rate, and he did just that on his way to an impressive 76 off 60. After being dropped on the boundary on 51, Gnodde looked like leading Oxford towards a damaging total before an innings defining spell from Moses.

Taking four wickets in three overs, Moses sparked a middle order batting collapse that saw Oxford lose four wickets for just 22. However, the Oxford tail wagged, with a quick-fire 16 run cameo from Marsden seeing Oxford end on 264/8.

Cambridge responded confidently but Marsden’s opening spell of 2/18 off six left the game evenly poised at 52/2 after 12. A frustrating day for Cambridge beckoned as the top order all got starts but failed to carry on.

As Cambridge fell to 111/4, the momentum was well and truly with Oxford, but the introduction of the star with the ball, Tim Moses, changed everything. His 66 run partnership with Dalgleish put Cambridge right back in the game, with Moses’ rapid 45 off 35 threatening to take the game away.

However, the reintroduction of Marsden into the attack brought about a much needed wicket, and the departure of Moses immediately slowed the run rate. Tensions were high at the 40 over mark, as Cambridge required a further 64 runs from the final 60 balls, with five wickets in hand.

A fine bowling performance from Swanson removed Dalgleish for 68 in the 41st over, and from there, Oxford had the upper hand. However, with two overs remaining Cambridge were still very much in the game, needing 21 runs with three wickets to spare. But the wickets kept falling.

Fittingly, Marsden bowled the final over, and picked up the final wicket of the match, bowling opposition skipper Patrick Tice around his legs, to finish with impressive match high figures of 4/33.

Tensions were high and the crowd was vocal in the final few overs, but a strong all round bowling performance from Oxford, particularly from the spin brigade secured a deserving win. Gnodde (76) and Naylor (52) were standouts with the bat while Marsden (4/33 and Swanson (4/58) were the key wicket tackers for Oxford. Tim Moses (4/56 and 45 off 35) was mightily impressive, but it was not enough to secure his side the victory.

The teams appear evenly matched for what will be an exciting four-day game in Cambridge next month.

Students reject move to end the wearing of scholars’ gowns

Henry Straughan
-
0
Students reject move to end the wearing of scholars’ gowns

Students have overwhelming voted against a motion on whether OUSU should oppose the wearing of scholars’ gowns in examinations.

In a consultation poll, 2126 students voted against the motion that OUSU should oppose the wearing of differential gowns in examinations, with 1214 in favour, and 33 abstentions. The poll was open for two days and received a total turnout of 3373—around 14 per cent of the student body.

The results of the poll, which is non-binding, will be discussed and voted on in OUSU’s 1st week Michaelmas Council.

The motion was proposed by Wadham students, Matilda Agace and Isobel Cockbur. Writing in Cherwell, Agace, Cockbur and Taisie Tsikas claimed that “the hierarchical gown structure is fundamentally in conflict with ideals of community and equality that the University espouses”. “Many students are made to feel uncomfortable and nervous by the presence of a visual reminder of what they might perceive as their academic inferiority,” they wrote.

It was further suggested that scholars’ gowns, which cost £45, do not accurately represent academic achievement. An argument in favour of the motion on OUSU’s website argued: “prelims results are more of a reflection of a student’s educational background than their grade in Finals”.

However, there has been strong opposition to the banning of scholars gowns. Writing in Cherwell, Thomas Munro said that it would be “perverse to deny those who have achieved academically the rewards of their success”.

Munro further argued: “to remove the right to wear [scholars’ gowns] from those who have already achieved scholarships reeks of envy, rather than any real desire for reform”.

It remains unclear if the poll will prove decisive on this contentious issue. Because the consultation was solely advisory, OUSU council could still technically vote to adopt the policy of opposing differential gowns in examinations in October.

1...858859860...2,515Page 859 of 2,515

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by James Ashley