Wednesday, May 7, 2025
Blog Page 892

Time-turners and doppelgängers: battling homesickness at Oxford

0

I think I’d be a crippling disappointment to my ten-year-old self. My first thought upon acquiring a time-turner probably wouldn’t revolve around a desire to be simultaneously battered in two tutorials at once. Unlike Hermione Granger, I’d probably first use my additional time to renegotiate my currently distant and frayed relationship with a systemised sleep cycle. After all, it’s sixth week: I’m already the shattered husk of the eager-eyed 0th week student I once pretended to be. At Oxford, there just never seems to be enough time.

Yet, we battle on. Feeling as deflated as IKEA flatpack furniture and tired as aged wallpaper, we furnish our lives with far too much to do. The idea of missing out on the ‘Oxford Experience’ is incomprehensible. We must all bustle on the eight-week-long highway to success and survival. But, amongst all this rapidity there exists a desire to escape. To leave the city, it’s social chaos and unrelenting deadlines, and just, well, go home.

Homesickness is not a foreign concept to the university student. Yet, it seems that Oxford has taken great efforts to create its own special brew. Procured guilt and an undertone of apparent selfishness combines to create a powerful notion: the belief that you lead two separate lives that often seem irreconcilable.

Part of the problem of homesickness is that you often self-diagnose yourself as its root cause. University is supposedly meant to be the time of your life, and getting into Oxford was no mean feat. The reality then, of life slightly dragging at points and missing the comforts of home, doesn’t really cross your mind whilst you read that acceptance letter with trembling hands. Oxford does not fail to present you with countless opportunities—one for each essay crisis—and, when you are unhappy, the natural conclusion is to blame yourself for not taking enough of them.

Indeed, the collegiate system does essentially grant you a home away from home; happy days spent within college can make everything seem quite well with the world. But, sometimes, amid all the insularity and relentless welfare teas, one can feel quite suffocated, lonely and unable to display any of these sentiments. This is especially true on the weekends where hoards of tourists will gaze at you aghast, as if the tears on your face form part of an out-of-place 20th Century water feature. Often, then, just as you have begun to feel comfortable during term-time, you are forced to pack up your belongings and clear your room to make space for some all-important conference guest.

This guilt felt for experiencing homesickness often combines with the knowledge that, as Oxford students, we can prove rather self-centered with our priorities. I have often found myself—more than once—easily finding excuses to justify why I may have forgotten to call a friend from home, or buy my brother’s birthday present earlier than the day before. Similarly, it must seem somewhat ridiculous, from an outsider’s perspective, that the times when I choose to Skype home often revolve around the points when I’ve decided not to fall into an essay crisis (that was probably avoidable).

As often as we may express a desire to escape from the land of dreaming spires, there also exists a marked tendency to avoid or postpone contacting those from outside the Oxford bubble. After all, keeping up with everything during our eight-week terms can prove quite a struggle. Thus, we idealise about returning home whilst simultaneously putting off connection with the very people and places we long for.

If only we could all have our own doppelgänger that allowed us to keep both of our lives successfully running in tandem. Then we wouldn’t feel so constantly swamped.

Letter from Abroad: Paris

0

After months of finalising my ever-elusive year abroad plans, I have found myself interning at a legal translation firm in Paris for ten months.

Perhaps it’s not been as glamorous or lucrative as working as a British Council teaching assistant, as many of my friends have done. The experience, for sure, hasn’t always been easy. But it’s definitely been rewarding. During my time spent in Paris I think I will particularly remember the effect that various recent terrorist attacks have had on the city. The mentality of the general population has been unnerved, and continues to be so, more than one might expect.

When I arrived, what struck me first was the sheer amount of soldiers that marked many of the streets. It’s the kind of thing you get used to, but from time-to-time can’t help but feel slightly disturbed and question ‘Should this feel so normal?’

At the office we have, on several occasions, pondered over where the next attack might take place. It is this disconcerting atmosphere which has resulted in the tourism industry suffering quite a severe blow; apparently, there are significantly fewer non-European visitors than in recent years. No doubt this is true, yet it is hard to believe this whilst queuing for the Musée d’Orsay on a Sunday morning.

I have been pleasantly surprised as to how friendly Parisians generally are. Despite their reputation for being rude and cold, in particular to foreigners, I have found that if you try (your best) to engage with someone in French, they are often incredibly helpful. Saying that, Parisians do have that awkward tendency to immediately address you in English.

However, it’s safe to say, the English do still have a bad reputation in France. I can’t fully understand why, but whenever I mention that I’m from the United Kingdom, the typical response I receive is “oh dear”. Then again, that response is always followed by a laugh. I smile bemusedly back.

People often talk about the fear of missing out during their year abroad. For me this has manifested itself more as a sense of not really belonging. You see university life continue without you, while you yourself are still trying to settle down and express yourself coherently amidst swathes of colloquial and rapidly spoken French. To this day, I am still not sure whether it is acceptable to start addressing new acquaintances as ‘tu’.

Nevertheless, the year abroad has been refreshing. Just spending time surrounding yourself with a different culture is an incredible eye-opener.

Sometimes, it’s the small things that serve to best reflect surprising differing interests and tendencies. For example, in comparison to Blackwell’s in Oxford, the local French bookshop has significantly more police thrillers, and I am still yet to find a single English book. I have also found discussions of Brexit and colonialism with French people particularly interesting, especially since their consequences are still very much present.

The year abroad is an incredible opportunity, but also a challenge. Ultimately, all you can do is embrace and enjoy it as much as you can, before coming back home and knuckling down for finals.

Is May following Trump’s model?

0

Since Donald Trump was inaugurated on 20 January this year, it seems as though there has been a daily barrage of outcry after outcry. Some would say, given the campaign he ran, and the populist nature of the platform he ran on, this is not surprising.

What has surprised many, is the swiftness at which he has imposed (the now overturned) travel ban, and the flippant nature with which his plans appear to have been drawn up. A further surprise has been Theresa May’s unwillingness to condemn the ban, and, what’s
more, her own response to the refugee crisis: withdrawing a scheme to allow unaccompanied child refugees sanctuary in the UK.

The initial resettlement plan was proposed by Labour peer Alf Dubs, and was passed in 2016 as an amendment to the Immigration Act: it paved the way to allow 3,000 unaccompanied refugee children into the UK.

On Thursday of last week (9 February), it was announced that this scheme was coming to a close after admitting only 350 child refugees into the UK. There has been the expected anger. Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi, who is of Iraqi origin but a British citizen, called it “a sad sad day to feel like a second-class citizen … the order does apply to myself and my wife as we were both born in Iraq.” The impact of the ban is shockingly pervasive.

What is most worrying, though, is what this says about our government, its priorities, and what this means for the Western world. Has May seen Trump’s ‘crack-down’ on immigrants and refugees as paving the way for more stringent measures in the UK? Has this been a long-planned U-turn on a promise, that the government tried to sneak out in and amongst all of the outcry at Trump?

Or are there more pressing reasons for the withdrawal of the scheme? Perhaps there is some issue of national security at risk. Perhaps the costs of these child refugees are crippling and would divert funds from hospitals, or education?

Whatever the reason, it seems unlikely that there is a reasonable response for this – the government certainly hasn’t furnished the public with one. What is more concerning is what this might mean for the western world. It seems that we are slowly moving towards a policy of isolationism, where nations forget that we are all citizens of the world, and have du- ties to one another. Instead, states are putting sovereignty above all else, including humanity.

Trump symbolises a far wider problem: people feeling disenfranchised. Through his continuous stream of outrageous actions he gives other governments carte blanche to act in equally outrageous ways. More worryingly, he may be allowing other governments to hide behind the furore that his actions are creating.

Time will tell if our own government will continue down this path. But, without a doubt, May’s decision to renege on a promise to child refugees is a worrying sign. One can only hope this is simply a misstep, and not the first step on a path to far more nationalistic policies.

The birth of modernism: a journey in innovation

0

The Special Exhibition gallery in the Ashmolean is a significant space. Last year it housed over a hundred pieces by Andy Warhol, in an important exhibition that marked the first time many of the works had been exhibited in public. Yet, whilst significant, it is by no means an enormous space, especially if an exhibition attempts to span almost 200 years—as Degas to Picasso does. Any attempt at providing an all-inclusive overview of French art in this enormous period would have been futile.

Thankfully, the exhibition does not attempt this. There is no glamorous, instantly-recognisable centre-piece. The range of artists is broad, as the exhibition approaches French modernism as a revolutionary desire which bore markedly different reactions from its many proponents.

The three large rooms which comprise the exhibition are generally (though not strictly) chronological, beginning with the French Revolution and finishing up in the latter-half of the twentieth century. For an exhibition on modernism, beginning in 1789 may seem risibly illogical: modernism is a prodigiously nebulous term, yet people generally agree that it was a child of the fin de siècle.

But beginning here sets up the rebellious desire which would come to characterise not only the end of the eighteenth century, but also the nineteenth: there would be two more rebellions, one in 1830 and another 1848. The exhibition uses this as a frame to view the various challenges to convention which would define modernism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century.

Starting early also allows for an exploration of the Academy, an institution which largely dictated a French artist’s success between the seventeenth and early twentieth centuries. The first part of the exhibition whizzes through artists creating art in this Academy context, looking particularly at responses to the three revolutions. The artworks are all hung on one long wall, a smart curatorial decision which physically manifests them as a sort of timeline that one walks along.

There is a preoccupation, throughout the exhibition, both on the human form and on the classical demands of the Academy. In ‘La Toilette’ (1862), Manet takes the idealised composition of an older work (‘Surprised Nymph’) and shifts it onto a domestic view of his mistress. The result is juxtaposed in tone, with its tongue firmly planted in its cheek. Whilst Manet has numerous works which are more overtly politicised, ‘La Toilette’ reformulates convention in its own, more subtle way.

Degas battles with both the human form and convention. Once remarking: “No art is less spontaneous than mine”, he repeats the same forms over and over, obsessively, making miniscule adjustments with each new iteration. For instance, in ‘Nude Woman Standing at her Toilette’ (1891), the background gradually fades away so that the focus falls solely on the exquisite human form.

For any exhibition exploring modernism in France, a key determiner of audience interest is going to be the amount of coverage afforded to our dear friend Pablo. Fear not: he is given ample space. The second room, which focuses on and around Cubism, would have been naked without some Cubist still-lifes by the man himself.

However, the more stimulating works here are the less obvious ones. There is a ‘Study of Four Nudes’ from around 1906, a small work which eventually led to ‘Les Demoiselles d’Avignon’. But most interesting of all the Picasso on show is a sheet from a sketchbook entitled ‘Three Heads with a Christ on the Cross’ (1901). The three heads are in a cartoon style, probably intended as comic caricatures of people Picasso encountered in everyday life. Whilst the accompanying paragraph assures us that this is “one of a number he created at the time”, this is not the Picasso we know from this period: the work anticipates the more cartoon-based style he would come to adopt in the 1960s.

In the third room hangs ‘Bathers’ (1961), one of a vast number of rapidly executed drawings Picasso created in the period. It is dated ‘4.6.61.I’, setting it as the first work in the day’s output— Picasso operated in a mechanised manner. Several works in this final, post-Cubist room turn to mechanisation as an answer to the tricky question of ‘what next?’, not least Fernand Léger’s ‘Factory’ (1918). The work would provide the groundwork for Léger’s experimental animated film ‘Ballet Mécanique’ (1924), which is stuffed full of mechanical forms.

Much like the Warhol exhibition, which opened almost exactly a year ago, this exhibition takes a well-trodden topic and approaches it from a new angle. These artworks are taken from a private collection never before exhibited in the UK, so it is not an exaggeration to suggest that you will never be given such an easy opportunity to see them. Pick up your bod card and go.

A dose of sarcasm, playfulness, and politics

0

In a chatty interlude during her gig at the O2 Academy, Kate Nash tells the audience that it was in a tour bus outside this very venue that she received one of the most sexist interview questions of her career. A journalist asked her if she was disappointed that it was mainly teenage girls who attended her gig, to which she replied, “Yes, of course I’d prefer it if only old men turned up”.  Defiant, irreverent and unashamedly feminist, her response exemplifies what makes Kate Nash a fantastic live performer: her infectious enthusiasm ensures that, aside from loving her music, you also want to be her best friend.

Her set—which was attended by a diverse range of ages and genders, if any chauvinistic music critics happen to be interested—saw her take to the stage in holographic silver trousers and a sports bra, looking like a mermaid who updated her clamshells in JD Sports. With help from her all female band, she treats us to a winning mix of favourites, from her debut, Made of Bricks, to the edgier material of Girl Talk, as well the few standout songs from her weaker second album, My Best Friend is You, and a smattering of brand new tracks.

Her music is perfectly suited to live performance due to its intoxicating peaks and troughs. In the opening number, ‘Sister’, the slow, sultry verse entrances and beguiles before suddenly breaking into the raucous, angry chorus: this gear-shift comes into its own in the presence of a jumping, joyful crowd.

As well as musical catharsis, Nash delivers sarcasm, playfulness, and politics. The tour works with the mental health charity, Mind, to promote awareness, combat stigma and raise money, and Nash frankly discusses her own anxiety and OCD. In a music industry where tactical, empty feminism is often employed simply to bolster ticket sales—we’re looking at you, Taylor Swift— it is refreshing to see a musician seem to genuinely care about the causes they are associated with. Nash also talks about the statistically low number of female musicians, complete with a hilarious anecdote about a young female protégée who wrote a punk hit called ‘I AM ANGRY’.

Anger, it seems, is natural response to the social minefield of being a young woman, and this is something Nash understands, hence lyrics such as “being ripped away from you is like being ripped out of a womb” and “why you being a dickhead for/ you’re just fucking up situations”. When rage is as witty and sequin-studded as this, it can’t help but be edifying. It also transforms into moments of tenderness, such as in new single, ‘My Little Alien’, which is dedicated to her dog and professed soul mate, Stella.

In seconds, Nash switches from cosy camaraderie, treating the audience like a gathering of close friends, to full-blown rock star, crowd surfing with her guitar and screaming along with the strobe lights. One thing remains a constant: you want to be included in her Girl Talk.

Preview: ‘Tender Napalm’

0

“I could squeeze a bullet between those lips. Point first. Press it between those rosebud lips. Prise it between your pearly whites. Gently. I wouldn’t break a single tooth.”

The play opens with man and a woman embracing as they share their disturbingly violent sexual fantasies with each other. They never remain static, at times kissing, at times fighting, even lifting each other in the air. Their words are equally fluid: interwoven monologues and sharp dialogues that sweetly trace their youthful love story of a chance meeting at a partyand then switch to wild fantastic imagery of islands and monkeys and sea monsters.

The time and place are unclear, but there is a sense of apocalyptic disaster happening outside the intimate space of the two lovers. Themes are repeated throughout the shifting monologues: the threat of bombs, the pain of losing a loved one. The characters shift between playful sparring to clutching one another in agony in moments.

Even in the brightly lit Wadham rehearsal room, with the actors in their own clothes and not fully off-book, the emotion and fervour of Tender Napalm was overpowering. Catriona Bolt’s production, set in the round for an added sense of closeness, is both mesmerising and stifling. I felt myself at points wanting to escape from the relentless intensity of the loversalthough perhaps “lovers” is the wrong word, for at times their loathing for each other was palpable.

James Walsh and Hannah Marsters have excellent chemistry and produce varied and captivating performances. He is lustful and yearning as he describes his dark sexual desires, and then wracked with anguish as he sobs for a loss we do not fully understand. She is playful and almost childish as she imagines herself queen of a desert island, and vicious as she describes punishing her lover. She manages, however, to contrast this with moments of acute fragility and tenderness. It will be interesting to see how the production uses sound and lighting to intensify these performances.

Tender Napalm is not performed very often, and it’s easy to see why: the absence of real plot and disquieting nature of the play don’t make it an easy watch. But the visceral power of the performances, and the moving and sometimes shockingly funny commentary on love, loss, fantasy, and violence in a devastated world make it well worth a ticket.

Who will represent France in a new world order?

0

In June 2016 the world was convinced that Britain would remain in the EU and that Hillary Clinton would be the next US President. The pre-Brexit world also probably thought the idea of Marine le Pen winning the 2017 French election a ludicrous idea.

In the past year, the pro-globalisation European centrists have yet to see a political vote go their way. Populist politics and fear-mongering rhetoric have become the norm and experts are now the enemy of the people. The past year has seen the emergence of what some have called a “post-truth era” where facts are no longer of consequence and voters are motivated by fear and prejudice. We are yet to see whether this shall be the case in France.

Alongside the threat of terrorism, the past decade has been a time in which free speech in the West has come into question. Marine le Pen has marketed herself as a pillar of free speech, patriotism, and secularity. When she spoke at the Oxford Union in Hilary 2015 she said she admired the institution for its “open debate and freedom of expression”. Something tells me that Marine le Pen’s campaign is not quite what Evelyn Beatrice Hall had in mind when she said “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”, (it’s a commonly misunderstood ‘alternative fact’ that Voltaire was the one who said this).

As we draw ever closer to the French election, it is becoming yet more evident that politics in France are turning the same way as they have in Britain and America. The Macron, Fillon, le Pen trio bears a noticeable resemblance to the Sanders, Clinton, Trump line-up in America in early 2016. Macron, a 39-year-old ex-member of France’s Socialist Party who launched his campaign as part of the movement En Marche ! in November, is the young people’s choice.

Fillon, on the other hand, represents to some extent the ‘old France’, of Catholicism and so-called “family values”. A key policy of his, for example, is retracting the same-sex marriage bill passed in May 2013. Similarly, Marine le Pen has promised a referendum on same-sex marriage. Indeed, it was she who led the manif pour tous (protest for all) movement, the counter-campaign to marriage pour tous (marriage for all) prior to the introduction of same-sex marriage.

Le Pen and Fillon also stand united on the supposed ‘trivialisation’ of abortion. Macron, therefore, is the only socialist option of any kind, given that Hollande’s presidency has left the Socialist Party in tatters. And yet, if we assume that he will go the way that Bernie Sanders did at the Democrat Primaries, the choice is realistically right versus ultra far-right.

So why the sudden shift from relatively left-wing government to right-wing extremism? Although there are many factors that influence voters, the past five years have made it clear: the fear of terrorism. France has made the most terror-related arrests, and, after the UK, it has been subject to the second most attempted attacks of all EU countries. France, along with Belgium, has become a target for ISIS attacks since the countries’ decision to ban the burka (full face veil) and niqab (veil with eyes uncovered) in public. France initiated this ban on the basis of the country’s policy of laicité (secularity) that prohibits the wearing of any religious garment or sign in public.

In theory, the wearing of crucifix necklaces is to be dealt with as severely as the wearing of a kippa or hijab is, but this is rarely the case. One does not hear of Catholics being refused entry to banks or having their necklaces ripped from their necks in public. This is, however, a reality for Muslim women who wish to wear the hijab.

France’s secularism is a constant source of bewilderment for its EU neighbours. The country’s Catholics are said to make up to 88 per cent of the population, though this is dropping fast as young people are increasingly coming out as non-religious and defying their religious parents. Fillon’s popularity, therefore, could be seen as a political backlash against this atheism. The campaigns of Fillon and Le Pen could easily have taken the “make France great again” or “Vote X, take control” slogans, if they hadn’t already been taken by other white scare-mongering right- wingers in the Western world.

Marine le Pen’s campaign has had a resurgence in the midst of the widespread fear surrounding the terror attacks. Six years ago, under leader Jean-Marie le Pen, the National Front was a minority party made up of racists and extremists: a taint on French politics. But Marine is so much more than simply a daughter carrying on her father’s long-lost political dream. Now, the party has rebranded itself as the party of the ‘French people’. The people are the same, their marketing has simply got better. Since 2014, the National Front has been France’s largest party and in the 2015 local elections the party won more than 1,500 councillors and 12 cities. Every day it seems that her Presidency is becoming an evermore likely reality.

And so what are the implications for the EU? Now that Britain has voted—its public and its politicians—to trigger Article 50, there is a chance that other European countries will want to follow suit. Who knew Britain was a trend-setter? Greece has already voted to leave the EU, except the government refused. Indeed, the case could be argued that it does not make sense for Greece, whose economy has been failing since 4 B.C., to remain part of the same currency as Germany. France, however, is more concerned with bureaucracy and immigration.

The future for France, no matter what the outcome of the election, looks bleak for the likes of European centrists. If Macron wins, le Pen supporters will potentially rise up in protest against an ‘unfair’ voting system. If Fillon wins, France’s non-religious minorities are in trouble, and in the case where le Pen becomes President, who knows what lies in store.

It is uncertain how the French will vote, and much depends on the weeks leading up to the election. Back in the day of Louis XIV, the more scandalous a leader, the higher his popularity rating, although leaders were not exactly elected back then. And there’s a case to be made that the French of today think similarly; famously, in 2014, President Hollande’s a air with actress Valerie Trierweiler improved his popularity. This could go in Macron’s favour, given his marriage to his former French teacher, a woman 20 years his senior. Fillon looks to be the ‘safe’ option, at least for the Jewish and Muslim citizens of France. But if a terrorist attack takes place within a week of the election, there is almost no stopping le Pen.

OUCD Showcase 2017

0

The Oxford University Contemporary Dance Troupe are holding their showcase tonight at St. John’s College auditorium. We went along to their rehearsals to see what Oxford students can look forward to this evening.

Laura Marling: always a woman

0

In Laura Marling’s ‘Wild Fire’, the second single to be released from her upcoming sixth album Semper Femina, one character is “gonna write a book someday.” For Marling, “the only part that I want to read / is about her time spent with me / Wouldn’t you die to know how you’re seen?”

Speaking last week at a press conference at Goldsmiths University, London, the Hampshire-born musician admits she initially tried to approach this record as a man writes about a woman. The nine tracks were born out of a particularly masculine time in her life, she says, when she was experiencing the physical exertions of touring alone, “dragging three or four guitars around, and throwing them in the back of a car constantly”.

What began, in her own words, as “a self-conscious stumble”, is now fully formed. On the album due 10 March which takes its name from a line of Virgil (“Varium et mutabile semper femina”—“Fickle and changeable always is a woman”), Marling is very much a feminine being.

Semper Femina soon became an attempt to “take some power over the idea that we see women through men’s eyes.” And it is the female pronoun which saturates the record. “She speaks a word and it gently turns to perfect metaphor”, sings Marling on ‘Nouel’, a lilted lullaby, a tale, and ode to “a dear friend”.

As the audience upstairs in the Goldsmiths Student Union have their eyes on Marling, she tells us that Nouel, too, is being watched. Soon, it is “Oh, Nouel, you sit so well / A thousand artists’ muse”. Is this the manner by which Marling fi rst attempted to write just as a man views a woman? Her fight against this is evident in the development of the line, as she grasps back the reins as a woman, closing the verse with the sure-starting “But you’ll be anything you choose”.

Last summer Marling explored lingering ideas of gendered perspective and perception through Reversal of the Muse. The podcast series featured Marling in conversation with a host of music professionals, particularly studio engineers and producers, about experiences of gender and female creativity in the industry.

It’s a series Marling plans to continue, hoping next time to discuss female creativity in the fi lm and television industries. This album marks her directorial debuts in the videos for pre-released tracks ‘Soothing’, ‘Wild Fire’ and ‘Next Time’, and, back at Goldsmiths, Marling tells us “I like talking about the directing more than the music.” A bright, seductive light shines across these videos: is this how the world looks through the eyes of a woman?

Live, ‘Wild Fire’ is a drawn-out affair, fed with all the depth of breath and husk Marling’s voice can muster up. “You always say you love me most when I don’t know I’m being seen / Well maybe someday when God takes me away / I’ll understand what the fuck that means”, she sings with her characteristically calm, dry anger. What a victim of the over-romanticised male gaze Marling must have been.

On ‘The Valley’, Marling sings a charming admittance of her own: “I love you in the morning / My angel of the west / I love you in the evening / And I will do my very best”.

This warm promise of love is a triumph. Amidst the glory of six stellar albums and a whole life of wisdom, Marling admits that she is still trying, like the rest of us, to do her bit in love and friendship. Success in love is no mean feat.

Declarations that this is a record of female prowess and looking outward from her gender still stand, but this is also Marling’s record of querying herself, as a woman. “Semper femina,” she assures Nouel, “So am I.”

An experience of Oxford Women Speak Out

0

I’ve always found the thought of political activism slightly intimidating, even if the issues themselves personally interest me. What drew me to Oxford Women Speak Out was the simplicity of it all—it was a one-off moment to communicate a personal message. For a few moments, you express yourself with words written on your skin, before they are wiped off and you can return to a normal day.

It was easier than I thought to think of a message: sometimes the simplest selection of words can be the most powerful. I chose a quote from the author C. JoyBell C. It reads: “I am an entirety, I am not a lack of anything; rather I am a whole of many things.”

For me, her words counter the pressure on mixed race people to identify with one race or another, whilst also applying to any context where society forces people into fixed boxes.

The experience was empowering on an individual level because at every point you were given freedom of choice: the words themselves, the body part, the pose, even the camera angle. So often the female body is objectified, infringed upon and taken from women, so it was liberating to reclaim it and use it as a symbol of female strength. Everyone who took part was doing so on their own terms and with a self-confidence that was beautiful to see.

The best part about the campaign is that each individual photo forms an inspiring, collective portrait of Oxford’s women. There is a real sense of solidarity and support as everyone helps each other with writing messages and arranging the photoshoot. There is also the opportunity just to have a relaxed chat.

Viewing the whole group of images afterwards on social media was uplifting, with each college being a small but integral part of a more powerful, university-wide female community.

All in all, the campaign is a great, informal way to make your voice heard in a supportive environment, and this is something which is, in the current climate, seemingly increasingly important. In the theme of this year’s International Women’s Day—“Be Bold For Change”.