Sunday 17th May 2026
Blog Page 894

‘Lights Over Tesco Carpark’ review – “equal parts inspired and bonkers”

0

When I heard that there was a student play called Lights Over Tesco Car Park being produced in Oxford, my head was filled with possibilities of what it could be. When I discovered that it was in fact an absurdist work from Poltergeist Theatre framed around audience participation featuring that familiar haunt of students shopping for their milk and ginger nuts, and that it was going to be about hypothetical alien sightings, I knew it was something I needed to see for myself. Fortunately, behind that concept, equal parts inspired and bonkers, lies a play which feels as fresh and unique as it does alien.

From the minute it begins, Lights Over Tesco Car Park wants to confound its audience. The sketches dart ambitiously from phone calls accompanied by miming out the apparition of an alien spaceship, to entire scenes where not a single word is spoken and a child plays endearingly with a flying saucer sweet, all in an attempt to reconstruct what happened during the alien sightings. It is a surreal experience, to say the least. Lights gives you very little to go on, minimal sense of space or time, or anything in the way of plot, and yet it provides plenty to keep the imagination buzzing. I also maintain that this play finds the best use for flying saucers that I have ever seen, transforming a subpar sherbet sweet into everything from an impromptu light filter to a metaphor for human stories. The writing is gleefully absurd. Staging, while very simple, is effective at keeping the audience in the dark, mimicking a sterile interview room, as if we are merely observing an investigation.

That is, until we become part of the interrogation. What sets Lights apart from other student comedies, and its most well-executed asset, is its dedication to audience participation. What is most impressive is how this technique is employed not purely for laughs, but is central to the narrative. The best examples of this are when an audience member has an identity forced upon them, is patronised by an interrogator, and, since they do not know what the actors will ask them and must therefore improvise, they unwittingly fill the position of a traumatised victim trying to recollect what they saw. They do the actors’ work for them. This is audience participation done right. By the end of the play, everybody in the audience knew exactly how to respond to the characters onstage, via commands conveyed to them through minimal instruction.

Above all, Lights just exudes an aura of hilarity, provoking more than a few laughs. Some scenes make it evident just how much fun the cast and crew had producing this gem, such as a scene in which the characters riff off ludicrous headlines they found on the internet. In trying to uncover the mystery of the extra-terrestrial sightings, the investigators expose themselves as being just as weird, if not weirder, than the threat they are tracing.  Lights Over Tesco Car Park revels in the ridiculousness of human life.

If I had to offer any criticism, I would say that, for the admittedly low price of a ticket, some spectators would expect a longer running time: the production is criminally short. With the creative talent on show here, it would not have been impossible to include a few more sketches, even if just to get a few more audience members involved before the play draws to a close.

Overall, Lights Over Tesco Car Park is a bemusing play. This type of production will not appeal to everyone, but for those willing to be confused and surrender themselves to the madness, there is a lot of enjoyment to be had here and a lot to inspire one to try and make sense of the absurdity. Lights’ glowering achievement is that, in its manipulation of its audience, it constantly asks us to re-evaluate whether we were the aliens all along. What is truly alien in Lights are the interactions we have with each other, our encounters with strangers and friends alike.

Life on the streets of Oxford, Scott’s story

0

Last week I got into a conversation with a homeless man I’d seen many times before, but never really spoken to. Scott Hadlow, a man with blond tousled hair and a limp, was sat at one of his usual spots: a warm air vent on Brasenose Lane, where for many he is probably little more than a brief prick of the conscience en route to the Radcam. After speaking generally about his life, from growing up in South Africa, to smuggling Khat – a natural stimulant legal in parts of Africa – to finally breaking his leg at 23 in collision with a car, he said he’d be happy to write a piece on how he came to live on the streets of Oxford and on his current situation.

My Dad who was from Northern Ireland, whom whilst serving in the British Army met with my mum, whom at that time in her life was known as Debbie Allman. But after I was born and my dad moved my surname changed to Hadlow. So I’m now known as Scott Hadlow. I’m not sure if my surname is from Ireland or England as I never got the chance to ask my Dad as when I was 18 months old my Dad, who was a fitness fanatic and serving in the British Army at that time, took me and my mum to South Africa to join the army but sadly when I was two he got shot in Angola and I lost my Dad.

Me and my mum carried on living in South Africa but when I was about 6 we came back to Folkestone where I started my schooling and where me and my mum lived with my nan Betty up until I was about 9 and we returned back to South Africa. Here I did the rest of my schooling where I was forced to learn Afrikaans – the old version of Dutch with a small amount of German.

Even now, living in Oxford at the night shelter at O’Hanlon House and living as a beggar, I often speak to people from Holland and Belgium so I have one clever thing that most people cannot do – being bilingual in another language which is made up of a few languages.

I’ve now been here seven years living in Oxford. Two years ago I was attacked which resulted in an aneurysm bursting at the back of my brain. I now have six aluminium coils wrapped around it to stop it bleeding.  I’m lucky to have survived, as most people die.

Image: Emma Safe

Also where I was hit on my left cheek bone it caused an infection and during my first operation the infection pushed my throat to the side and I stopped breathing, so 4 tubes attached to an oxygen tank were used to help me breathe, so now I have a scar across my front. I have metal plates from knees to ankles in both legs, and my right leg being about 4 inches shorter than my other leg where I have an insole in my trainer because of shortness which affects my hip and lower part of my back. So I live suffering in chronic pain and in the winters I suffer that and the way my life has gone is the reason why I’m addicted to pain killers (i.e. morphine and codeine).

I’ve got to cut this short so I can go back to my begging spot outside Blackwell’s and the alley of Turl Street to meet the man who will be publishing the story of how I came to have a life on the streets.

So my finishing of words will be please carry on helping the homeless, go back to looking after them like people of Oxford used to. Anyone can land in that position, so please help.

Scott Hadlow’s full story is available in My Story, written by homeless and formerly homeless people of Oxford, and sold in Blackwell’s bookshop.

Vegans should embrace the joys of eating

16

I have two reasons for not being vegan, and neither of them are that I disagree with veganism. I think veganism is ethically required of me if I follow almost any of my other standpoints: it’s pretty much the best thing we can do for the environment as individuals, and it is an incredibly admirable lifestyle. At least half the vegan hate lurking out there is because people know that they could do more good for the world in their own lives. I was MVFS (mostly vegetarian while sober) for two years, and a vegan for exactly four days, before I gave up. Firstly, because veganism is wound so tightly with clean eating culture and lifestyle Instagram accounts, that I was not able to healthily pursue it. And second, because vegan food is absolutely disgusting.

Whilst the first seems by far the more interesting, others have spoken about it far better than I could — read Ruby Tandoh. Hopefully by this point there are very few who would deny the toxic culture that’s sadly enveloped so much of what could be a beautiful and positive lifestyle, albeit one that’s really into weirdly racist slavery parallels. For now I’ll be looking at the second, which rather than portraying me as a level-headed self-love activist shows me in my true colours: the unchaperoned child at an all-you-can-eat buffet.

Food is the highlight of my day. I have more recipe books in my room than fiction books, and, by no slim margin, more actual food in my room at this very moment than reading from my course. I love the gluttonous excitement of a Domino’s pizza arriving, the fact that you know full well that you don’t even particularly like Domino’s pizza, but, much like Ben and Jerry’s, there is an immeasurable comfort in the ugly, greasy, bitter-sweet ritual of the purchase, the unveiling, and the overeating. I love it when you add cream to a warm pan that you’ve been frying bacon in, when the cream turns gently-toasted-marshmallow brown, bubbling and sticking to the sides.

Don’t get me wrong, vegetables make the cut: baby carrots with honey, the mint, tarragon, walnut and feta salad from my local Persian restaurant, pretty much anything with caramelized onions on.

The problem I have, above and beyond veganism’s perils, is that you lose some of the most beautiful and peaceful rituals that exist. There is nothing life-affirming about an activated cashew, a £13 Buddha Bowl that tastes of grass or, let’s be honest, your fifth helping of chickpeas this week.

Of course, from a utilitarian point of view this is pathetic: the horrors of the dairy industry and slaughterhouses are anything but beautiful and peaceful, and the fact that we want to keep eating these things shouldn’t matter, but I do even if it does. Life is too dark and relentless to lose anything this joyful.

Clearly, the solution is to make new rituals around plant-based and cruelty-free food. We must find cathartic recipes and delicious fast food that simply don’t involve the ingredients that hurt the planet and the animals that live on it.

I’m happy to try and do this – honestly I am – but for one reason or another the world just isn’t game. Whilst there are some fantastic vegan places popping up which offer the sort of finger-licking-goodness I’m after – Temple of Seitan in London for instance – and many Asian-inspired restaurants such as Wagamama are mastering the art of ‘you wouldn’t know it’s vegan’, most others are lagging behind. I don’t want quinoa or a range of lukewarm plain vegetables whilst my friends are eating a burger, I just want you to make the burger without meat, eggs or dairy.

I know I’ll never be able to give up non-vegan things entirely, or even just give up meat, but I wish I could make more vegan choices without losing the joy of food. Until restaurants, supermarkets and bloggers accept that veganism is a simple restriction on ingredients rather than a life ban on seasoning, texture and luxury, that’s going to be a difficult task.

Life Divided: The Rad Cam

For the Rad Cam

Priya Vempali

Let’s face it, none of the Oxford libraries quite compare to the domed beauty that is the Rad Cam. Yes, you may have to elbow your way past throngs of tourists to get to the doors, but once you’re in, it feels like you’ve stepped into a scholar’s wet dream. The dusty books, the deafening silence, the Insta-perfect architecture — it has it all

Tired of staring at your blank screen waiting for a two thousand word essay to magically appear? Just stare up at the mesmerising ceilings and forget your problems for a while. Will it help you academically in any way, shape or form? No. Will it get your cover photo a hundred likes plus? Probably.

Not only is the building itself the most beautiful of the Oxford libraries, the circular citadel is renowned as a chirpsing hub, populated by the best dressed students in the university. Yeah, you may feel a little shabby walking around in your college hoodie, but who cares if that means you get to spend a couple hours mesmerised by the hottie in the Hilfiger jacket to your left? Abundant in inspiration for your next Oxlove, the safe haven provides some well-deserved distraction from that dead tutorial essay you’ve practically given up on.

Even the smallest things make a big difference, like the freezing cold temperature that keeps you from falling asleep at your desk. Annoyed that you can’t bring in coffee or snacks whilst you study? Don’t fear, friends – I’ve managed to sneak in an entire burrito and a milkshake whilst no one was looking. If you can believe, you can achieve.

All in all, the formality of the Rad Cam is ideal for masking your procrastination efforts with the prestige of an academic setting — and isn’t that really what the Oxford experience is all about?

Against the Rad Cam

Julia Alsop

The Rad Cam. It is, to all intents and purposes, a symbol of the rich history of a university that we are more than privileged to attend. Furthermore, it’s absolutely ace Instagram fod- der if you catch a pretty sunset. But it’s a gimmick – beyond the neo-classical façade it is literally the most unpleasant place to work, and yet it always seems to gain prestige and favour over far better libraries (#justicefortheWeston).

The voyage to getting a work spot in the first place is burdensome. First of all, you are forced to battle through the hoards of tourists, obliviously deciding what filter to add their selfie in the Divinity School.

Even once you’ve sweated your way into the building itself, you are faced with the dilemma of finding a space (but where?) and doing so in absolute silence to prevent the library early birds from flashing the kind of penetrating stare that nothing can dull your shame at breathing ‘too loudly.’ As you finally find somewhere, you realise that you are sweating from stress and the bizarre heat of the place, and you haven’t even typed a title yet.

But behold, eventually you notice that there are people there who are taking up ALL the space and literally barely working. These are the worst people of all: the ones looking slightly too dolled-up to be in essay crisis, with an open Facebook tab which they check periodically.

Beware of the Oxlove-seekers, with their faux-whimsical-academic vibe and total lack of regard for their fellow students in denial about their deadlines. Don’t be one of these people: the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality – although they are, after all, already in the Rad Cam.

Oxford professor to take leave over rape allegations

3

Tariq Ramadan, the Oxford Islamic studies professor accused of multiple accounts of rape, has taken a “leave of absence” from the University.

The University released a statement today stating that Ramadan, who has denied the allegations, was leaving “by mutual agreement, and with immediate effect”. It added that Ramadan will not be present at either the University or College during this time, and his teaching, supervising and examining duties in the Faculty of Oriental studies will be reassigned.

The decision follows student backlash at Ramadan’s continuing presence in the Faculty after the allegations first surfaced.

The statement said: “The University has consistently acknowledged the gravity of the allegations against Professor Ramadan, while emphasising the importance of fairness and the principles of justice and due process.

“An agreed leave of absence implies no presumption or acceptance of guilt and allows Professor Ramadan to address the extremely serious allegations made against him, all of which he categorically denies, while meeting our principal concern – addressing heightened and understandable distress, and putting first the wellbeing of our students and staff.”

In a faculty meeting last Tuesday, students voiced their concerns with the University’s handling of the mounting allegations against Ramadan – who has categorically denied the two accusations of rape from French women, as well as allegations made in the Swiss media this week of sexual misconduct against teenage girls in the 1980s and 1990s.

The faculty apologised for their “lack of communication” with students following the allegations, blaming the delay in responding to the claims on the fact that the allegations were made in a foreign country with a different legal system.

They also told students last week that they intended Ramadan to continue to supervise and tutor on his return to Oxford, although arrangements could be made with individual students about how their supervisions would proceed.

Professor Ramadan also reportedly taught a seminar and was seen “laughing” with faculty members in St Antony’s College immediately following the first allegations.

Director of the Middle East Centre Eugene Rogan had warned against jumping to quick judgments about Ramadan. He told students: “It’s not just about sexual violence. For some students it’s just another way for Europeans to gang up against a prominent Muslim intellectual. We must protect Muslim students who believe and trust in him, and protect that trust.”

A number of students expressed their anger last week with the University’s response to the allegations. One postgrad told Cherwell: “Frankly, I’m shocked by how badly the University has dealt with this incident. While Professor Ramadan must be assumed innocent until proven guilty, this does not excuse the absolute lack of communication between the Middle East Centre and affected students.”

Reconsidering the Lobster: Wallace’s Dostoyevsky

2

One of the essays written by David Foster Wallace in his collection, Consider The Lobster is ‘Joseph Frank’s Dostoyevsky’, a lengthy review of the Princeton and Stanford scholar Joseph Frank’s four volume biography of the Russian novelist. A thoughtful and detailed review, Wallace doesn’t shy away from looking in depth at the hardcore criticism and theory that Frank is working with in his biography.

David Foster Wallace, like Dostoyevsky, is one of the people you just have to try. The two have a lot in common. Both are the sort of writers who are good to have read if you’re headed to a cocktail party, both write long and involved books that grapple consciously with the serious philosophical questions that end up defining what it is to be a human being. This underlying theme in Dostoyevsky’s work is acknowledged by Wallace through asterisked sections listing off some the questions which preoccupy Dostoyevsky; ‘What exactly does faith mean?’, or ‘Am I a good person?’. While this stylistic trope can seem confusing, superfluous or even pretentious, Wallace manages to get to the bottom of what Dostoyevsky aimed to address.

When people talk about Wallace, they often talk about the ‘New Sincerity’. The cultural movement which looks fondly back to the honest and sincere literature produced before post-modernism, and which distances itself from the gutless aestheticisms of novels after Joyce. The Stanford scholar Cynthia Haven equates Dostoyevsky with what literary fiction had lost: “Who is to blame for the philosophical passionlessness of our own Dostoyevskys?”, she asks.

Wallace similarly sees Dostoyevsky as a throw-back to a time of philosophical confidence, writing: “The big thing that makes Dostoyevsky invaluable for American readers and writers is that he appears to possess degrees of passion, and conviction and engagement with deep moral issues that we, here today, cannot or do not permit ourselves.”

What Wallace sees in Dostoyevsky, he tries to emulate in his own fiction. The really hot thing about Infinite Jest, Wallace’s gargantuan magnum opus about addiction and tennis, is that it reaches a couple of half-formed conclusions in answer to the questions Dostoyevsky’s asking.

In the last 200 pages of Infinite Jest, a truly extraordinary example of modern fiction, Wallace depicts a wounded demerol addict resisting the offer of anaesthetic. Describing the pain is dealt with, he writes: “He could do the dextral pain the same way: Abiding. Here was a second right here: he endured it…he could just hunker down in the space between each heartbeat and make each heartbeat a wall and live in there.” Wallace suggests that we can manage if we just stick with our convictions and endure, or Abide, to use one of his favourite words.

After finishing Infinite Jest, the reader is left with a sense of cautious optimism; despite the moral labyrinth of personhood, there is – Wallace posits, a passage though. Similarly, Dostoyevsky is important because he engages. In a way that’s unusual in a lot of modern literature, novels like Crime and Punishment or The Brothers Karamazov take the reader by the horns and demands that we think about the basic problems of the moral world we inhabit. As Wallace famously quipped, “Fiction’s about what it is to be a fucking human being”. Dostoyevsky is about what it means to be a fucking human being, and that’s why he matters.

Five Minutes With… John Livesey

0

This week, we chat to John Livesey, the manager of Klaxon Productions.

Could you tell us a bit about how you got involved in Oxford drama?
It can be scary to start ‘doing drama’ at Oxford – it feels like people know each other already, and you are just some strange, quiet fresher. I was really lucky that the first show I got involved in (Edward II) had a very big, very friendly company full of drama stalwarts. It meant I didn’t think twice next time I was going for an audition. This is my first go at directing but I very much hope to do it again, you won’t get rid of me that easily!

What’s your happiest memory of drama at Oxford?
I’m not even halfway through my degree so I hope there will be a few more moments to choose from if you ask me again in a year! Currently though, some of my happiest memories have been from Random. It’s such a great team and we have a lot of fun, despite the serious subject matter. Fran and I have a similar sense of humour. The artistic eureka-moments we’ve had has made it a very special process.

Have you ever had any complete production nightmares?
I’ve had a few very bad dress-rehearsals. I’ve been in a show that had only rehearsed for a week. The worst was probably a cast-mate missing their cue completely, forcing me to skip 2 or 3 pages: nobody noticed but my heart relocated to Cuba for about 5 minutes.

What’s your favourite play?
Superlatives don’t do justice to the diversity of work out there. I can recommend some good ones though – Big & Small by Botho Strauss, Another Country by Julian Mitchell, An Octaroon by Branden Jacob-Jenkins, The Flick by Annie Baker. Oh, and Angels in America (I say this pre-empting the collective eye-roll).

How would you want to stage it if you had to put it on in Oxford?
Some of these might actually find their way to the stage so I don’t want to give any spoilers: that’s just bad marketing…

Who’s your inspiration?
Ben Whishaw is a role model for me, although that might just be because I have a crush on him! I try not to miss Robert Icke’s shows, and Tarell Alvin McCraney too. I also have the utmost respect for the way Rufus Norris is changing the game at the National. I also find my friends inspiring, back home and in Oxford. I think there’s something rad about understanding that those around you can be just as inspirational as any schmaltzy a-lister.

Do you have any advice for freshers who want to get involved?
Audition. Audition again. Audition again. And if you’re a director? Just risk it: submit the bid and see where the journey takes you. It’ll be horrible, amazing, dreadful and mind-expanding – the best fun you’ll have in this crazy place.

Are you working on any exciting projects at the moment that you can tell us about?
Once we’re done with Random I need a sit down with a hot mug of cocoa. However, KLAXON are also getting started on a bid for Hilary and there are some other things I hope to pursue when I have more time. Going to lectures is another honorable goal, but I don’t want to offer false hope.

Confessions of a Drama Queen 4: I meet my Romeo

0

Another week, another heartbreaking tale of rejection and solitude. The tragedy of my life this week concerns – inevitably – a boy.

Although, I would have it amended that ‘boy’ doesn’t do justice to my feelings for Thespian Jacob – ‘love of my life’ would be more appropriate.

It all began as I was sitting down to watch the play I was reviewing for Cherwell. When I say ‘sitting down’, I was accidentally half an hour late because I was catching up on The Apprentice and had to stand at the back, and to be honest I was so hungover that I’d napped through the first half, and then it happened. Thespian Jacob took centre stage, both in the play and in my heart.

Was it stalkerish that I followed the cast to the pub afterwards? If this was a 1990s Richard Curtis film, such a gesture would be the epitome of romance. And was it so outlandish to add his mum on Facebook? I just wanted to congratulate her for raising such a gift to the world! And as for my review verging on harassment… okay, so it ended with a marriage proposal. I do not think the restraining order was necessary.

It’s also quite unfortunate that it’s led to a lawsuit, but that’s for Cherwell to deal with. At least if there’s a trial I can go for a kind of felonious Elle Woods vibe, and our eyes can meet across the courtroom and he will realise that we are meant to be together forever and move to the home counties with three kids and a golden retriever.

He’s put on Facebook that he’s ‘interested’ in an audition for Sweet Charity, so I think I might try and join the costume team for that. Shouldn’t be too hard – I love charity shopping, and have seen the necessary tableau scene in Wild Child. Wish me luck! Adieu, fair reader!

The opening of a closed cultural world

0

“I will never believe in minds kept under glass; but I believe that a table has only four legs, but I believe that the fifth leg is a chimera, and when the chimeras rally, my dear, then one dies slowly of a worn out heart.”

It was the year 1955 in communist Poland when Adam Wazyk published ‘Poem for Adults’. Formerly one of the most ferociously Stalinist members of his nation’s literary world, Wazyk’s text was a damning indictment of the corrosive power of the communist regime over his nation and its people.

In a brief moment of reduced cultural control, the explosive material was published – and once released, could not be contained. Attempts at retrospective censorship were in vain. The poem was widely circulated: written copies were passed hand to hand, or fetched huge prices on the black market. In many ways, Wazyk’s poem is that of a man looking around himself and not understanding what he sees. Its ruthless criticism of the decay of society, the Russian exploitation of Polish resources, and the ruthless deception of its citizens, exposes the lies that his nation had been forced to live with: the promises that have been made and not kept.

The ongoing claim to universal equality and national prosperity, and its exploitation. The chimeras that have gathered round. It was often in the cultural sphere that these illusions were created and preserved. For artists that did not conform there was no place in the Soviet world, and part of Wazyk’s poem focuses on the life and death of one such individual: “They threw her out of art school,/ For lack of socialist morality./ She poisoner herself once – they saved her./ She poisoned herself again – they buried her.”

The story of the extremes of communism, and the brutality of the communist world that was born with the October Revolution, is not a surprising one in retrospect. We know that the communist dream manifested itself into a disaster where a systematic duplicity between the Party line and reality obscured a misled economy, inviolable state power, and the continuous infringement of this power into the lives of its citizens.

What becomes more difficult for us to remember is the role of personal agency and choice in this obscure world. The Polish intellectual Leszek Kolakowski asked in 1999: “Could half of Europe and half of Asia have been raped by a handful of bloodthirsty madmen, by Lenin and Stalin? Such things do not happen, it is nice to believe that they do.” It is all to easy to blame tyrants, and the organs of force and violence – the dictators, the secret police, the armed forces – for taking whole nations hostage. What’s much harder is to reconcile these shadows with everyday life: those who voted for communism, who lived through it, and who fought battles for it – the Adam Wazyks of the world.

What we can learn from individuals like Wazyk is that communism was not a historical aberration or an unprompted disaster, but, for many, it was a choice. And for more still, it was a world they had an active part in shaping. Wazyk was born into a Jewish family in Warsaw in 1905. He was a soldier in Berling’s army, fighting the Nazis as a resistor alongside Soviet allies, and as a staunch communist. Like many others, he had seen his nation torn apart by the experiences of occupation, collaboration and resistance. His voice had been part of the chorus that welcomed the accession of communism in Poland after the war, and had continued to be one of its great supporters.

These voices may not have been a majority in post-war Poland, but to forget they existed is to forego an understanding of choices made in difficult times, and in the promise that comes with revolution. Just as 1917 promised the Russian worker a utopia, the subsequent revolutions in Central and Eastern Europe after the Second World War promised its people a brighter future, and the chance to make it for themselves.

In ‘Poem for Adults’ we see Adam Wazyk sever ties with his own past: old beliefs are exchanged for a realisation that the revolution he had been part of had given birth to terrible things. For over a decade, he was not only a proponent of the Party, but one who ruthlessly supported its suppression of people’s cultural and literary freedom. In publish
ing ‘Poem for Adults’, he went from being part of the literary establishment, to a dissenter and an infidel. The fact that this work was so extensively bought and circulated, and that the authorities fought so hard to suppress it, makes clear that his sentiments struck a common nerve.

In the centenary of the revolution that captured the imagination of huge numbers of people, we can spare a thought for those, like Adam Wazyk, who were a part of its legacy. He and many others would come to look around at a world they had helped to build and no longer recognised as their own. These individuals came full circle, and in art like ‘Poem for Adults’, they again made radical acts of revolution

Poppies mark the season of patriotic sensationalism

1

Ahead of the England cricket team’s flight to Australia before this winter’s Ashes, the Professional Cricketers’ Association (PCA) tweeted a picture of the 16-man squad suited up with the series trophy and the historic urn. The photo was something of a botched job: certain players were shoddily dressed, with a casual approach to footwear and featured a startling pair of socks worn by Stuart Broad on the front row.

However, the response to this tweet was not one of support for the squad. Instead, all eyes were on one player in particular: Moeen Ali.

Travelling in a squad containing fifteen white men, of which nine attended fee-paying schools, and one British Muslim with a full beard, Moeen is used to standing out.

But this time, Moeen wasn’t being heralded as an inspiration to British Asian children in the UK. Instead, he found himself as the target for a mountain of vitriol and criticism.

“How come Mo isn’t wearing a poppy? Please, how do I explain this to my teenage son who loves him?” read one reply. “Disgrace that Ali wouldn’t wear a poppy…it symbolises those who gave their lives so idiots like him can play cricket” said another.

This sort of trolling is nothing new for those who live their lives in the public eye. News presenters Charlene White and Jon Snow are put down on an annual basis, labelled ‘unpatriotic’ and ‘disrespectful’ for their refusal to wear the symbol. Northern Irish footballer James McClean is booed all year round at English stadia by fans who consider his choice to not wear the red flower as a demonstration of anti-Britishness. It’s no surprise then that when searching his name on Google, the top suggestion is ‘IRA’.

Indeed, wearing a poppy from late October to mid-November has become compulsory for those who face media attention – failure to do so inevitably leads to an onslaught of poisonous vitriol from self-proclaimed patriots.

In Moeen’s case, the abuse stopped soon after England landed. The team’s account tweeted a handful of pictures of the players arriving, and it was pointed out that whilst Moeen was wearing his poppy in Perth airport, various other players weren’t – “Poppy fell off!” he tweeted.

But the intense anger directed towards Ali shows not only the extent to which the poppy has become politicised in the past few years, but that it is now being used as a symbol of division.

For example, take the interview that then-UKIP senior advisor Raheem Kassam was subjected to by Sky News anchor Dermot Murnaghan last November. In a bizarre three-minute conversation – which was meant to focus on Nigel Farage’s meeting with Donald Trump after the US Election – Murnaghan repeatedly asked Kassam why he hadn’t been wearing a poppy. Kassam responded with a series of reasonable explanations: the poppy was on his other coat, it had become “a bit tatty”, and emphasised the difficulties of finding a poppy in New York.

But despite this, he was attacked as some sort of traitor by Murnaghan: “Well you can tell that to the Royal British Legion, can’t you? Would you like to apologise for it?”

It was a display of the toxicity attached to the symbol that has had its meaning gradually eroded away over the past decade. Kassam had, it transpired, donated £300 to the Royal British Legion that very morning, But somehow, that didn’t seem to matter.

The virtue-signalling few that try to make poppy-wearing compulsory miss the point: if everyone wore a poppy all the time, its meaning would be undermined to the extent that the symbol became meaningless.

Indeed, wearing a poppy should and must remain an issue of personal choice. For some, it ignores the millions of civilian deaths at the hands of wars involving Britain. Equally, others object to commemorating wars that they believe should never have happened – after all, the poppy honours those who have died at war, including in recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, not just those involved in World Wars.

The victimisation of those who choose not to – or forget to – wear a poppy must stop immediately: if we fail to respect personal choice, then we risk turning a symbol of respect
into an excuse for division.