Wednesday 16th July 2025
Blog Page 904

“Injections of humour amidst the Beckettian existential angst”

0

It’s been fifty years since Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead was first performed in Edinburgh by the Oxford Theatre group to an audience of six critics and one lone punter.  But Ronald Bryden’s stellar review in the Observer caught the eye of Kenneth Tynan, the director of the National Theatre at the time, and the play opened at its base at the Old Vic later that year.  But despite the play’s age, David Leveaux’s current production, back in the Old Vic once more, makes the play feel just as fresh as it would have back in the heyday of post-modernist drama.

A lot of the audience members seemed younger than could be expected, probably due to the presence of Daniel Radcliffe in the role of Rosencrantz.  Radcliffe is very good in the role: his boyish anxiousness and bafflement at the absurdist world into which they have been thrust is charming, and he works well as a sidekick to Joshua McGuire’s more confident and cerebral Guildenstern.  The two have a good chemistry as they shift between the Shakespearean language of the Denmark court and their own more modern speech, and they help the play avoid seeming tiresome or self-congratulatory with its intellectual in-jokes.  David Haig is excellent as the Player, both amusingly bawdy and eerily knowing while Rosencrantz and Guildenstern remain in the dark as to their role in the tragedy in which they are but minor characters. The group of tragedians that the Player commands are all dressed like Pierrot and every scene with them was a delight to watch.

The set, designed by Anna Fleische, is fantastic. Pink and blue clouds, idyllic yet unnerving, painted on the walls seem to resemble the sets of 50s Hollywood productions or poor amateur stage backcloths, a witty and self-consciously meta-theatrical reference, like the red “EXEUNT” sign at the back of the stage. The physical movement and timing of all the actors is superb, and not once did the play feel tedious or over-long, due to the constant injections of humour amidst the Beckettian existential angst.

Luke Mullins and Helena Wilson (who left Oxford this summer) are strong as Hamlet and Ophelia, and Mullins is especially funny as he pronounces Hamlet’s more self-indulgently miserable lines.  However, such emphasis is given to caricaturing Shakespeare’s prince of Denmark that the Hamlet figure we are offered is not one the audience can recognize or sympathise with – giving Stoppard’s commentary on Hamlet less of a meaning.

Overall, it’s a brilliant production of a play that blends philosophical commentary on the theatre and human existence with frequent moments of wit and hilarity.  I look forward to seeing the play in fifty years’ time, and I doubt it will feel any more dated than it does today.

It’s Fashion, But is it Art?

Last week, the Louvre opened its sculpture gallery to house Louis Vuitton’s AW17 collection, which is the first time a gallery has hosted a runway show. Nicolas Ghesquière’s collection was certainly impressive; the combination of broad shouldered outerwear and tightly-belted waists created angular, yet feminine silhouettes. There were also some next-level bias cut slip dresses with lace insets, beading and fur. What was perhaps most interesting, however, was the interaction between the clothes and the art. The experience was clearly immersive and aimed to combine the elements of both the neoclassical sculptures in the Louvre and the new figures in Louis Vuitton. However from some people’s coverage of the show, it almost felt like the clothes overshadowed the art. The Louvre’s hosting does spark the interesting debate: is fashion art? If so, why is it rarely taken seriously by anyone outside of the industry?

It is easy to say “a jumper is a jumper”, and there are people for whom fashion has a purely utilitarian role. However, to say the concept of utility excludes fashion from the world of art would be absurd; it would completely ignore the spectrum of expression already seen from artists. Are we to ignore Grayson Perry’s classically styled vases purely because a vase is also a vessel for water and flowers? Surely, the argument against the potential for functionality in art was settled after the rise of reverence for Duchamp’s Fountain. Just as much creative genius goes into the design for a runway show, or a Manolo Blahnik sandal, as it does a piece of ‘fine art’. And in terms of the layman’s lack of interest, there is no area of art that doesn’t bring forth yawns or derision from some sectors of society. The fact that fashion is something that everyone has to actively appreciate should make it less dismissible, rather than more so.

One reason for this layer of derision around fashion is the uncomfortable issue of internalised misogyny. It has long been painfully clear that the areas of culture and industry which are deprecated in school and society for being feminine and unimportant are dominated by men when transferred to the real world of business. This is perhaps most clearly seen in the traditional female ‘housewife’ stereotype. It is seen as a woman’s duty to cook for the family, and equally baking is seen as an old lady’s occupation, or perhaps taught to young girls in ‘Domestic Science’, but definitely not something for growing boys to concern themselves with. There’s a whole story line focusing on just that in everyone’s favourite infamous Disney movie, High school musical—who remembers crème brulee Zeke, who wasn’t sticking to the status quo? Yet, almost every famous chef, be that on or off our TV screens, is a man. The two main exceptions fill depressingly archetypal roles – Delia the ‘Mother’ teaches us how to poach an egg and Nigella the ‘whore’ seductively piles chocolate and cream into a bowl and then licks the spoon. This trend can be seen across the board—an interest in art and drawing at school is often thought of as girly but as we know from campaigns like ‘Gorilla Girls’, all of our museums are full of pictures of naked women, drawn by dead white men.

In terms of fashion, what could be more girly than caring about clothes and shoes and makeup and handbags? Women are constantly slated for being too into their looks, or too vain and shallow. It’s even ingrained within our language on gender, we are told not to be a ‘big girl’s blouse’ when acting too fussy or weak, and in the north, men who cares about their looks are ‘tarts’. One might hope then, that as a kind of recompense for this degradation, women would have pride of place within the fashion industry. Unfortunately however, women only make up a third of the top jobs in fashion. That’s not to say it isn’t a female-dominated industry, but the fashion houses are still predominately being run by men; think of Alexander McQueen, Valentino, Ralph Lauren, Yves Saint Laurent, Alexander Wang, Tom Ford, Gucci and Chanel, which started out as styles from Coco for the modern woman, but is now run by Karl Lagerfeld. This sends the unfortunate message that when something is associated with women, it is not to be taken seriously, until it is taken over and made into a money-making reality by the strongmen of this world. Why is it that Nicolas Ghesquière can be invited to the largest and arguably most prestigious art gallery in the world, yet young girls reading fashion magazines and picking out beautiful shoes are still told to stop wasting their time, to focus on something actually worthwhile?

This is not to say that I’m not thrilled that Ghesquière was invited to the Louvre for his show or that it was his gender that got him the invite. This is about the wider issue of fashion not being recognized as an art form—because to quote the great Stanley Tucci from the famous ‘The Devils Wears Prada’, fashion is “greater than art, because you live your life in it”.

The Shins – Heartworms review

0

It’s become almost fashionable to sound the death knell of the kind of indie rock that once peppered the Pacific Northwest, and in doing so, to call into question yet again the continued viability of the genre altogether. After all, how many songs can, or more importantly should, be written about the dirt in our fries, the freckles in our eyes, or whether we’ll float on okay?

Sixteen years since the release of The Shins’ first album, Oh, Inverted World, these questions may to some appear as tired as the genre they purport to interrogate. After all, a lot has changed since the optimistic days of the summer of ‘01. James Mercer, who occupies the same equivocal space between person and project as Justin Vernon in Bon Iver, is now 46 and a father of three. The band’s entire line-up, save Mercer, has changed; The Shins, rightfully, so, is no longer the project of early-30s musing but the home of a more middle-aged reflection.

In that spirit, there’s a certain sense of renewal in The Shins’ fifth effort, Heartworms. With an almost father-like “go get ‘em” flair, the album opens with ‘Name for You’, a sweetly encouraging piece that seems to deter all cynics. There’s no doubt here at all – the big questions of life, which Portland indie rock once tried to tackle en masse, are accepted as intractable. But here, Mercer delves into practicalities. In ‘Painting a Hole’, Mercer sings, “You’re painting a hole, can you crawl up inside it?”, asking doubtfully whether the difficulties in life can be avoided any further. These themes aren’t new and they aren’t original, but age offers a sharply grounded perspective where once the answer would have been “sack it.”

Just because Mercer has aged, however, doesn’t mean he’s willing to tone down the tricky arrangements that have characterised Shins records for the past decade. On ‘Cherry Hearts’ and ‘Fantasy Island’, Mercer pulls together 808-esque low ends with familiar, unforgiving keyboard tones. On the latter track in particular, Mercer confronts his age, asking “where are they now, the money and the crowd?” without much in the way of bitterness. He opens up on the subject of his anxiety, without the bluster of his youth, showing a confidence and a clarity that’s clearly developed over the course of a productive career. It’s a confidence which, whilst possibly tentative at the start of the album, never disappears once unleashed.

In ‘Rubber Ballz’, Mercer flips the old clichéd line “I can’t get her out of my head” around, crooning instead that he “can’t get her out of my bed.” As crass a line as it might seem, there’s a confident self-awareness as he bemoans his “making bad decisions into art forms”, a line which seems to aptly capture a large portion of the ethos of noughties indie rock with such momentum that the optimistic idealism of the song’s follow-up, ‘Half a Million’, almost gets swept up in the rhythm. Still, the song’s upbeat message feels like a natural progression from Portland indie’s pessimistic past, with Mercer reminding us that despite all the difficulties and expectations he faces, he still has his guitar.

Once the album’s finds its confident voice, however, it never lets go. The psychedelic track ‘Dead Alive’ is unashamedly the quintessential Shins single, in its reverb-soaked outro that harks back to the classic ‘One By One All Day’. Despite it clearly being produced and released in time for Halloween, the single never quite feels like it’s meant to be a novelty; the referenced “dead alive” aren’t zombies à la ‘Thriller’ but a reference to the simultaneously uplifting and depressing nature of nostalgia. Back for a fifth album, The Shins are indelibly marked by what’s gone on before—and that’s something Mercer accepts and even embraces.

As a result, as the album begins to draw to a close with the highlight title track ‘Heartworms’, there’s a weightless euphoria that comes attached to almost endless replay value; the title track seems to characterise almost perfectly the ‘what can I do’ attitude of lazy summer afternoons. Summer is followed by autumn on ‘So Now What’, which was first released as part of Zach Braff’s Kickstarter-funded film Wish I Was Here. For a film which made little effort to move beyond Braff’s signature narrative ground, ‘So Now What’ feels remarkably fresh, carrying what is probably the strongest melody in the album.

As much as The Shins seem to be begging listeners to take a moment to reflect, the pace of the second half of the album is almost restrictive in that respect. There’s a lot going on here—ever since ‘Fantasy Island’, Mercer has been confidently exploring themes he’s explored before with a distinctly new perspective. With a valedictory tone, ‘The Fear’ concludes the album by returning to the topic of anxiety. It’s clear that it’s not an easy topic for Mercer to share, but he does so with vigour; in the lines “the fear is a terrible drug / if I only I had sense enough to let it give way to love”, Mercer’s songwriting is at its most relatable. That sense of distance you often found with indie rock groups, where the problems they sang about seemed otherworldly and at times fake, is shattered on a song remarkable for its honesty.

It’s easy to argue, sixteen years on from their breakthrough, that groups such as The Shins and Death Cab for Cutie have nothing new to say. As with most things, there’s an element of truth in this: the same themes once explored will be explored further. There’s no Natalie Portman-esque “change your life” moment on Heartworms, but it’s not fair to claim there’s nothing worth listening to here—the changed, shifted perspectives from previous records betray glimpses of magic, with an honesty that makes the listen all the more rewarding.

Review: ‘T2 Trainspotting’

0

Upon the release of the first batch of T2 trailers, the image of Mark Renton (Ewan McGregor) on a treadmill made me incredibly nervous. I wondered whether T2 would be consumed by the modern way, filled with Apple products, spiralisers and Netflix references. Thankfully, T2’s revival of 90’s lurid grittiness was delivered in abundance to viewers eagerly anticipating the sequel to the film of a generation. T2 self-consciously proves that you can’t always escape your past,but for both Danny Boyle and the skag boys, this proves to not always be a bad thing.

Trainspotting (1996) ends with Renton running off with 16k after a dodgy drug deal involving a very angry Begbie (Robert Carlyle) and Underworld’s iconic Born Slippy. T2 begins by telling us how Rents utilised (or didn’t) his small fortune as he makes his first return to Edinburgh since he left his mates, his skag and his underage girlfriend back in 1996. There’s also a new addition to the gang in the form of the bright-eyed Veronika (Anjela Nedyalkova), one of Sick Boy’s (Jonny Lee Miller) ‘girls’ that winds up controlling both him and Renton, whilst cultivating a mesmerising friendship with Spud (Euan Bremner).

T2 does not, quite rightly, take itself as seriously as the first film does. It is charmingly aware that it will not be the voice of its generation. For example, Blondie’s Atomic is replaced with Frankie’s Relax. Boyle’s reimagining is more concerned with tapping into the humanity of the often shallow and vapid lead characters, which lends T2 a tenderness only hinted at in its predecessor. The boys are no longer part of a supposedly superficial and excessive Generation X, and this is precisely what they have to come to terms with.

That is not to say T2 doesn’t burst with the energetic brand of cynical, indie wit, characteristic of Irvine Welsh, that elevated the original to cult status. T2 is outright hilarious, with John Hodge once again giving audiences a superlative lesson in the art of screenwriting. Aside from punchy dialogue, the quintessential anti-naturalist style that gave Trainspotting most of its life force is ever present in T2. Danny Boyle’s knack for genius camera work and intense colour (the giant Scooby Doo in 127 Hours springs to mind) feels most at home in the Trainspotting universe. This time, rather than emphasising the otherworldly experience of drug addiction, the camera hones in on the more sterile, even harsher reality of the everyday.

Like the script and the style, it was always the chemistry between the actors that helped make Trainspotting what it was. In 2017, this is as palpable as ever, warmly reuniting fans with old familiar friends that we love to hate and, significantly, hate to love. Euan Bremner, however, is the standout actor of the bunch for his heart-breaking portrayal of cartoonish Spud, who undeservedly has the hardest time of them all in T2.

The addictive energy of T2 pays homage to the magnificence of the first film, having plenty of room to move under its immense shadow. Trainspotting will always be one of, if not the, best examples of contemporary British cinema and I am overjoyed to report that Danny delivers the best final hit we could have asked for. Shocking, unapologetic and thoroughly moving, long live Trainspotting and long live Danny Boyle.

Dark Blues hopeful ahead of first Varsity Football double-header

0

Sunday sees the first-ever Varsity football double-header, with Barnet’s ground The Hive playing host to both the Women’s and the Men’s fixtures.

The Varsity Match is the oldest regular fixture in world football, having been played every year since 1873, barring the two World Wars. Even though the Men’s fixture has been played as many as 132 times, 2017 marks the first year that it has been played on the same date and at the same venue as the Women’s game.

Men’s Preview

After a 2-0 Varsity win last season, Oxford’s Men will be confident heading into Sunday’s fixtures. Victory over Cambridge in the 3rd place play-off in inaugural World Elite Universities Football Tournament in Beijing last summer was followed by a 4-2 home win and 0-0 away draw in the league this season.

Joan Crespo surely holds the key to victory for the Dark Blues in 2017. The Spanish visiting student learnt his trade in Barcelona, and his quick feet and ability to find space between the lines have made him the crucial man in the Oxford midfield.

Crespo will look to supply the Dark Blues’ number nine and main goalscoring threat Dom Thelen, who is set to start up top. Thelen has managed 16 goals in just 23 starts this season, and his poaching ability will be tested on Sunday.

At the back, Michael Moneke returns to play his fifth Varsity match at centre-half—impressively, he is set to make an 82nd start for the 1st XI. Despite his mixed injury record, Moneke’s commanding presence will undoubtedly cause problems for Cambridge’s strikers as he lines up in a back three alongside stand-in captain Cian Wade and Sam Hale.

Women’s Preview

The Women’s side also came out on top in last year’s fixture, with Tina Gough’s early goal securing a 1-0 victory. However, Cambridge’s side have enjoyed a fantastic league campaign this season, steamrolling the Midlands 2B division with ten wins from as many fixtures. Despite sitting in a higher division, the Dark Blues have struggled in the league, and will be hoping that they can put an end to a poor run with victory at The Hive.

Claudia Hill’s presence at centre-back will be crucial for the Women. A tough-tackling defender, Hill will have a task on her hands to shut out a free-scoring Cambridge side, but her authority at the back should mean she is up to the task.

Caroline Ward will captain the side at The Hive after missing the 2016 Varsity Match due to a MCL tear. An energetic midfielder, Ward also has an eye for a key pass, having managed three assists in her seven appearances this season.

However, the team’s main creative threat is Colleen Lopez, who will occupy the number ten role just behind the striker. Originally from California, Lopez took some time to adapt to the physicality and intensity of English football, but has performed with aplomb since fitting in. Despite a lower goal return in 2016/17 than in the previous campaign, Lopez has still managed to create a couple of assists for her team-mates this season, and will look to exploit any space between Cambridge’s back four and midfield.

Tickets are still available for Sunday’s fixtures, and can be bought here.

Online discoveries through the Oxford Book Club

0

The student-run Oxford Book Club has been holding second hand book fairs for a number of years, offering a diverse range of titles that is conducive both to long, expensive reading lists—and the simple pleasures of browsing and discovery. Now, the Oxford Book Club is looking to extend this element of discovery to an online forum, in the shape of a new website where readers can submit reviews and hold discussions.

Led by a team of three co-editors, Megan Husain, Yashwina Canter, and Victor Ajuwon, a major principle of the new website is that “everyone at some point will have read something—a book, a poem, an essay, or even a sentence—that will have changed them, redefined their perspective, or inspired infectious enthusiasm”. As Megan explains, the focus is not on a highly critical, academic style, but rather a sense of the personal claims people feel towards books.

The Club’s website is already displaying the kind of individuality and idiosyncrasy of personal response that it hopes to promote. Articles include The Saga of Gunnlaug Serpent-tongue: Why I Have Been Liking Vikings and Making a Poetry of Science: Why Darwin and Shelley Should Have Met, written by Victor. For example, he explains how the ethos of the Oxford Book Club has enabled him to intersect a love of literature with the scientific focus of his Biology degree. Yashwina also points out that many reviewing websites often coordinate specifically with publishing cycles, whereas the Oxford Book Club is more interested in how books can come into our lives at any time, or in any place, and in how we express the impact they have.

New and inclusive, the Oxford Book Club is hoping to attract contributors over the vacation and throughout next term. Anyone interested can get in touch via the Facebook page, www.theoxfordbookclub.com, or by contacting the editors at [email protected].

 

 

Oxford University launches £10 million medical marijuana research program

1

Oxford University are set to partner with Kingsley Capital Partners to research marijuana-based medicine.

Cannabinoids, the chemical compounds found in marijuana, alter neurotransmitter release in the brain, and therefore can be used to treat pain, cancer and inflammatory diseases.

Eight scientists will be investigating the effects of medical marijuana, aided by the funding from Kingsley Capital Partners, a London-based private equity firm.

Neil Mahapatra, Managing Partner of Kingsley, said: “Medical cannabis and cannabinoid medicine is already helping patients with some of the most distressing conditions across the world.

“However, research into the specific pathways and mechanisms that create this benefit is limited and long overdue.” He claims that the partnership between Kingsley and the University will ensure that the UK has a leadership role in the fast-growing field of medicinal marijuana research.

Ahmed Ahmed, Professor of Gynaecological Oncology at Oxford, registered his support of the research. He commented: “Cannabinoid research has started to produce exciting biological discoveries and this programme is a timely opportunity to increase our understanding of the role of cannabinoids in health and disease. This field holds great promise for developing novel therapeutic opportunities for cancer patients.”

The program has received notable support from actor Sir Patrick Stewart. The X-Men star has used medicinal marijuana to treat his arthritis, which he claims has helped him sleep at night again and restored mobility in his hands.

He told the Daily Telegraph: “This is an important step forward for Britain in a field of research that has for too long been held back by prejudice, fear and ignorance.

“I enthusiastically support the Oxford University Cannabis Research Plan.”

Currently, the only licensed cannabis-based product in this country is Sativex, a prescription-only drug for patients suffering from Multiple Sclerosis. NICE, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the NHS’s primary rationing body, strongly advises against the use of Sativex, claiming that it is not a cost-effective treatment.

Whilst the Conservatives and Labour do not officially support legalising marijuana for medication, both the Green Party and the Liberal Democrats have called for it. The Liberal Democrats announced only four days ago that they support a regulated cannabis market in the UK.

The Oxford University Liberal Democrats told Cherwell: “We are pleased to see the university taking this positive step towards better treatment for certain conditions in the future. The UK is behind other countries in this area, and the Lib Dems have consistently supported a compassionate and progressive stance of legalisation of prescribed cannabis and decriminalisation of possession.”

This is a breaking story, and will be updated with comment as we receive it.

C+: Why is my curriculum so white?

0

This article originally appeared as part of a C+ investigation into Race at Oxford. Other articles include a discussion of student responses to the migrant crisis, student responses to a C+ poll, and the university’s record on race and access. 

University is regarded as the place which forms thought and allows for the diverse exploration of it, particularly at an institution like Oxford which boasts some of the highest standards in higher education for provoking thought and knowledge acquisition in its students. The mission statement of most universities calls for a fostering of equality, yet a glance over most of our reading lists demonstrates how this sense of equality is not similarly perpetuated in academia. This unvarying approach is, for the most part, left undisputed, reinforced by the sense of these white, and for the most part male, sources holding academic prestige and privilege.

BME students are left with their history essentially ignored in their academic life. This colour-blind approach leaves a wealth of work offering alternate outlooks ignored and even propagates the absurd notion that only white men have been involved in the pursuit of knowledge. This regulated attitude is disturbingly seldom addressed or chuckled away in lectures. This conservation of power is even recognisable in casual conversation, where the more white authors someone has read maintains a symbiotic relationship to how cultured they are perceived as being.

This insistence on the moral and intellectual superiority of the white thinkers subconsciously establishes concerning power structures in the formative minds which are carried and continue to multiply in the world beyond university. As an Aiming Higher report commented in 2015, it is now being recognised that it is unacceptable for academia to be “normatively, habitually and intellectually ‘White’”.

Finding themselves under-represented, many BME students are acutely conscious of this mainstream narrative which neglects their historical discourse and become disillusioned by it. This has been dubbed by the NUS as leading to the BME attainment gap, whereby a reported 20 per cent of BME students are less likely to attain a first or 2:1 class degree at the end of their course compared to their white peers, despite having arrived at university with the same examination results, providing an example of how the colour blind curriculum can perpetuate exclusion and marginalization outside the lecture theatre.

In a 2014 OUSU survey on ‘Race, Ethnicity and the Student Experience’, an Oxford student was reported as having commented in relation to curriculum diversity that “it means that BME students are made to feel inferior and our identities are subsumed, almost as if to say there are no academics from other backgrounds that haven’t made huge developments in their field. It’s said implicitly in the curriculum we study. After a while we begin to accept these things as being natural when we shouldn’t”. They continued: “You accept the idea that Europeans and Euro- centric voices are the most authoritative and legitimate.”

It appears to be the arts and humanities subjects that have extensively ingrained this white euro-centricity bias into their syllabi. In the cases of Classics and Philosophy, for instance, the works of white males governs the arena. This is not solely because of the proliferation of their work, but a muted connection between hierarchy of power and knowledge.

When asked to comment on this concern, the Oxford Classics Faculty told C+: “Classics has been at the forefront of work to diversify curricula, despite being more constrained than some subjects (such as English, History or Modern Languages) in the geographical and linguistic scope of the cultures it studies and the range of surviving sources for them. New material has been introduced into undergraduate lectures, highlighting the ethnic diversity of the Greek and Roman worlds.

“Students have been introduced to the politics of translation and interpretation, which can change our understanding of how our sources constructed and viewed members of different groups. A new paper is being developed in Ancient History, which studies the ancient near East and its interactions with the Greek world entirely though non-western sources. Graduate students are being invited to lecture this year on themes which speak to the diversity of the ancient world and the history of interpretation of this diversity.

“A research seminar is currently running on ‘Colonial and post-colonial voices’ (12.30pm, Thursdays, the Ioannou Centre, 66 St Giles: all welcome). Undergraduates and graduate student representatives have been actively encouraged in recent years to discuss with their constituencies what further diversification of the curriculum they would like to see.”

“A senior member of the Faculty has, for the past three years, been the Humanities coordinator for the CRAE/OU working group on curriculum diversity. In this capacity, she has brought high profile figures, including Professor Homi Bhabha and Dr Ruth Simmons, to lecture in Oxford. She has worked extensively with students across faculties on the ways in which they would like to see their curricula diversified. She has actively encouraged faculties across the Humanities to offer lecture series on more globally, racially and ethnically diverse topics, to develop new undergraduate and graduate options, to introduce new perspectives into existing options, and to diversify posts.”

The concern is that if we continue to exclusively study one ethnicity’s discourse at the hands of all others, our default perception of the world will be through the eyes of the structurally privileged, granting them with the power to supposedly articulate for everyone, despite the fact that swathes of people are excluded from the narrative.

Tobi Thomas, an Oxford undergraduate, told C+: “I think it’s really important for our curriculums to be decolonised. I study Philosophy, and so far my whole degree has revolved around the intellectual traditions of Western white men, who deem people who look like me to be ‘intellectually inferior’ and ‘primitive’. This whole idea ultimately perpetuates the racist trope that anything worthy of academic merit has come about by the West alone. It ignores the many great contributions of Eastern and African philosophers, which in many ways have acted as the foundations for Western philosophical thought.”

“This is especially harmful when growing up. In school, the only history I learnt about black people revolved around the slave trade or British imperialism and colonisation, which is problematic in itself as it implies that black people have only ever had history ‘done’ to them. It’s a problem because at a young age, you internalise this false belief that people who look like you have never contributed anything positive to rational and enlightened thinking in the history of humankind.”

While we should not be led to discount white thinking on account of race (its contribution is indubitable), it is not the sole seminal source. As institutions could potentially be at risk of introducing these suppressed works in a tokenistic manner, we should instead move past this and focus on the ideological motives behind this institutional bias and then embark upon curriculum reform.

This is something which the efforts of the Classics Faculty demonstrate are being attempted in Oxford. We must continue this across the university in order to perpetuate the diversity which aspects of the curriculum are gasping for, so that students are no longer forced to ask the question of why their curriculum is so white.

C+: Race and Access

1

This article originally appeared as part of a C+ investigation into Race at Oxford. Other articles include a discussion of student responses to the migrant crisis, the “whiteness” of the curriculum, and analysis of C+ poll data

As part of its Strategic Plan of 2013-18, one of Oxford University’s commitments is to “ensure that our undergraduate and graduate admissions processes identify students with outstanding academic potential and the ability to benefit from an Oxford course whatever their background.” This shows that the university is actively ensuring that anyone from any background or race should have access to study in Oxford if they have the potential.

The university’s 2014/15 Equality Report shows that 24 per cent of Oxford students were of black and minority ethnic (BME). Compared to the 2011 Census data for the 18-34 age group, black students were under-represented broadly in line with the population of England and Wales. The university ranks in the lower mid-range among Russell Group universities, whilst London-based universities are leading in the rankings. This raises the question if access into Oxford is fair. Recent admissions data released by UCAS has revealed a continued racial deficit in Oxford admissions. Of the 2,555 offers made in for 2016 entry just 45 were to black applicants, compared to 2,090 to white applicants. Critics argue that raising tuition fees would further decrease access to students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Yet the University is doing a lot to help BME students increase their chances of applying, and ensuring that they get given the support they need in the application process.

The university works closely with Target Oxbridge, a free programme that aims to help black African and Caribbean students and students of mixed race to increase their chances of getting a place at Oxford. Following false media coverage about applications into Oxford, Target Oxbridge was established in 2012. The programme includes regular mentoring, interview help, and contact with an Oxford graduate for students who come from schools or families where it is not usually common. Speaking to the Cherwell, the founder of Target Oxbridge, Naomi Kellman said that the organization was founded because of a combination of factors—students weren’t aware that other black students applied, especially as the media coverage was off-putting, which made students worry if they would be the only BME student attending. It has cooperated with the university to begin a three-day residential course for more than 40 state school students with African and Caribbean heritage.  The university’s office for Undergraduate Admissions and Outreach is also working closely with an annual access conference in London, for high-performing year 12 African and Caribbean students. The conference aims to support students in making competitive applications to Oxford, and provides them with a platform to ask questions and engage with student role models of African and Caribbean origin. Dr Samina Khan, Director of Undergraduate Admissions and Outreach at the University of Oxford, recently told Cherwell: “We are aware that there is still work to be done, particularly in terms of offer rates to Black and Asian students.”

Yet, applications of BME students into Oxford are slowly increasing. Target Oxbridge has secured 46 offers for students into Oxford and Cambridge, which shows the positive impact of organizations to increase race in access into Oxford. Naomi Kellman told the Cherwell that “it’s no longer the case of worrying ‘Can black students go to Oxbridge?’ as this has definitely been proven, Target Oxbridge is more geared towards offering the support that they need to students who don’t have access to support.” Whereas a few years ago, there seemed to be a massive barrier in confidence, this is slowly changing. Target Oxbridge has received 150 applications, which has doubled from last year. The university is therefore doing a lot to increase applications, which it doesn’t necessarily have credit for. It cooperates with organizations such as Target Oxbridge in a hope to fulfil its plan to make sure that anyone can get access into Oxford if they have the academic potential, whatever their background.

 

C+ Investigation: Race at Oxford

This article originally appeared as part of a C+ investigation into Race at Oxford. Other articles include a discussion of student responses to the migrant crisis, the “whiteness” of the curriculum, and the university’s record on race and access

Of the students we surveyed, a large majority were white, contributing 69.2 per cent of the responses. This was followed by those from mixed or multiple backgrounds at 11.1 per cent. Around 4.3 per cent of respondents identified as black.

Of all respondents, 43.5 per cent of people agreed that racism as a problem at Oxford with a 15 per cent disparity between white students (42 per cent) and BME students (57 per cent). Similarly, 43.9 per cent of students surveyed agreed that Oxford was a diverse place with a clear disagreement between white and non-white students.

Many BME students commented on Oxford’s institutional racism, which has also recently been criticised by David Lammy in a speech at Lady Margaret Hall. The Labour MP for Tottenham accused the University of failing to adequately tackle racism caused by an institutional “unconscious bias”, until Peter Claus, the access fellow for Pembroke, interrupted him with a cry of “absolute nonsense”.

This comes after reports that just one per cent of Oxford’s 2014 intake was black, compared to 5.3 per cent of those taking A-levels or equivalent qualifications.

Other responses focused on the euro-centric curriculum. One student wrote that: “I can only say from my experience as a History student, but the focus on white/European history is quite frustrating.”

“At the moment you can only really take fully non-European history for two of the finals modules, the further subject and special subjects, and those options are often oversubscribed.

“At the same time, British History and General History (essentially European history) are compulsory. But the syllabus is changing so I’m not sure how much that will remain the case.”

Another disagreed, saying: “The question of a diverse curriculum seems to confusing to me. As a student of PPE, it would be almost impossible to study politics or philosophy if we incorporated non-Western traditions.

“The assumption behind our course is that we’re looking at the Western side of PPE, which makes sense since the expectation is for us to go and work in the West, where that information is relevant. If we want to learn about African or Asian traditions of philosophy, shouldn’t we go and study there?”

Others had personal experiences of Oxford-based racism. One student told Cherwell: “In regards to the tutor for race [a survey question], I think this should be an option for students if they want it.

“As a white-passing student (mixed Pakistani and English) I rarely have issue with race, but a girl I know personally turned down an offer to read English at Oxford due to her experiences in the interview at Oxford.”

“She is a Muslim student who wears a hijab, and we both went to a very diverse school where the majority of the students were not white/were Muslim. She felt singled out and didn’t want to take on the identity of a token Muslim. Perhaps if she had seen any tutors of a similar religion/ethnicity to her she would have studied here at Oxford.”

More shockingly, one student stated that: “I have been pretty shocked to hear stories of racism from some of my “less white” mixed-race friends.”

“One girl was told by a white acquaintance, ‘you can’t tell me not to say n****r, because you’re not even black’ (she’s half-Caribbean), while otherwise there’s a lot of casual racism and misunderstanding which I don’t think is adequately alleviated by university-wide teaching or cultural awareness initiatives.”

“Also, the lack of diversity at my college and (anecdotally) others as well is pretty shocking. This place is whiter than my school, which was unbelievably white let me tell you. I don’t know how that could be changed very easily though. It brings up the whole quotas/ ‘reverse racism’ argument.”

Overall, the survey highlighted the contrast between the views of white and BME students on many issues, and the disturbing prevalence of racism, both personal and institutional, among the Oxford community.

There were 587 respondents to the C+ poll, which asked three questions: “do you believe that racism is a problem at Oxford”, “do you believe that the statue of Cecil Rhodes should be removed”, and how well students performed at Prelims and Mods based on their ethnicity.

BME respondents largely believed racism was a problem at Oxford, in contrast to white respondents; whilst most students did not know whether they wanted the statue of Cecil Rhodes to be removed, white respondents were more likely to answer “Don’t know”. Finally, students from BME backgrounds performed marginally more strongly at Prelims and Mods than white students, but only a small sample size of BME students was available.