Thursday 17th July 2025
Blog Page 961

The fundamentals of sporting passion

Adam Hilsenrath
-
0
The fundamentals of sporting passion

Passion is often hailed as the minimum requirement of any team. Its importance rarely understated, pundits, managers and players alike declare the desire, the drive, the hunger that their teams can and will display or, in the case of defeat, that they lacked.

A few of weeks ago, Mexico faced up against the USA in a 2018 World Cup qualifying match in Ohio. On the back of success for a presidential campaign that was less-than-favourable to Mexicans in its policy and language, indeed in a key swing state won by the Republican nominee, the media covering the game spoke of the increased intensity, passion and feistiness to the game both in the build-up and throughout the match. That the game was won through a dramatic 89th-minute header by Mexican captain Rafael Marquez, cueing frenzied celebrations added another layer to the impassioned spectacle.

On the same day, England faced up against their old rivals Scotland in what was in the end less of a close contest, but one billed as equally full of passion and desire, from all quarters. Not only has the traditional rivalry between Scotland and England often been enough in and of itself to push the players involved onto that extra level of intensity, but both managers’ jobs were on the line, more so Strachan’s than Southgate’s.

Finally, earlier in the afternoon, there was another passionately played out match. The LMH 1st team travelled all the way south of the Oxford city centre to play St. Hilda’s away in the JCR Cuppers tournament. There was no large crowd, no managerial threat, no age-old rivalry (unless you count their league game the week before). And yet, Hilda’s last-minute equaliser and LMH’s shoutout-winning penalty sparked loud and emotive celebrations from the respective teams.

If one were to look for other cited causes of intensified passion, they are all over the place. Small, compact stadiums, with fans close to the pitch, such as Bournemouth’s Vitality Stadium or Crystal Palace’s Selhurst Park, are seen to cause intimidating atmosphere that spurs on home teams. Local rivalries, relegation dogfights, title contenders, minnows against giants in cup ties. Even already-relegated sides are said to be dangerous opponents as they play for pride with nothing to lose.

If passion is so commonplace, then, and from such a wide variety of sources, then why is such emphasis placed upon it, week in week out, in every season? One could argue that it aids certain systems; high intensity pressing, such as that which Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool employ, or backs to the wall defending, such as Burnley have impressively displayed in recent weeks, particularly against Manchester United, might require increased levels of passion. However, passion is not caused by the tactics or system played; as established, it comes from all over the place, and to pin it down to any one cause or need would be overly simplistic.

Rather, perhaps the regularity of passion shows why so much emphasis is placed upon it. Passion is the most essential part of any team. Not in the sense of some kind of pre-match team speech to get everyone riled up and ready to go. When pundits really analyse on the topic of passion, and really emphasise the importance it had on one game or another, it is not because of its presence but its lacking.

When teams lose over and over again, it is a common cliché that the fans would be satisfied if only they showed a little fight, as was the case in Newcastle’s relegation-doomed season in 2015/16. When England fail to perform in major tournaments, as they often do, the go-to problem blamed by fans and punditry is often the lack of intensity or passion. It is the ultimate sin in sport to not give it your all, to fail to, as the cliché goes, leave everything out on the field, or in the ring, or on the track, or on the river.

The simple reason why a dead-rubber Oxford reserve league division four encounter on the last day of the season between two sides neither sitting at the bottom, nor in with a shout of promotion is that everyone wants to be there. It is not some mandatory secondary school game that people have dragged themselves to and spend seeking to avoid exercise and injury. The notion that anyone would voluntarily play sport, and in the case of professionals get paid for it, and not want to throw their heart and soul into it is so incomprehensible to the sporting world that it automatically sets you at a disadvantage to your opponents, and it earns you the wrath of your critics and perhaps your fans.

Sport is unifying, and engaging, and the team bonds that are forged can make or break a season, but passion is the underlying and most essential tool. Passion should not, in theory, offer any advantage, but should merely level out the playing field and make sport the spectacle that it so often is; passion is simply an inherently natural part of sport, it is not as the media hype train would like to argue, a phenomenon that raises its head only at those particularly heated derbies and grudge matches.

OxFolk reviews: Life in a Paper Boat

Ben Ray
-
0
OxFolk reviews: Life in a Paper Boat

When one thinks of the well-established folk singer Kate Rusby, her smooth, silky tones instantly spring to mind, a voice as comfortable and comforting as a favourite jumper. Over the years Rusby has garnered many accolades, having been one of the few folk singers to be nominated for a Mercury Award, and along the way gaining the title ‘The Barnsley Nightingale’, her soft cadences leading her to carve out a unique niche in the folk world. Indeed, with her latest release Life in a Paper Boat tallying as her 14th studio album, you could perhaps be forgiven for predicting how her music might sound—but you’d be wrong. This new release by Rusby is an exciting listen, full of experimentation and showing a clear effort to forge new ground—all accompanied by Rusby’s haunting, unforgettable voice.

Throughout this album Rusby retains the ability to surprise the listener. The music is laced throughout with an intoxicating mix of darkness and humour. Haunting ballads such as ‘The Witch of Westmorland’ are contrasted against lyrics like that of ‘Big Brave Bill’: “It was UHT milk, she broke down and cried.”

Indeed, this last track deserves a special mention: placed at the end of the album, ‘Big Brave Bill’ finds Rusby narrating the tongue in cheek story of the superhero from the mines that just loved Yorkshire tea. (If you have time, check out the fantastic music video accompanying this track on YouTube.) One can’t help but wonder if this is Rusby playfully signing off her latest release with a jubilant signal of new, exciting work to come.

As always, it is Rusby’s astonishing vocals that are the crowning glory of ‘Life in a Paper Boat’: she manages to engage and hold the listener throughout, even during one potentially over-long six-and-a-half-minute minute track. Despite the impressive range of emotions she manages to convey in this album, there are ample examples of the slower, more sensitive songs for which Rusby is most famous. Even within the upbeat, quick rhythms of ‘Only Desire What You Have’, her voice gives the song a sensuous, smooth quality that manages to lift the track above the rushing instrumentation.

The diverse and sometimes experimental instrumentation on this album really complements Rusby’s breathy, distinctive tones: indeed, Rusby herself has mentioned “the union between old songs and modern musical technology.” As well as working with Rusby’s traditional band members, the group is joined by Dan Tyminski singing with her on two tracks, whilst the skilled banjo player Ron Block’s musical offerings light up many of the tunes. Each song has a distinctive, beautifully formed opening, with the first track ‘Benjamin Bowmaneer’ emerging from a single chime and a gorgeously rich guitar line.

This whole album is a stunning addition to Rusby’s repertoire. Both new and bold, is shows that she is still able to surprise and push the boundaries of her vocal style, whilst also allowing her distinctive voice to shine through- a difficult balance in folk music.

Labour: Richmond by-election’s biggest loser

Louis McEvoy
-
1
Labour: Richmond by-election’s biggest loser

Zac Goldsmith, surely one of 2016’s most tragicomic political figures, ended his parliamentary career last night with yet another humiliating defeat, this time completely unnecessary. Long gone are the days when Goldsmith was fawned over as a beacon of youthful, compassionate Conservatism, merrily courting liberals and environmentalists; this attractive, eco-friendly, modernising Tory is now, rightly, excoriated by the liberal left for his mayoral campaign. Even the Tories are unlikely to miss a man who reduced their paper-thin majority even further. His decline and fall has been swift; he will be remembered as a nasty and incompetent loser. Good riddance.

As satisfying as Goldsmith’s defeat is, it doesn’t especially change things. Lib Dem survival on the margins, picking low-hanging electoral fruit here and there, was to be anticipated. Elsewhere, there are a plethora of Tory seats, with slim majorities, ruthlessly attained by the Conservatives last year at the nadir of Lib Dem fortunes; such seats can be regained now that the Lib Dems have renewed their pre-2010 role as a party of protest. Alas, any Lib Dem gains, through by-elections, are rendered irrelevant by the impact of potential boundary changes, and more pertinently by what will almost certainly be big Tory gains elsewhere. A hard Brexit still looks inevitable. But let’s allow the Lib Dems to savour their first victory in a long time.

What Richmond Park does raise is a much bigger and more important issue than anything to do with the Liberal Democrats: the future of the Labour Party. Richmond Park was a vote on Brexit, and Labour lost their deposit for the first time in a by-election since 2008. Richmond might not be ideal Labour territory, but even the dismal 2015 election saw them gain nearly five times the number of votes in Richmond than they received this time round. Brexit undoubtedly remains the big dividing line and primary political issue in British politics, and what the parties say on it matters. So where do they all stand? The Tories appeal to Leavers; UKIP calls for an extreme Brexit; the Lib Dems oppose it through talk of a second referendum, appealing to disaffected Remainers. Labour…well, what should Labour’s line be?

The likes of Owen Smith, David Lammy, and the defeated Richmond candidate Christian Wolmar adopt the Lib Dem view and oppose departure altogether; a broader cross-section, entailing everyone from John McDonnell to Chuka Umunna, support leaving but quibble over specifics. Their broad stance seems to amount to criticising the government’s “shambolic Brexit” for being unclear about its aims and for failing to stick to the Leave campaign’s promises, which is all well and good, but hardly offers a clear alternative pitch for voters.

Several weeks ago, Corbyn declared that he would oppose the triggering of Article 50 if the government failed to meet his demands, but this was rapidly abandoned. Worse still, although most Labour MPs want “soft Brexit” and to remain a member of the single market, Corbyn chose to criticise aspects of membership and signalled a desire to simply maintain “access” to the single market. Corbyn’s suggestion is an interesting one, considering it is identical to the nebulous Tory line, and that no one opposes some sort of access to the single market. Clearly, Labour is in a bit of a pickle.

There’s no doubt that Labour has it harder than any other party when it comes to determining an effective and cogent line on Brexit. Whereas a majority of Tory voters opted to leave, most Labour voters opted to remain – yet simultaneously, seven in ten Labour constituencies voted to leave.

Opposing Brexit would open the way for UKIP and Tory gains. However, supporting Brexit leaves Labour vulnerable to challenges from the left; frustratingly, a recent YouGov poll has suggested that a pro-Brexit Labour stance was the least popular compared to a pro-soft Brexit or a pro-second referendum position. Thus, opposing Brexit might allow Labour to pile up votes in urban areas, whilst being decimated elsewhere. This is not a strategy worth considering, and the fact that Corbyn himself is patently unwilling to go against the result is the final nail in its coffin. If a second referendum is off the cards, then what do we call for? Soft Brexit seems to be the only obvious option, but this would entail supporting continued freedom of movement, thereby creating the UKIP campaign strategy for them. This would please few people.

This leaves us either with the task of supporting hard Brexit and therefore having nothing to say about the issue, or finding a new position beyond the banal labels of ‘soft’ and ‘hard.’ The whole situation reeks badly of Labour’s Scotland problem – a country whose politics are defined and divided by another referendum. In a chillingly similar fashion to the setup here, all sides of the debate are monopolised by other parties: those who want independence vote SNP, and those who want to stay are increasingly moving towards the strongly and unambiguously pro-Union Tories, who beat Labour into third place in the Scottish locals earlier in May. The Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale has sought to win over both by remarking that she might consider voting independence in the future, and asserting, post-Brexit, that there should be a second independence referendum if the Scottish people want it. Little wonder Scottish Labour is dying.

If Labour is to talk about Brexit – and it must – it cannot oppose leaving, but it has to find a way to differentiate itself from the government. Perhaps we could insist on remaining in the single market but ending freedom of movement; this might be impossible for the government to negotiate, but making impossible but popular demands is part of the luxury of opposition. Yet, like the other options, this is a compromise which cannot totally please either side. Labour’s problem here harks back to the old Hampstead-Hull divide: the party straddles a broad church of liberal, pro-immigration voters in urban areas and more UKIP-inclined, anti-immigration voters in its old heartlands. If we choose one side, we’re likely to lose votes from the other. It seems that, as usual, there is no easy solution for Labour’s difficulties. Inevitably, we will remain unclear on the Brexit issue, and thus, our enemies – Lib Dems who prey on Remainers, UKIP and Tories preying on anti-immigration Leavers – will prosper at our expense.

Rhodes Must Fall return to protest outside Oriel

Jack Hunter
-
1
Rhodes Must Fall return to protest outside Oriel

Campaigners demanded Oriel College “name their price” at a Rhodes Must Fall (RMF) protest outside the college on Friday.

The protest came a year after Oriel launched their sixth-month listening exercise, which was brought to a halt in January when they announced their intention to keep their statue of British Imperialist Cecil Rhodes.

There were chants of “get up, get down, there’s a decon movement in this town” and “de-de-decolonise” while the group presented a cheque to Oriel, explaining in a letter to the college “you understand only the logic of hard cash”.

Campaigners claim that Oriel College’s decision not to remove the state was motivated by a potential loss of funding from wealthy donors. The college has strongly denied these allegations.

In an open letter to Oriel from Rhodes Must Fall Oxford, which was read out at the protest, “Your actions reflect a broader context of embedded prejudice, white supremacy and institutional indifference at the University of Oxford.”

“You are just an example of the university’s institutional racism: you marginalise, ignore, and actively undermine the voices of particular racial groups as you stuff your pockets with their money and pay lip service to an empty agenda of diversity.”

The protest’s focus on the issue of financial donors follows recent developments within the RMF Oxford campaign and decolonisation movement, as protesters seek to intersect with Free Education Oxford and other groups against the “colonisation and neoliberalisation of higher education”.

Graduate student and decolonisation activist Rachel Harmon told Cherwell,”We are going to let the University and Oriel College know that RMF Oxford is going to keep organising until our objectives are met and until our demands are dealt with in a meaningful way by the university.”

“We’ve been extraordinarily disappointed with the institutional response so far and we’re not going to give up just because they haven’t done what we want them to do yet.”

She explained that the protest was demanding the University “deals with iconography around the university which glorifies people who have done really atrocious things throughout history”. The group also demand changes to the “extraordinarily euro-centric curriculum” and representation.

A spokesperson for Oriel College told Cherwell,”In January, after careful consideration, the College’s Governing Body decided that the Rhodes statue will remain in place. As was made clear at the time, the College considered a wide range of views from many sources including students and academics, heritage bodies, national and student polls, alumni and members of the public. The overwhelming message of these was in support of the statue remaining in place, for a variety of reasons.”

A spokesperson from Oxford University said, “Oxford University is a welcoming, tolerant and diverse community. More than 25 per cent of our undergraduates and postgraduates are black and minority ethnic students. We are continually working with students on many initiatives towards greater inclusion and representation for all ethnic groups.”

“For example, we ran a highly successful summer conference to encourage more UK minority ethnic applicants from state schools, jointly led by students in the University’s African and Caribbean Society. We are also working in consultation with minority ethnic students on curriculum change, and supporting this process with a series of high-profile public lectures on cultural change in higher education.”

Preview: The Pillowman

Jeevan Ravindran
-
0
Preview: The Pillowman

A writer puts pen to paper only to churn out stories of little children being horribly murdered. We soon discover that he has a very troubled backstory, a tortured and traumatised brother, with murder accusations hanging over both their heads. However, insist directors, John Maier and Will Cowie, this is a comedy.

Initially, I have difficulty believing this, and as the rehearsal begins, I am mesmerised more by fear and a gnawing curiosity than by the side-splitting humour of it all. Katurian (played by Lillian Bornstein) is both narrator and performer, with intriguing re-enactments of his stories interposed between the action. As the lights come up in the opening scene, he sits blindfolded, alone onstage, and is subsequently interrogated by police officers Tupolski and Ariel (played by Joseph Stephenson and Christian Amos), who meet his impassioned claims of innocence with a mix of apathy, amusement and anger. In fact, the entirety of Martin McDonagh’s script toys with the juxtaposition of brutality and comedy.

To enact one of the stories, a vast white covering, part wall, part screen is transformed, as Eve Finnie’s remarkably designed puppets play out Katurian’s words. Suddenly the directors’ vision comes alive as a story both real and imagined plays out before us. Much as the writer describes his parents conducting an “artistic experiment,” it is obvious that the play itself is an artistic experiment, toying with the play’s earthy and sinister misanthropy. It is clear that Cowie and Maier have read and interpreted the play sensitively, choosing to see it as a statement on society. Gender-blind casting and the innovative storytelling methods only add to this.

The intimate setting of The Michael Pilch Theatre breathes a new life into this adaptation. The audience, on the same level as the actors, have a close insight into the minds of the characters, whose intense exchanges are claustrophobic in their proximity. The directors seem keen to assure those who might have seen the 2014 Playhouse adaptation that this is quite different – the minimalist nature of their production has forced them to delve deeper into the play and create something entirely original. Yet, seeing the play in action, it’s almost impossible to imagine the production on any scale other than this.

It is difficult to deny the talents of this small cast of four – Lillian Bornstein’s Katurian is at once forceful and pitiful, playing beautifully opposite the comic duo of Stephenson and Amos; the pair bring out the play’s boldest humour, whilst having fun at Katurian’s expense – torturing him, then politely asking him to take a seat. His brother Michal (Chris Page) is childish and naïve, failing to understand the gravity of his situation, bemoaning an itchy posterior, and shaking his head confusedly at Katurian’s complex intellectual musings.

Talking to the cast afterwards, they assure me they’ve had fun preparing for the play, despite its dark themes. Cowie and Maier say they were looking for eminently capable comic actors in casting, and that the nuances of Martin McDonagh’s bathetic and anticlimactic humour are often easy to miss.

It’s clear that there’s much more to expect than what we’ve seen – a story told through animation, retro TVs, and realistic fight-scenes choreographed by movement coach, Pete Sayer, as well as much more humour. “We want people to leave crying, but crying with laughter,” Maier concludes. “But maybe every one in three tears should be emotional,” chips in Cowie.

Whether funny or emotional, with its turbulent mix of totalitarian horror and quirky humour, don’t put head to pillow this week without seeing The Pillowman.

The Pillowman runs in 8th week at The Pilch Studio, (30th of November- 3rd of December).

Review: Much Ado About Nothing

Nina Crisp
-
1
Review: Much Ado About Nothing

Shakespeare’s tale of two schemes concerning lovers – one to get a couple together, one to tear another couple apart- could conceivably happen anywhere. Jack Bradfield sets the action in a house party at the turn of the millennium, where anything might happen.

Poltergeist Theatre’s production introduces new perspectives to the characters. I liked how Hero and Claudio, who are traditionally the couple who conform to society’s gendered expectations, are the ones whose genders are played with, keeping the genders and pronouns they have in the text, whilst being played by actors and wearing clothes coded to another gender. The editing of the play blends this all together, as Claudio’s rant at the altar focuses more on the infidelity he believes Hero to be guilty of, and is less directly misogynistic, which might have felt weird coming from someone in a skirt. In addition, I enjoyed the addition of a redemption arc for Margaret when she realises her complicity in the shaming of Hero.

The cast was very strong. Alice Moore’s Beatrice was sharp and had a wide range of comic facial expressions, and Adam Goodbody’s Benedick was the least cocky I have ever seen him, even vulnerable in his love at times, and together, they make a touching couple. Benedick’s other important relationship, his friendship with Claudio. Is also well played, from their camaraderie at the beginning to seeing the conflict of issuing or receiving the challenge to the duel. Georgia Figgis plays Claudio in many states-excited in love, drunk, angry, upset- and the sadness she brings makes you feel sympathy for him, at least until he very convincingly rages again. Another standout for me was Lillian Bornstein’s Don Pedro, who looked utterly heartbroken after Beatrice refuses his marriage proposal.

Design wise, it’s tied together well. Both Georgia Bevan’s costumes and Adam Marshall’s lighting revolve around winter greens and rich purples, set against the white snow and plainer bases to the costumes. The transitions between scenes often resemble fast-forwarding in a video, keeping with the video theme in a stylised and polished way. Many a time a character is seen with drugs, a glass, or a bottle, which seems to motivate some of the more extreme reactions. The music, an original soundtrack by Alice Boyd, is melancholy, and the haunting rendition of Sign No More is particularly beautiful.

One thing emphasised in the marketing was the use of live-streaming and television. The major use of the live feed is when policemen Dogberry and Verges, perform to a handheld video camera, which shows on screen. This is an inventive way of allowing their actors, Imo Allen and Marcus Knight-Adams, to double as villains Conrad and Borachio, but the scene where the constables capture the criminals, repeatedly passing the camera between them, did seem a little clumsy. The television is also used in other parts of the play, to be played with, or for comic effect or for exposition. Its use would be greatly improved by ensuring that the audience could always see what was happening on screen- either by having a second screen that the actors didn’t interact with, and was only there for the audience, or simply by having the actors moving around instead of sitting or standing still in front of it.

The other thing that was conveyed in the marketing was the edgy perspective they would take on the play- the “death” of Hero and Benedick’s challenge to Claudio are emphasised. I was expecting a darker tone than what I normally expect from a Much Ado…-but this production went beyond my expectations. Yes, there are moments of pure comedy, such as the scene when Benedick is tricked into believing Beatrice loves him, and the unexpected audience participation, but it’s a lot darker than something often played as a rom-com is. The editing of the script focuses on the sad, angry, and tense moments, and even the very last line -drawing attention to the Prince’s failure to find a wife- leaves you with a sombre mood.

If you’re going hoping for a cheery, fun, or romantic night, this is play not for you. However, if you’re going for Shakespeare performed very differently, or something to play with your mood, or a uniquely brilliant interpretation of a classic, Poltergeist’s Much Ado… is one to watch.

St Aldates closed after police incident

Marianna Spring
-
0
St Aldates closed after police incident

St Aldates is currently closed to traffic following an incident involving a pedestrian on the corner of the High Street and St Aldates.

The Oxford Bus Company has since confirmed that one of its coaches was involved in an incident with a female pedestrian on the High Street.

An X90 coach has been cordoned off at the top of St Aldates, although pedestrians are now able to use the road again.

No students are confirmed to have been involved, but it is advisable to avoid the area whilst the police incident is ongoing.

Thames Valley Police and the Oxford Bus Company have been contacted for comment.

Merton tops updated version of Norrington Table

Marianna Spring
-
1
Merton tops updated version of Norrington Table

Merton College has topped a revised version of the Norrington Table, pushing Oriel into second place.

Oxford University adjusted the table according to the results of various appeals that have occurred since the provisional version of the table was released in August.

Having topped the table in 2014, Merton plummeted to 27th place last year, with Magdalen coming in first place.

Meanwhile, Brasenose has risen to 7th place, overtaking Balliol, whilst Pembroke have taken 13th place from Jesus.

The two most significant rises were Somerville from 20th to 16th place and Hertford from 23rd to 20th place.

St Edmund Hall dropped 6 places from 15th to 21st and Lady Margaret Hall fell from 21st to 23rd. Queen’s remained in bottom place.

A spokesperson for Oxford University commented, “The original table was only provisional and was based on interim data, which was correct for the time. The final table is based on complete results after any re-marking or other changes have been undertaken and entered – this may affect the change in college rankings between the publication of provisional and final versions.”

Dr. Simon Smith, a senior tutor at Brasenose, told Cherwell, “Brasenose is naturally delighted by the academic success of last year’s graduating cohort, which reflects the efforts of our students and tutors in a supportive social environment. At the same time, it should be remembered that the Norrington table is simply an ordering of Oxford’s mixed colleges and that all of them offer an exceptional undergraduate experience.”

Natasha Gibbs, a third-year student at Merton, commented, “Naturally we’re all very pleased to have taken back our position at the top of the table after the slight slip up recently. If we’re going to have a reputation as being where fun goes to die, we might as well have the results to show for it.”

The Norrington Table, an unofficial academic ranking of colleges, is calculated using a points system for the degrees undergraduate students were awarded in that year. A First Class degree gains the college five points, with three points for an Upper Second, two for a Lower Second and none for a Third or a Pass. The total score is expressed as a percentage of the maximum possible score, which is all Finals candidates multiplied by five.

Merton college declined to comment, whilst Oriel are yet to respond to request for comment.

The updated version of the table can be found here. The provisional table released in August can be found here.

Preview: Bang Bang You’re Dead

Amaris Proctor
-
0
Preview: Bang Bang You’re Dead

Although I was unable to see the actors in action, I got a sense of the production as the enthused director, third year psychology student Antoni Czerwinski, took me on a conversational tour of his vision for the play. It is a pliable, one-act piece of writing by William Mastrosimone, which lasts only about an hour, but has immense emotional weight. Disturbed by the prevalence of school shootings in America, and specifically Kip Kinkel’s 1998 attack on Thurston High School, the playwright explores the psyche of Josh, a teenager who brutally shoots his parents and classmates.

The piece is one which, in the words of the writer, requires “no set, no lights, no costumes (except for contemporary dress)”, facilitating how it spread like wild fire. This minimalism is something which Czerwinski has taken full advantage of, promising a production with a subtle use of lighting and a solitary piece of furniture. Czerwinski’s capacity to exploit the writing’s plasticity quieted one of the primary qualms I had about the piece: The writing was bred with American culture in mind, meaning the leap to a European setting would possibly detract from its powerful relevancy. This is especially considering how the last mass school shooting in Britain was the Dunblane school massacre, which took place in 1996, before many current students were even born.

This fear was dispelled when I saw the set design, as the floor is to be papered with news articles, from America, but perhaps more interestingly also from European settings, such as the Czech Republic and Serbia. This plays both on the fascination with crime drama which has spiked in the past few years, considering the likes of Making of a Murderer, whilst also showing that rather than necessarily being a direct comment on gun culture in America, this production deals with the universal teenage condition. This is conveyed by how the piece engages with the hunter as much as the victims, exhibiting a sombre sense of empathy with the desperate offender crucified so utterly by the media.

The smart decision to use the floor as a statement piece has a secondary, more pragmatic effect, as it helps darken the already intimate Burton Taylor studio, complementing its shady, atmospheric walls. This mutedly plays up the connections between the writing and the difficult discourses surrounding mental illness in Oxford. Although less drastic and sadistic, the negative, overwhelming emotions of self-loathing and isolation experienced by the protagonist can sometimes rise in our highly pressurised environment. Additionally, the doubling of the creative and practical during the staging of the play is admirable as the fifty audience members will be seated in an octagon. This places focus on the multiple exits, which will allow for crisp transitions while also emphasising the themes of exiting and death at the centre of the play, as is accentuated by how each victim has their own way out.

Thus the play clearly comes to grips with themes which reverberated around the minds of high school students, considering the tens of thousands of productions which have sprung up from the intense script, all attempting to fathom acts of unthinkable cruelty. As the author states, it is “a drama to be performed by kids, for kids”, as is expressed by the darkly playful title. This in my mind makes it exceptionally well chosen and fresh for a university audience, who are on the cusp of adulthood. We have had a bit of breathing space from the traumas of high school, but are still essentially kids, with the experience of teenage angst still fresh in our collective consciousness. Ultimately, hopefully the robust cast of seven will be able to execute Czerwinski’s solid vision.

Fiction: Watch the sky burning

Sophie Burdge
-
0
Fiction: Watch the sky burning

“Let’s go for a walk.”

She shrugged. Continued to stare straight, not into her coffee but over it. She didn’t look round.

“Come on,” I pressed. “It’s a beautiful day, let’s take a wander along the canal.” It was her favourite kind of day as well. Or would have been, under normal circumstances. Autumnal, but not yet grey and chilly, the sky was still bright and the air had both the huskiness of bonfires and the sharp bite of the approaching winter. “A beautiful day,” I said again.

Clearly she didn’t feel like having an argument today, as she stood up and reached for her coat, all the while saying nothing. I almost wished she would argue, I wished she would scream and shout and hate me and leave me. Anything but this impenetrable fog of silence between us. She downed her coffee—it must have been cold by now, but she tipped it back anyway. Not even a grimace as the cold grit from the bottom of the mug hit her throat. She probably didn’t notice.

I helped her on with her coat—she didn’t need me to but I liked it. I’d always liked the feeling of being a gentleman, pulling out chairs and opening doors for pretty girls. Even when she told me off and said that I was being “benevolently sexist,” I did it anyway. I liked it. We hoiked on our wellies and shuffled out the door, sliding our way through the swell of orange that coated our front steps. I’d never really appreciated autumn before we met, always thought of it as something of a nothing season, just a filler between summer and Christmas. I still didn’t like it that much, if I’m honest. I hated feeling as if it were the middle of the night as soon as I finished work, and the way the air snapped at you but without the promise of snow. But I’d learned to sort of objectively appreciate it—for her sake. She wanted to us to stand round bonfires together and go on evening walks to watch the sky burning. I could sort of appreciate that now. I guess. She probably doesn’t like it as much anymore though.

She’d always liked wrapping herself up, that was another of her favourite things about autumn. She always looked so sweet, enveloped in huge scarves and jumpers, a little flushed face peering out into the cold. Now it looked more like armour. Impenetrable. She’d lie wrapped up in a blanket on the sofa in the evening. And I’d come and sit beside her. And she’d just pull the blanket tighter.

We’d reached the canal by now. A few ducks skated serenely over the crimson water, avoiding the token shopping trolley. I reached for her hand. She tried to pull away but I persisted. Tightening my grip around hers, keeping her soft little hand enclosed in mine, I felt like I was holding a mouse, or a little chick, something that you had to be gentle with but also not let go of. That was her all over: be gentle but don’t let go.

I did the not letting go part pretty well. We had a strong relationship, I think. But sometimes I perhaps wasn’t as gentle as I should have been. And that’s what got us into this mess. Well, it wasn’t all my fault. She had her fair shame of the blame as well, and she knew that. I think that’s what had sent her into this extended sulk actually. She knew that she was partially to blame and she couldn’t stand it.

Her hand gradually relaxed into mine as we trailed along the canal. We’d walked that way so many times, our hands always intertwined, that it began to almost feel normal. A dirty, greying sheet had spread across the sky by now, any trace of azure blue enveloped by its fraying corners. No burning sky tonight. Just nothingness. Blank. I pulled her closer, trying to steal her away from the cold’s probing finger tips. I tried, but she resisted. One step at a time. The squelch of rotting leaves beneath my feet was beginning to nauseate me, with each pace the damp radiated into my boots a little more, her hand pulled away from mine a little more. I tightened my grip. Be gentle but don’t let go.

The frustrating thing was that I was really trying. I was trying my absolute hardest. And I understood why she was angry, genuinely I did. But she couldn’t just keep giving me the silent treatment like a petulant child. In fact, it was this sort of lack of communication that had led to the problem in the first place. It was like she just expected me to know exactly what was going on in that manic little mind of hers all the time. Bloody typical of women when you think about it. They go on and on about communicating and how important it is to be open in a relationship, but as soon as something goes wrong they shut you right out. Or that’s what she did anyway. I mean, I sort of realised at the time that something was wrong. But she never said that she didn’t want it. She never said stop. She never came right out and said it, you know? And I’m not a mind reader. How was I supposed to know? Seriously, how the hell was I supposed to know? Bloody women. You try and you try and… nothing.

1...960961962...2,515Page 961 of 2,515

Support Student Journalism

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

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

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

Website by James Ashley