Friday 27th June 2025
Blog Page 1592

The Feminist Question

0

“To have your cock cut off and then plead special privileges as women – above natural-born women, who don’t know the meaning of suffering, apparently – is a bit like the old definition of chutzpah: the boy who killed his parents and then asked the jury for clemency on the grounds he was an orphan.”

This is how Julie Burchill chose to characterise transsexual inequality in Sunday’s Observer. The piece was a follow-up to a fight between her long-standing friend and fellow journo, Suzanne Moore, and the ‘transsexual lobby’. In its deceptively plain and respectable typeface, the piece exemplifies the problem of populist feminist debate: introspective, self-referential, and happily couched within the gentility of leftist Comment sections, feminism is defined in the public consciousness by a small set of loudly proclaimed representatives. The debate is small and insular, founded on the preservation of small and insular groups. It reflects a political sphere in which black women have their own distinct and separate niche, as though middle-ground feminism is synonymous with a middle-class, white majority.

The recent history of feminism goes some way towards explaining this state of affairs. Women in the media have, in the past few decades, admirably and doggedly kept women’s issues in the spotlight, and in referring to themselves as feminists, forwarded the idea of feminism as an integral element of daily politics. Yet as a result, the evolution of feminism as a public entity has been shaped in the discussions of a narrow media elite. The vast majority of the public aren’t interested enough, committed enough, or possessed of enough time to explore the happenings of global feminist activism, or youth feminist blogging, or intellectual feminist criticism. They get their feminism from the media, to the effect that the ‘ivory-tower’ accusations so often levelled at leftist media end up colouring the image of feminism; and feminism has plenty of that, without the Observer’s help.

When ‘the issues’ are referred to – rape conviction rates, the gender pay gap, or similar – the term ‘feminism’ does not feature. It is used, instead, in pieces like Burchill’s, debating the internal politics of a self-defined world. As a result, feminism becomes easily separated from the issues, to the detriment of that great mass of activists who do their incredible and essential work under the unhappy banner of ‘feminism’.

Part of the problem is the nature of ‘feminism’ as a political entity – neither disparate nor united, and unsupported by a concrete agenda, or even common policies. The term means something different in every instance of its use. If a word is, in operation, defined largely by the way in which it is understood as opposed to the meaning intended, then ‘feminism’ is almost always lost in reception. It’s paradoxical, then, that feminism has got a reputation for exclusivity partly because it is so diverse and universal. It’s impossible to find cohesion in an ideology that encompass- es the interests of half the world’s population.

The answer is not to try. Cohesion isn’t necessary in feminism, any more than it is possible. Unity and community must be main- tained, though, even where agreement is not. So often the ‘core principles’ of feminism come down to debates between essentially compatible camps, which not only perpetu- ates a detrimental public image and detracts from the important interests of the warring parties, but also obfuscates the ideology of the movement as a whole.

Julie Burchill has made the feminist debate about herself and her cohort, pitting a false, generalised ‘us’ against a false, generalised ‘them’. But the interests and opinions of transsexuals as individuals within a movement dif- fer no more widely from the ‘average’ feminist than ‘average’ feminists’ opinions differ from one another. Burchill, in attacking any interest that chooses to group together beneath feminism’s banner, is guilty of defaming the larger, already embittered, company.

Feminism is founded on an immovable principle of equality. If any element within the whole is seen to hold preference or primacy, or if any element is set below the rest, then the entire ideology is undermined.

Review: The Handmaid’s Tale

0

★★☆☆☆
Two Stars

The crucial issue with this interpretation of The Handmaid’s Tale is you absolutely need to have read the book. If unfamiliar with the story then entry into this extremely experimental piece of theatre will scare you – and possibly cover you in red cloth. Also enter aware that this is an opera. Against a haunting background of accordions, strings, piano, a cappella and by the end several large glass empty bowls, the story of Offred is played out.

A ‘Handmaid’, or birth surrogate, in the totalitarian regime of a future American dystopia, the constant change of actress portraying her character is another source of confusion; although it did highlight well the loss of personal identity, this theme is more effectively conveyed before anyone sits down. A mute selection of performers direct audience members to remove their coats and shoes to be draped instead in the striking crimson dress of the Handmaid’s, who then – silently – escorts you to your seat, creating an opressive mood instantly.

The successful scenes continue in this vein, expanding upon Atwood’s themes. The ceremony is distinct, made even more dehumanising and uncomfortable than one could imagine, by the lack of a bed but also the most effective use throughout of repetition in song. The epilogue strikes the correct note of scholarly satire and clarification while the recorded tapes are also used well.

However, the majority of scenes dragged on too long. Multiple long pauses of almost five minutes left audience members wondering if this was a technical fault or a chance for poignant reflection. If the latter, again while once an effective technique, it was, like many others in this piece, overused. Played out atop a giant scrabble board some metaphors are stretched to their extreme and in many cases, while Atwood’s prose is award-winning, do not suffer well the conversion to song.

The music takes precedence. Melancholy notes are evocative although they never seem to reach a high volume and impactful crescendo, which may also have made the end of this production easy to spot. While it tries hard this production is undeveloped though coloured with a few strikes of potential.

Diary of an Angel

0

Becky Luffman (Set designer)
We’ve been building the set for the last three days, and it’s shaping up quite nicely. Having never even handled a handsaw before, I am learning a lot of things quite quickly. It’s great to watch the set being made, though seeing it in in reality is strange; my 2D sketches are now something that people – actor people – will actually need to walk around in. I just hope that once it is finished I can begin to get excited about the show happening, right now it’s more of an impatient child demanding my attention that I’m shushing with one hand as I drill with another. This is the first Playhouse show that I’ve been involved in, so the pressure is on!

Jack Sain (Director)
With less than two weeks to go,  it’s quite a long time since I drifted into my friend’s room and told him about a play I thought was fantastic. Now we’re knee deep, I can’t believe so much has been achieved in such a relatively short space: Angels is an amazing play, but nothing if not a challenge.

DESIGN TEAM: “So does the Angel actually have to fly?”
ME: “Yes.”
DESIGN TEAM: “I don’t think that’s actually been done by students before, Jack.”
ME: “Cool.”

Asking a twenty-year old girl to play an octogenarian rabbi is equally hard, to say nothing of onstage nudity and putting some very confidently heterosexual men very far out of their comfort zones (which in fairness they’ve done with admirable zest). And it’s a brilliant play: I can shroud it in many layers of pseudo-intellectual bollocks, but that’s the simple fact. Yes, it’s about social issues, yes it’s about politics, yes it may cause some schoolboy giggling (bloody hope so too), but it’s also a really, good play. And that makes it all worth it: I’ve loved every second. Fingers crossed you guys do too.

Jessica Campbell (Associate Artist)
I came on board as the dubiously-named ‘associate artist’. It’s turning out to be one of the best roles in student theatre: helping with rehearsals, watching runs and offering comments – or keeping schtum as one sees fit. The Angels cast shows off the absolute best – though the seven (brutally charming) men outnumber the three (equally impressive) women, so one leaves the rehearsals drenched in thespian testosterone. The play’s homosexual relationships make for some of the most interesting confrontations and its surprising to see how even Oxford’s finest are at times unnerved by the gay scenes. In rehearsals these are often followed by a short exchange of notes from the lucky participants: ‘No more pre-kiss peanuts, ok?’, ‘No Thai sweet chilli crisps’, ‘Don’t be so awkward with your arms…’ I won’t reveal which performers test their heterosexual nerves, but rest assured, watching their relationships form and break apart is devastating – and also pretty sexy.

Holly Morse (Costumier)
The challenge: source costumes for a play set in 80s NYC featuring a fantastic array of characters including a rabbi, a drag queen, an Eskimo, an angel…. This should be easy, right? In the weeks leading up to opening night of Angels in America I have found myself doing some weird and wonderful things in the name of costume; spending hour after hour at the Oxfordshire Drama Wardrobe Collection and finding myself up a ladder in the National Theatre Wardrobe contemplating Eskimo costume (That’s right, they have more than one!) I’ve also became addicted to eBay, doing victory dances each time I win another unforgivably 80s item of clothing. At moments like these I’ve wondered whether this costume sourcing business is messing with my mind. I became sure of that fact when, on a freezing December morning, I got up at 5am to go costume hunting at a vintage market…  in the dark. Everyone else had torches. FML. But it has not been in vain; the wardrobe for Angels in America is coming together beautifully. Bring on the quick changes!

Nathan Klein (Composer)
When composing to a deadline I am so terrified of not getting a good idea that as soon as one comes, getting it down in any shape or form has to be the only priority. I would love to say I’ve sketched melodies on matchbook boxes on the way to sessions at Abbey Road—as I am informed is a rite of passage for all the greats—but unfortunately I neither smoke (sorry girls), nor have the budget to record at such a premises (cheers Simon). Instead, I leg it from the piano to the computer, smash in the idea on my keyboard and sit in a euphoric state with the playback on loop.

Next the idea has to be developed. I find there is about a 30 minute time period from the initial conception where things happen, but after, a 3-5 hour break ensues as I force anyone within a mile radius to listen and praise (only praise is accepted at this fragile time). For these 30 minutes, you need tunnel vision. This works okay in Oxford as you can shut yourself away reasonably easily, but imagine the dilemma of a nagging family over Christmas. For these reasons, I entered my lowest state of creativity over the holidays by simply playing everything straight into Logic (the music software I use). So now 0th week must be spent re-interpreting all of the ideas onto paper so that others can interpret them into sound during the recording session in 1st week. I hear that this is a similar method to Hans Zimmer, except that he whistles around 3 notes into his iPhone and emails them off to an army of composers and orchestrators. Magically, an hour of music is spun out of those three notes. Clever idea. I wish I had an army of orchestrators. Any volunteers?

Katie Ebner-Landy (Marketing Associate)
As Marketing Associate, or using my preferred ex-title, “Stunt Manager”, I believed I wrangled myself one of the coolest roles in this production. Although I don’t quite pull any stunts – my original title was rebuked for this very reason – I have had the opportunity to organise a couple of events, about which the party planner in me gets quite excited.
I was keen to use some of the marketing to emphasise the political edge to Angels in America, and after bouncing around ridiculous ideas with Simon, we decided on three, relatively optimistic, objectives.

  1. Get the Union involved.
  2. Have a university wide “Queer Bop” in 1st week.
  3. Keep our print material in people’s wallets and out of the recycling bin.

Cue lots of carefully worded emails – be warned: don’t miss the Q off ‘LGBTQ’ – and meetings with senior Union officials. Objective 2 didn’t go fully to plan, Entz reps are actually much busier than I had previously assumed, but Objective 1 was achieved in its entirety. We have a partnered Union debate in 1st week: “THW be glad to have gay parents” and, although we didn’t get 38 colleges involved, we do have a series of collegiate LGBTQ events coming up, including a Queer Bop at Trinity. And, a deal at Angels cocktail bar in Jericho which is on our business cards. Just a heads up.

Hannah Hurley (Co-Producer)
Producing at this stage of a production is somewhat of an odd role to fill. Tuesday was spent papering Oxford with posters, whilst yesterday I was knee-deep in saw dust, helping make set.  Of course, this follows months of preparation: in places, my endless to-do lists look utterly mad: comments about meeting playhouse staff and finding rehearsal rooms are in several places sat next to the phrases like ‘Find bald cap and call RE coffin.’

In general, these lists have been characteristic of my life for the last six months. Jack quite concisely told me that we absolutely needed to fly an angel in the playhouse and, in the same breath, asked for on-stage snow. Along with the Production Manager, we’ve so far managed to make both things happen. Snow machines, power tools and flying angels are just part of what has made this a wonderful show to produce; I just hope you enjoy the production as much as I’ve enjoyed the process.
 
Selali Fiamanya (Actor)
As the only science student in the play, and one of two who’s a Playhouse virgin, I figured I had some catching up to do. Affirmative action can only get you so far, y’know? It’s time to research how the pros get down. And who better to learn from than these cats, who are more comfortable on the Playhouse stage than in jumpers from this millennium. First things first: get a moleskine. All the best actors have moleskines. Secondly, I heard one of them talking about method acting. I gave it a go over the holidays, and I feel being caught by your father in his wife’s tights and heels watching Breakfast at Tiffany’s will not only make me a better actor, but a better person. Long live the theatre.

Flanders and Swann: A Modern Duo?

0

I had never heard of Flanders and Swann before I saw the publicity that announced Tim Fitzhigham and Duncan Walsh-Atkins’ revival being performed in Oxford this Saturday, and yet within seconds of watching one of their videos online I felt like I recognised them. The musical comedy duo, Flanders and Swann, singer and accompanist respectively, sing whilst at the same time talking in pleasant voices; a small scale Gilbert and Sullivan. The jokes in the songs I looked at on Youtube were quaint but also faintly risqué: in ‘Madeira M’dear’ an old man uses madeira to seduce a young woman, while in ‘A Song of Patriotic Prejudice’ national snobberies about the differing regions of the U.K end up nonetheless satirising the casual xenophobe himself. Others contained pure silliness reminiscent of Monty Python. But I was intrigued to meet Tim Fitzhigham, who plays the role of Flanders and comes from a very successful comedy background (he has won numerous accolades in performances at Edinburgh), to discover why now was the moment for a revival of this particular act, and what the act’s wider relation to contemporary and past comedy might be.

Tim reveals that he has been acquainted with Flanders and Swann for a very long time. “‘The Canoe Song’ by Flanders and Swann is my earliest childhood memory apart from swallowing paint. I think my parents must have loved it. I guess there was an album in the house and I must have started listening to it then.” I ask him then what prompted him to perform their work professionally as an adult. “Well Duncan and I were asked to do a charity concert by Duncan’s Granny, who used to be a dancer, and had this kind of fantastic west end turn of phrase, although she kind of fitted in nowhere [living in] Sussex. She used to raise money for the local cottage hospital and we did Noel Coward one year, ‘cause we were working on a Noel Coward review, and then the next year she said, ‘Darlings, I don’t think I can guarantee a house again for Noel Coward, I just don’t think I can hold the seats’. And so we sat down and I said to Duncan, ‘Why not Flanders and Swann? I’ve always loved them,’ and Duncan said. ‘Ahh, I’ve always loved them.’” This partnership led not just to fruitful artistic performances but also a concrete development for the community: ”The Plaster Cutter at the cottage hospital was entirely the result of these two charity nights.” The success went from there as it turned out that there was a wide interest in Flanders and Swann.

I was interested to ask whether the success of their version of Flanders and Swann was due to a recent surge in interest for musical comedy, as with performers such as Bill Bailey and Tim Minchin; or instead more nostalgia for the past. “I think it is certainly both of those things, but I think also thirdly let’s not underestimate these songs are just funny. They are really funny songs. The banter is good and people just do like hearing funny, well put-together, brilliantly crafted lyrics and great musical numbers. And I think Michael and Donald were some of the best we have ever had at that.” Fitzhigham views the songs as empirically good in themselves, citing Donald’s (Swann’s) gift as a composer and Michael’s as a lyricist. But there does seem to be a nostalgia element that drives people to the shows: there are few places to see what used to be such an important act. “People who have heard Flanders and Swann want to hear him done right. There is not that much television footage of Flanders and Swann and not that much cinematic footage either. Flanders and Swann’s shows were released as cinema reels when they finished touring them – that is sort of how big they were. And you think that now we don’t have an act, probably globally, apart from some of the American acts who can do a tour in the theatre and then finish the tour and say lets do a cinema release now.”

The transition from such popularity to being almost unknown among young people seems to demand an explanation. “I think it is the fact that Flanders and Swann were famous at just the wrong time for television. So they didn’t really do television. So every time you get all these countdowns that everyone watches on the television: Flanders and Swann simply weren’t in them. They were touring the world and playing massive theatres when no one had a television set.” But the fact that, because of technology, Flanders and Swann do not play a role in our collective memories of comedy means that we have a poorer understanding of how comedy has changed. “If you look at Noel Coward, and you see a single guy sitting at a piano singing really fast sort of patter comedy songs, and you look at Peter Cook and ask yourselves, ‘How did comedy go from Noel Coward to Peter Cook? How did that happen? What is the missing link?’ The answer is Flanders and Swann. So if people like comedy, and like knowing how it came together, Flanders and Swann are a vital missing link.”

The relevance of Flanders and Swann to the Oxford student is not limited to their importance in the development of musical comedy, but they were also both Oxford students (as indeed Duncan did). Fitzhigham remarks, “Donald was an Oxford man through and through. I would say not having been to Oxford like Michael, there is a lot of Oxford humour in there.” I worry, though, that this Oxford element might be old-fashioned and politically incorrect; and so venture to ask whether the work is politically incorrect and a bit out of its time, especially Madeira M’dear. “I think one has to be sensitive about these things. There’s nothing in there I couldn’t hand on heart explain away. I think we’ve all seen doddery old men trying to pursue younger women.” I question him about the arguably xenophobic ‘A Song of Patriotic Prejudice’. “At the beginning of the song you they are just going into English xenophobia, but by the end of the song you’re very clear that what they are actually saying is that everybody thinks they are slightly better than someone else, that they are using a stereotype to make someone become aware of their own foibles, and that is comedy. Rather than being a politically outdated song or a politically incorrect song, it becomes the most politically correct song. They were doing things that perhaps even the audience at the time didn’t quite get. It certainly is a joy for a modern audience to see quite how far thinking they are.”

Swann and Flanders are lucky to have two professionals with such a passion for them to be around today to perform their work. It is not just nostalgia which should draw us to the comedy of two Oxford students from more than half a century ago, but also their modern appeal.

Flanders and Swann: Homage to musical comedy greats is on at the Oxford Playhouse this Saturday

Modern Golden Opulence

0

MODEL HANNAH NICHOLSON    

FASHION AND PHOTOGRAPHS AGATA WIELONDEK

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6665%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6631%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6632%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6634%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6633%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6636%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6635%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6638%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6637%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6639%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6640%%[/mm-hide-text]

Leveson’s Lieutenant

0

Walking into Robert Jay’s office gives the feeling, at first, of taking a step back in time: the rows of dusty law literature lining the shelves and the classical music emanating from some corner of the room set the scene suitably. This image, however, quickly disappears when I realise that the musical vehicle is, in fact, an iPad (a new app I’m told); and perched quaintly on top of the central fireplace is a cardboard cut-out mask of none other than Rupert Murdoch. Well, at least he has a sense of humour.

Inevitably, the interview starts by diving head first into the events that propelled Jay into the limelight – the Leveson inquiry. On balance, Jay’s reputation received a pretty good ride: he was hailed for his calm patience and extraordinary use of vocabulary (remember “propinquity” and “bailiwick” to name but a few), and came out the other side with an enhanced and largely positive public profile, which is more than can be said for the string of politicians, media moguls and celebrities sitting on the receiving end of Jay’s questioning.

Scrutinising the likes of Cameron and Murdoch must have been a pretty daunting task, I suggest. Not for Robert Jay. “We had a pretty good idea from the beginning who we might be calling to give evidence. That was determined quite a long time in advance.” Not even a hint of nerves, I probe, considering the high profile nature of the inquiry? No chance. “The big difference between anything I’d done before was the omnipresent television camera; that took time adapting to. The subject matter was a million times more interesting to the public, in every sense of the term, than [what I’d done in the past].”

With his yellow-rimmed glasses, eye-catching ties and video evidence of Jay mouthing, “this is such fun!” to one of his colleagues, is it fair to say that he revelled in the limelight; that he was encouraged by the high profile nature of the case? “I’m glad I did it, yes. But if I had known from the outset the amount of public interest it was to have, I think I would have hesitated a little bit more before throwing my hat in the ring. I wouldn’t say I’m a shy person, but quite discrete.” Not by some people’s standards, it would seem; there were accusations over the summer of headline-grabbing fantasy allegations that he was purportedly dishing out – particularly in relation to his opening submission for the political module. In Jay’s view, however, he was simply marking out his territory. “We’d heard from Rupert Murdoch by then and I felt that it was necessary to demonstrate that the inquiry was wide awake to all the possibilities, if I could put it in those terms.”

Remaining on that subject of attention-seeking, I pluck up the courage to query the origins of those yellow-rimmed specs. “My wife chose those – I’m still wearing them. I do as I’m told, on all matters stylistic.” And just in case any fashion-conscious young men were wondering, “all my ties come from the same fashion house in Italy – Missoni – my wife buys them, although I decide what matches.” Murdoch and co may well benefit with a little advice from Mrs Jay on how to keep Mr Jay on the straight and narrow.

After hours and hours of questioning, Jay must have a pretty good insight into the real personalities behind all these profiles. Did his views change as a result of the inquiry? “Well, yes. I think it’s fair to say that we all start off with an idea of a political figure, but you’d have to be fast asleep or not interested in coming to bed at all not to have an opinion about it.” But any further insight into what his opinions may be is masked by the autopilot switch back to legal objectiveness, “I think as one’s knowledge improves, as it did considerably, the opinion deepens. Exactly how my opinions have changed, however, would tell you what precisely I think of them.”

Despite a high public profile, the inquiry has had its fair share of critics. The Education Secretary, Michael Gove, claimed that the Leveson inquiry created a “chilling atmosphere” towards freedom of expression. Again, at this point, Jay’s legal instincts kick back into play before his real feelings can be expressed, “all I can say is that he’s entitled to that opinion. What I would say is that he would have to provide hard evidence on that. I would invite people to consider, in accepting that view, whether there really is hard evidence.” Jay is a frustrating interviewee; there are some undoubtedly strong opinions lingering just below the surface, but, like every good lawyer should be, he has withdrawn his emotions from the case, or if he hasn’t, he is at least very good at hiding them.

We round off the interview discussing the many obstacles facing students today who are attempting to pursue a career in law. “Unfortunately the bar now is extremely competitive, more than it was when I started.” He’s quick to add, however, that it was pretty difficult in his day too, lest we ever thought otherwise. “Ultimately today you need a first class honours degree from a top university, which is extremely tough. Or it’s having particular gifts of personality and charisma which most people don’t have, it has to be said.” And as for the allure of the Magic Circle and city solicitor’s firms? “The bar in my opinion is a far more interesting and fulfilling life than becoming a solicitor, which is fairly dull and of little public benefit.” Touché.

Three’s not a crowd

0

The morning after I visited his Newbury home, Ian Mucklejohn was making sure his children were ready for their first day back at school. Some couples choose not to have one child on the basis that it is too much hard work; Ian has raised three boys by himself for 12 years.

Having been a carer his whole life – when he was eight, his father was involved in an accident that left him with dementia – it seemed only natural that Ian would want to have children of his own. However, in between caring duties and running his business ‘Vacational Studies’, starting a family had to be put on hold. When he got to the stage where he felt he was ready, Ian was missing one vital component – a partner. Vital, however, it was not. He explains, “I didn’t want to assess dates as potential mothers. That seemed wrong, so I found another way.”

British law is not conducive to the concept of surrogate mothers (they are able to claim custody of the baby they are carrying), so Ian turned to the US. Once the genetic mother was picked, four of her eggs were implanted in the chosen surrogate. Doctors warned Ian that the process is a tricky one and often doesn’t work. Lo and behold, a whopping three of the eggs took and Ian was informed that Tina, the surrogate, was “very pregnant”. After initial amused confusion over what on earth ‘very pregnant’ could mean, the truth dawned and Ian never looked back. After an inevitably difficult multiple birth, Ian Mucklejohn became the proud father of triplet boys – Piers, Ian and Lars. “Beginner’s luck,” he laughs.

When asked if he felt the screening process had been any stricter because he was a man, surprisingly he answered in the negative (with the exception of getting the boys British citizenship). It’s a shame this didn’t last.

Upon arrival back into the country, it soon became clear that Ian would not be able to bring up his children quietly as he had hoped to. Someone – “to this day I don’t know who” – had thought it wise to alert the Daily Mail to the situation. In typical form, they hounded the new father and initiated what became a wider attack on the concept of purposeful single parenthood, and in particular that of a father. Interest in the story grew; audience-participation phone lines asked questions that amounted to (as Mucklejohn put it) “should my children even be allowed to exist?”, and the BBC’s own Anne Atkins asked Ian to his face if he believed his lifestyle choice made the children ‘disabled’.

I asked if he felt less antagonised nowadays and he explained thankfully, “I don’t get [media hostility] anymore. They’ve seen that I’ve done it – the good job that I’ve done in raising the children is palpable so they have nothing to say anymore.”

One area when talking about surrogacy and egg or sperm donation that tends to elicit intrigue is whether or not the children should meet their biological parent. Ian, having chosen to be completely honest with his children from the get-go, decided that a meeting would be a good idea. From what Ian tells me of that meeting and others since, he has been fortunate enough to avoid a potential tricky situation.

Before choosing a mother for his child(ren), Ian was told to pick carefully, looking not only at desirable physical features but to consider their reasons for donation. Melissa, the donor he chose, saw the process as simply passing on perfectly good genetic information without having to go through the usual steps of having and raising children herself – a lifestyle which she was not interested in herself.

When she eventually met the triplets, however, no one could be certain that maternal feelings wouldn’t emerge and make the situation heart-wrenchingly difficult. Fortunately, no drama occurred. Ian recounts, “I introduced them, it was fine and then they talked about football. After we’d met, Melissa asked if I wanted to keep in touch. I said ‘if that’s alright with you’ and she said it was – if ever we visited America we should drop by, and whenever she was in Europe she would.” As their father has always been open with them about their upbringing, the boys are remarkably unfazed by the situation. They do ask about their mother occasionally and Ian answers with the truth. “Does our mother love us?” “She doesn’t know you – but if she did, she definitely would.”  

In the absence of a mother figure Ian fulfils both traditional functions: “I’m caring – I give them cuddles, which they still want unlike many boys their age, but I also fill the role of disciplinarian.” He recounts a time when one of the boys’ friends held his hand to feel affection because he hardly ever got to see his own parents. This to me highlights the hypocrisy of arguments against alternative family set-ups: for every unusual lifestyle that results in a difficult childhood, there are so many nuclear arrangements that are, to say the least, far from perfect.

The boys themselves are fantastic. Possibly because of Ian’s directness in answering, they are highly inquisitive and unafraid to speak their minds. Polite, intelligent and young-looking for their age (they definitely still fall under the ‘cute kids’ umbrella), they don’t want to go back to school, but for very different reasons. Piers likes to choose what he learns about and in his own way – he is probably the only person I’ve ever heard to get into a religious conversation and learn about another’s culture from someone thousands of miles away via the medium of the games console headset. Ian Junior doesn’t like the strictness and having to sit down all day – he’d rather be looking for wild animals. Lars knows that he is very lucky to be where he is and to be doing what he is doing, but finds the whole school experience spoiled by the fact that the others in his class do not share his appreciation and take their position for granted.

This highlights the fact that, although the three have been brought up together and in the same way, their personalities have developed in distinct directions.

Regarding their relationships with each other, Ian can find the boys’ internal rivalries trying. The bottom line is that they all compete for daddy’s affections. Every question is a messily-hidden way of asking “who’s your favourite?” Two of the boys bought Ian chocolate for Christmas, and immediately needed to know whether he preferred the Lindt or the Ferrero Rocher. This has led to Ian’s resolution never to compare. Anything. The children, with their bent for competition, love the CBBC programme The Slammer; Ian finds the concept of comparing a mime to a juggler and deciding who should win frankly absurd, on the grounds that “they’re just different; they both have different good and bad points.”

However, the strain of having only one parent became very apparent when Ian was diagnosed with skin cancer. For the first time thinking about what would happen to the boys without him became a reality. A friend offered herself as guardian should the worst happen, potential arrangements were made, and Ian’s mind was more at ease. Fortunately his brush with the disease is now seemingly over. All through the procedure, he told the boys the truth, albeit in diluted form, as he seems to with every area of life which they ask about.

Ian’s experiences have compelled him to share these messages with others. After writing a book about his initial experiences of the hectic blur that was bringing up three infants, purely because he found it interesting, he decided to have it published to convey his side of the story after the furore caused by conservative tabloids. And Then There Were Three became the first of what Ian expects to be several books. The second, A Dad For All Seasons, has been very recently published and is full of anecdotes and quotes that put the Outnumbered kids to shame. “Sometimes we’ll be having a conversation and one of the boys says something so funny that I have to start writing it down,” Ian tells me. “The boys know what I’m doing now and start asking, ‘is that going to be in the book?’” In the future, Ian hopes to continue writing. A collaboration with Esther Rantzen on abuse is in the pipeline, and he is tempted by a foray into fiction; however, with golden material at his dinner table every day, the boys provide plenty to write about for now.

Admittedly this successful scenario cost a huge amount of money to bring to fruition, money that Ian is not short of. He proudly shows me the 1959 Cadillac he has on display in one of the sitting rooms of his phenomenally gorgeous house. Whilst admiring the car, I look up to see two iconic Roy Liechtenstein pictures; he points to the clearly handwritten signatures in the bottom corners. It is true that having a child in the way Ian chose is highly exclusive (he estimated to the press at the time that the process cost £50,000) but this should in no way cast a shadow on the Mucklejohn family, as some have tried to do. If anything, Ian’s case (and that of men with similar stories) should be a stepping stone towards making alternative procedures to start a family more accessible to those on more modest salaries.

Ultimately, I was delighted to have the opportunity to conduct this interview as I hoped it would show that non-nuclear family set-ups have the same results as ‘typical’ ones. The Mucklejohns did not disappoint. Piers, Ian and Lars are bright and happy young children who have a father who has given them so much time, love and affection. It puts most other families to shame.

Ian is sure that many men will have been put off having children by themselves because of how he was initially treated by the media, men who were more prepared to commit to fatherhood than the many ‘regular’ parents who may have only had their kids by accident. This is a travesty. We should embrace the different ways of becoming a parent and encourage those who want to have children to do so. The common theme binding the successful raising of families is not a mummy and daddy, but something far more abstract. As Ian himself said, “the Beatles got it right – all you need is love.”

If You Liked… An Awesome Wave by Alt-J

0

Last year Alt-J stormed onto the music scene, winning fans, critical acclaim and The Mercury Prize, a pretty good year by anyone’s standards. As a product of their moody ethereal music and high-pitched singing Alt-J have been compared by many to Radiohead, however I feel that a far more accurate comparison would be with Leeds-based band Wild Beasts.

Wild Beasts have much in common with Alt-J. They write moody atmospheric pieces, often with sinister lyrics but always with catchy melodies. In Hayden Thorpe they have a front man whose voice you’re either going to love or hate. But, above all, they too are a great British band making uncompromising music to the delight of their fans. Wild Beasts, like Alt-J, make albums and not songs.

Wild Beasts were nominated for 2009’s Mercury Prize with their second album, Two Dancers, which saw them refine their sound from their often over-theatrical debut album Limbo, Panto. Fans of Alt-J will probably find a greater affinity with Two Dancers than either of Wild Beasts’ other two albums because it is easily the darkest of the three. For example, it features ‘All the King’s Men’, a song which is apparently about arranged marriages among the upper classes and refers to young girls as ‘birthing machines’.

Wild Beasts followed Two Dancers in 2011 with their third album Smother. Smother is arguably slightly poppier than either of their previous efforts but nevertheless refuses to compromise on their artistic vision. In an interview with Cherwell last year, Hayden Thorpe railed against the limited range of music played on BBC Radio One, saying that it was still the desire of the band to achieve a number one. The balance between trying to reach lots of people and remaining true to your own musical ethos was obviously something which Thorpe found frustrating.

With the success of Alt-J perhaps this problem is already being corrected. If you were one of the people who rewarded Alt-J’s musical vision by going out and buying/ downloading their album, then there is a pretty good chance that you’ll like Wild Beasts too. 

Have You Met…? – Port Isla

0

Norwich. Once the second largest city in England, nowadays apparently famous for its cathedral and the manufacture of mustard (thank you Google). With Radio One ‘big dog’ Tim Westwood and Hear’Say singer-turned-classical pianist Myleene Klass fighting it out for the title of ‘most exciting export’ in recent years, one thing the city isn’t really known for is its music scene. Let’s hope Port Isla can change that in 2013.

Formed two years ago by music students at Norwich’s UEA, the four-piece favour upbeat folk-rock songs much in the vein of Fleet Foxes, had Fleet Foxes been raised on the East Coast of Britain rather than the West Coast of the USA. Whilst the two bands may have much in common musically, lyrically Port Isla are far removed, referencing Arthur Ransome and maritime imagery in a way that somehow seems very British. Recent track Alexandra’s lament for lost love couples chiming guitars with impressive close-harmony vocals, whilst the thumping drums of Swallows and Amazons demonstrate that they know their way round a good beat.

Following in the footsteps of another four-piece they list among their inspirations, the band travelled to Hamburg this summer, though performing at the Reeperbahn festival was perhaps a less debauched experience than the seedy clubs of St Pauli would have been in the early sixties. Port Isla really are a treat witnessed live, with frontman Will Bloomfield’s soaring vocals solidly supported by tight instrumentals played with an energy and enthusiasm that gives their songs an anthemic quality. Hoping to build recent success, the band are planning on touring extensively this year, with a tour of university cities in the pipeline.

One sure-fire favourite at these upcoming gigs will be their recently-released debut single Sinking Ship, available for free on the band’s website, with its howling vocals, thumping piano chords and frantic handclaps. The band sing that they’d ‘rather be a gunman than a captain on a sinking ship’, but judging by the strength of their songs and live performances, I don’t foresee them struggling to stay afloat.

Inspired by the catwalk: Baroque

0

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6649%%[/mm-hide-text]

image: vogue.co.uk

1. This dress is a beautiful twist on the LBD with all-over embellishment and a detailed strappy back that’ll be sure to turn heads, but remain wearable at parties for years to come. Pair with heels and a simple clutch for a sexy, yet effortless, look. (Topshop, £60, was £120)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6652%%[/mm-hide-text]

image: topshop.co.uk

2. This is the perfect dress if you can’t quite stretch to the designer pieces but want to remain on trend! (Topshop, £20)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6651%%[/mm-hide-text]

image: topshop.co.uk

3. For those feeling more daring as we enter the new year, take advantage of both the velvet and lace trends with this decadent purple bralet. Add high-waisted leather shorts and a kimono jacket. (Miss Selfridge, £22)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6647%%[/mm-hide-text]

 image: missselfridge.com

4. This beautiful black satin clutch is heavily embellished with sequins and large beading giving the perfect rock-chic contrast between ruggedness and elegance. (Accessorize, £45)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6648%%[/mm-hide-text]

image: accessorize.com

 

5. This gold snake ring will be an adorable addition to your wardrobe and complement your style all through 2013. As unique as it is cute, this stunning piece screams vintage fun. (Topshop, £8.50)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6654%%[/mm-hide-text]

image:topshop.co.uk