Monday 30th June 2025
Blog Page 1728

Review: The Truth

0

Before discussing this production of The Truth, I must make a confession.  I am a massive, unrepentant, card-carrying Terry Pratchett fan; I therefore approached St. Hilda’s Dramatic Society’s production of Stephen Briggs’ stage adaptation with certain expectations.  This goes some way towards explaining me alternating between gleeful, childish excitement as some characters materialised on stage exactly as I had always imagined, and confused disappointment as some did not.  Unfortunately, my reaction was mostly the latter.

This isn’t just because, like every fan, I have my own idea of how the story should appear.  Watching the production, I got the overwhelming impression of a good pool of talent spread too thin.  Really bringing Pratchett’s story to life requires incredibly strong characterization, something the cast just can’t pull off for every role.  The dearth of male actors shows particularly strongly; despite a heroic effort on the parts Rowena Francis and Victoria White, they never quite convince in parts that simply don’t fit.  A few of the performances, however, are truly exceptional: director Dominic Hall doubling as Commander Vimes is excellent, as is Rosalind Gealy as the wonderfully prim Sacharissa Crisplock, although James Phillips as a perfectly executed zombie lawyer Mr Slant stands head and shoulders above them all.  Many others, however, just fall flat as performances.  When the core cast is offstage, the play simply begins to drag.

Part of this is down to the script itself; Pratchett’s work doesn’t translate brilliantly to stage, and at nigh-on three hours it requires a continuous level of energy not everyone involved can achieve.  It’s made worse by the director’s failure to really address the difficulties of the script; the staging is thoroughly unoriginal, and the total lack of set (apart from the toastie machine standing in as a printing press) doesn’t help. With no real sense of dynamism or atmosphere, the more lacklustre scenes really have nothing to fall back on.

Ultimately, the whole production comes across as distinctly amateurish, though in the best possible sense of the word.  Lighting cues are missed, props are lost, but the cast holds character, rectifies the problem, and the audience laughs along with them.  Enthusiasm and a friendly crowd can only go so far though; for every laugh and every golden scene, there is a corresponding period of dull, tedious exposition.  You can almost feel the cast rushing through these scenes, so they can get to the comedy, to the bits they really enjoy.

This is quite obviously not a recipe for a professional standard of theatre.  But St. Hilda’s Drama Society almost succeeded without really trying – with all its flaws and unfinished feel,   The Truth is just about watchable, and frequently enjoyable.  It survives only on the strength being based on the work of Terry Pratchett: but if you are a Discworld fan, come with an open mind, and not too many high expectations.  If you’re not, just try to enjoy the jokes.

 3 stars

Preview: Mephisto

0

Mephisto is a play about plays, about the boundaries between art and life; about where one ends and the other begins. How can one be “just an actor” when the world outside the theatre is in political turmoil? How can one be “just an actor” in 1930s Berlin? Mephisto interrogates these questions through its depiction of The Peppermill theatre, a radical Bolshevik theatre troupe set up in 1929 with the aim of promoting Communism through the medium of theatre, depicting their rise to prominence and fall from greatness as the Nazis gain power. In this theatre, we find the play’s Faust, the young actor Hendrik Hofgen, who sells his artistic integrity for fame and fortune under the Nazi regime through his performance of Goethe’s Mephistopheles.

Not only is this play intensely concerned with the question of the meaning of art, but in its own status as a work of art. Whilst the rehearsal was in a room in Hertford, the production  team promise to turn the Playhouse’s stage into the backstage of The Peppermill’s own theatre, complete with exposed rigging, cable drums and clutter. Indeed, the play begins with the cast bowing, not to the audience for whom they will perform, to the audience for whom they have just performed, with the cast facing away from the Playhouse audience to bow to the Hamburg Theatre’s spectators. 

The first scene that we were shown, a snapshot of the Peppermill’s cabaret, a ‘rehearsal’ of a satire of Weimar bureaucracy, set in an office for social security,  was pure Brecht. Histrionic dialogue being bellowed out, waving limbs and human furniture all created a sense of dislocation that was only heightened when the skit finished and the cast turn to discussing their next scene in an entirely naturalistic fashion, before rapidly shifting between these two modes in order to explain hyperinflation to a confused cast member. Mephisto seems to be a highly strung balancing act, gaining its dramatic power through the contrast of these two modes. Another scene, set on a railway bridge, a powerful piece of dialogue about the victims of the Nazi regime was delivered by Georgia Waters without any such conceit: rather, it gained its power through her straightforward, forthright delivery of the lines.

The play’s concerns with theatricality are enmeshed not only in the script of the play, but in its production. As well as acting out scenes from the play, we were treated to an insight into the ‘mind’ of the production in the form of a rehearsal of a scene. Rather than simply acting through the scene, each actor was given a prompt, a command to fulfil. For example, Nick Howard-Brown had to play his character, Hendrik Hofgen, as though he was desperate for the toilet; Gottchalk, played by Joseph Allan, had to act stone deaf. This conceit is not just confined to the rehearsal space, but will be a part of every performance of Mephisto. Every night, each actor will be given a different prompt, and so no two performances will be the same. Each performance will reveal a different subtext, a different aspect of what is shaping up to be a fascinating production.

Four stars

Blues put second-rate Brookes to bed

0

It’s not in my nature to denigrate and criticise those who are members of less auspicious universities than ours because in fact they have it better in many ways – they have less work, go out more often and on the whole they seem to be annoyingly more attractive. That being said, we all know Brookes students are scum. And in that spirit, a football fixture was played on Friday night which cemented Oxford’s reputation of a higher level of skill, professionalism and modesty whilst proving that Brookes is essentially just a cesspit with students.

This fixture was the first of its kind in that our teams never meet competitively during the season seeing as Brookes are two divisions lower; however this prior knowledge of superiority was somewhat tarnished by our less than perfect season so far which has left us sitting at the bottom of the league. We were also fully aware that Brookes would attempt to compensate for their lack of ability with a mix of grit and aggression. Nevertheless, these two disparate sides met under the new floodlights of Iffley Rd stadium in front of a (near) capacity crowd of 400 people to decide which truly is the best university in Oxford.

The last few weeks of arctic weather had taken its toll on the Iffley pitch, and coupled with the fact we had played on it just two days this resulted in a scrappy and direct match with little for the purists to appreciate. Right from the outset we soon realised we could utilise the quick feet and speed of wingers Tom Castro and Ejike Onuchukwu (a name which temporary MC Ben May spectacularly garbled during the team announcements) to devastating effect against the Brookes full backs, which resulted in a host of early corners and long throw-ins. It was from one of these of Adam Healy missiles that the first chance was created for captain Julian Austin, as a flick on from Elliot Thomas fell to the head of Austin on the edge of the six yard box but sadly was sent over the bar. However, another of these throws resulted in a clash of heads and wound for Thomas who was sent to the sidelines for treatment. This was unfortunate as the vociferous Brookes fans had chosen to victimise Thomas out of sheer proximity and when he returned to the pitch after receiving medical attention, the dressing around his head resulted in the pithy but surprisingly catchy moniker of ‘Bandage Wanker.’ The irony is that without the hard work of our beloved Sabbatical Officer to organise the event, they wouldn’t have even had the privilege of verbally abusing him.

Even though we were a man short for that small period of time, this is when Oxford found the net; a flick on from Anthony Beddows from yet another Healy throw allowed Austin to redeem his previous error and guide the ball home. The remainder of the first half was relatively mundane with Brookes having very little in the way of inspiration. However, they did have one saving grace in the form of a fairly skilful and tricky midfielder who had one particularly incredible 35 yard effort which cannoned into the bar. Keeper Tom Haigh claims to have got a fingertip to it but the jury is still out. So, after 45 minutes the Blues were looking comfortable and solid but with an always potentially fickle 1-0 lead.

Sadly, the second half proved not much more exciting with Brookes still looking to play the long ball into their strikers despite having almost no physical presence whatsoever against the towering Blues centre backs Beddows and Bassett. In fact, it was a Brookes spectator who spiced things up half way through the second half by shedding his clothes and sprinting onto the field of play with the words ‘Fuck Oxford Uni’ adorned on his back in permanent marker. Whilst this gave infinite delight for his supporters, it was rather odd when the referee failed to stop the game, even when the ball went out of play, and the stewards were static in their response. It was only when the streaker was threatened with the discontinuation of the match that he chose to remove his shrunken, shrivelled ego.

Luckily, the second half did contain one other interesting piece of football-related action as the Blues managed to seal victory by scoring a second goal 20 minutes from time. It came in a similar to the manner to the first; a corner was initially cleared by a Brookes player before Sam Donald headed the ball back across the box where Austin was waiting at the far post to volley it home.

From this point it was vital to the Blues that we kept a clean sheet, something which has been an infrequent occurrence so far this season, so all our substitutions were used and we switched to a slightly more defensive formation in order to see out the 90 minutes. This was achieved successfully, although with roughly 10 minutes remaining as their fitness waned, Brookes clearly realised they weren’t going to win the match and began flying in with more cynical and dangerous tackles. However, this had no real impact and the Blues were able to claim victory and silence the jeers of the Brookes supporters.

 

Overall, it was a reasonably tedious encounter but one which should provide the Blues with a much needed confidence boost just a few short weeks away from the bona fide varsity against Cambridge in March. Wins have been scarce this season despite the more than respectable performances so it is reassuring to know we can perform on a larger stage and hopefully this win will be the springboard for league survival and a triumphant Varsity. 

Third Time Lucky For Hodgson?

0

He’s not the ‘people’s choice’. Nor is he the flavour of the month. But his illustrious CV, ability to transform the fortunes of teams on a national and international level and rich knowledge of the global game elevates him to that of one of the most respected managers in World Football. What Roy Hodgson lacks in style, he more than makes up for in substance.

The basis of Hodgson’s strong credentials lies in his record at club level. Having managed 16 different clubs of varying sizes and statures across Europe, he holds far more experience in European football than any of the other candidates linked with the vacant managerial post. Whilst he turned Halmstads BK from relegation strugglers to two-time League Champions and won five successive Allsvekans with Malmö FF, during his first spell at Internazionale (1995-1997), he led the team to runners-up in the UEFA Cup. Having guided Fulham to their highest-ever placing of seventh in the 2008-2009 season the following season he led the Cottagers on a remarkable run to the UEFA Europa League Final, culminating in him receiving the LMA Manager of the Year award that year.

And whilst the black marks on his otherwise impressive career remain his spells in charge of Blackburn Rovers (1997-1998) and Liverpool (2010-2011), the latter, in particular, cannot be considered ‘disastrous’. Working under the Hicks-Gillett regime and with the Anfield faithful clamouring for Kop legend Kenny Dalglish to return to the dugout, Hodgson was always facing an uphill task. And yet his overall win percentage is not far off that of Dalglish’s – a noteworthy achievement given the polar-opposite financial and management contexts. Whilst many expected his star to fall, a month later he was appointed as Head Coach of West Bromwich Albion, whom he guided to a very credible 11th position last season. The 64-year-old’s success at club level has been mirrored on the international stage.

Just as Hodgson has gained notoriety for reviving the fortunes of dwindling clubs so he’s come to do the same for struggling international outfits. Accounting for his spells in charge of United Arab Emirates and Finland, his most notable success came in the form of the Swiss National Team. Under his guidance, Switzerland enjoyed a spectacular revival. Having lost just one match in qualifying, the Swiss eventually reached the Round of 16 at the 1994 FIFA World Cup, losing out to Spain. The team easily qualified for the UEFA European Football Championships in England in 1996, culminating in a meteoric rise to 3rd in the FIFA World Rankings in 1995. However much one gives to these achievements, he has become a highly respected figure both on and off the pitch.

With 41 years of managerial experience in his pocket, beginning at the age of 29 at Halmstads BK, no other candidate can boast a similar pedigree. Over the four decades Hodgson has consistently demonstrated his ability to adapt to, if not in some cases be ahead of, the times when it comes to his coaching methods and tactical nause. During his time in Sweden, he is credited with introducing zonal marking and he has appeared on several occasions as part of UEFA’s technical study group at the UEFA European Football Championships. And despite experiencing many highs and lows throughout his career he has always remained calm and dignified which would slot in with the FA’s desire for a statesman-like figure.

Even if FA Chairman David Bernstein is looking for a short-term fix, namely for the UEFA European Football Championships, to what is arguably a long-term problem, then Hodgson’s ability to instigate change in a short space of time would certainly fit the bill. He was, albeit with significant investment, instrumental in transforming Internazionale from mid-table mediocrity to leaving them in 3rd in Serie A whilst his experiences at Fulham and currently with West Bromwich Albion provide further evidence of this. And with Hodgson’s contract at the Hawthorns due to expire at the end of this season, a small compensation fee would certainly be appealing to the FA. England has little to lose so there’s no reason why the Croydon-born manager cannot repeat his previous successes.

Tottenham Hotspur’s Harry Redknapp remains the favourite in what is a narrow field of candidates – a damning indictment of the shortage of English managers in the Barclays Premier League. But the FA should take note – being the ‘popular choice’ does not necessarily make Redknapp the right candidate for the job. There is an alterative and that alternative is Roy Hodgson.

Twitter: @aleksklosok

Beyond Black: Behind-the-scenes video

0





[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%4951%%[/mm-hide-text]


[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%4952%%[/mm-hide-text]


[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%4953%%[/mm-hide-text]


[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%4954%%[/mm-hide-text]


[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%4955%%[/mm-hide-text]


Victoria wears:

Mesh body, £10, by Cheap Monday at Urban Outfitters

Feather harness, £250, and cuffs, £80, Karolina Laskowska

Jolie Moi Black Erica dress, £35, ARK

Cage skirt, £60, Freyagushi

Lace eyemask, £30, Karolina Laskowska

Black Hannah Dress, £29.99, Hearts & Bows at ARK

Stella wears:

Taffeta Trench, £699, Emma Griffiths

Leggings, £14, Romwe


Models: Victoria Rigby and Stella Sticinska

Stylist: AERYNN

Photographer: AERYNN

Hair and makeup: Gemma Sutton, assisted by Victoria Poland

Blagging the news: The Iran-Israel covert war

0

Mrs Jones: Surely the latest attempts on diplomatic lives in Thailand, Georgia and India are linked to the nuclear issue; such semi-covert attacks are an extension of the bitter diplomatic struggle that has been central to Iranian foreign policy for years.


Mr Jones: Indeed my dear, the recent attempt on the lives of Israeli officials is hardly surprising to those of us who have been following the development of Iran’s nuclear program.

The Iran-Israel covert war

 
What:
 
Staff at Israeli embassies in India, Georgia and now Bangkok have been targeted by bomb attacks in the last week, with four people injured.
 
In a move that shocked nobody, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Iran of masterminding them. This comes after an Iranian nuclear scientist was assassinated by a magnetic bomb attached to his car by two men on motorbikes (a technique widely attributed to the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad). It was the fourth such attack on Iranian scientists in two years, and strikingly similar to an attack in 2010 on the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Agency. Add to that the Stuxnet computer virus that damaged Iran’s centrifuges in 2009, and it’s all looking a bit well-organised. Many experts believe this is the latest in a string of tit-for-tat state-sponsored assassinations stretching back decades.

Why:

 
Iranian President Ahmadinejad claims the country’s nuclear program is for entirely peaceful, energy-generation purposes. The West, especially Israel and the USA, are convinced the real aim is to produce a nuclear weapon, and Ahmadinejad has previously spoken of “wiping Israel off the map”, so the Israelis are understandably worried. Across the pond, Republican Presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have both said they’d support covert operations against Iran to prevent them acquiring a nuclear capacity. Seeing as no country has admitted to any of these attacks, it would hardly be surprising if there are more reprisals against either Iranian or Israeli targets. Or both. This isn’t over.

Soundbites to wow with:


“The escalation in violence between the Iranian and Israeli intelligence agencies can only harm the already-sour relations between the two countries.”

“With President Ahmadinejad bent on a nuclear Iran, I can only foresee more violence between the two countries.”

Don’t say:


“Why don’t we just invade Iran and sort this out once and for all?”

 

Interview: The Awkward Silence

0

If you are bored of the Burton Taylor then 6th week has something quite unique in store: a radio play. It sounds a little bit like something your dad listens to on a Sunday afternoon but I am assured by The Awkward Silence that this could not be further from the truth. Assisted by Adam Lebovits, Max Fletcher and Liam Shaw, they promise to bring their audience at The Port Mahon, a taste of their unbelievably tense detective narrative, with ‘guns and shit’. ‘It’s the first half-hour episode in a detective-comedy series of ours called ‘Shrapnel and Fogg’. Set in East Putney in 1910, it follows Detectives Shrapnel and Fogg as they are introduced to one another and begin a partnership of solving grisly crimes. The first revolves around an evil criminal called The Salamander. He’s a bloody weirdo, and leaves dead salamanders at the scene of every crime he perpetrates. Can you imagine that? The guy needs help.’ 

For a comedy duo who usually write for the stage, I am told that working on a radio play has been ‘a lovely change’ but it has also been a deeply challenging one. ‘You haven’t got the opportunity for any visual gags, any real nods to the audience. In other ways however, it has been a more convenient change because so many of the verbal jokes work for radio but would struggle on stage. What’s interesting, but perhaps obvious, is that so far we’ve got no idea about how it will be received, as we’ve never really done radio stuff; and for half an hour of material, that uncertainty’s a bit stronger compared to just testing out a couple of new sketches’

Their tactic to make us part with our well earned cash then? ‘Cramming in as many nutters with weird voices as possible, and having lots of fun with jokes revolving around wordplay and verbal misunderstandings.’ He chuckles, ‘I’m a big fan of language so hamming up that side of things – and twisting clichés, playing with turns of phrase, etc. – is great. For this specific project it’s also been nice, and of course fairly easy, messing with the detective format. I’d say that one of the reasons we’re dipping our toes into radio is that it’s a very viable and appealing form in which to showcase comedy and develop a reputation. And there’s a lot to be said for the fact that it doesn’t involve getting the train to Camden and doing a gig to two people…not that that’s ever happened’.


‘The Awkward Silence’ will be performing at The Port Mahon on Friday 24th Feb, followed by stand up from Paul Fung, George Chopping, Rory and Time and Liam Shaw. Tickets are £5.00 (or £4.50 if you whisper the code ‘There’s some salmon in my knickers…’)

5 Minute Tute: Falkand Islands

0
Why do Argentina and the UK disagree over the Falkland Islands?
 
 Argentina thinks that the Falkland Islands (or The Malvinas, as they know them) are their own territory because they are only 200 miles off the Argentinian coast. As far as they are concerned this is the single most important and emotional issue of foreign policy.  Britain claims that the islands have been a legal colony for nearly 200 years, although shortly before the 1982 war, the Thatcher government was trying to shed this responsibility. They had a long term proposal for joint custody for 50 years followed by a transfer into Argentinian control. But the islanders themselves were adamant that they wanted British rule, as the Argentine Junta in the 1970s had been a vicious dictatorship.  When we tried to save money by withdrawing our patrol ships, the Argentinians thought we were no longer concerned, and mounted an invasion.  Faced with this, British forces were sent to recover the islands from 8000 miles away, which they achieved in less than three months of brief and bitter conflict.


Why, after almost 30 years, has the dispute been brought back to international attention?

The Argentines, despite losing the war, never gave up their claim to the Malvinas, and continued  to say “The Malvinas are Argentinian”.  Now that Argentina has overcome terrible economic problems, the islands have come back to the top of their list of issues. Their glamorous female president has started blowing the Malvinas trumpet knowing she will gain huge popularity for it.  Whereas in ‘82 the Argentinian regime was despicable and despotic, they can now claim to be an effective democracy. The Argentinians are not suggesting they’re going to invade, but are claiming that Britain is “militarising” the South Atlantic by sending a new warship to conduct an offshore patrol, though it is actually replacing an older one. There is known to be oil in the offshore waters, which raises the stakes, though it may be difficult and damaging to extract it. The UN retains its policy of decolonisation and self-determination, but the islanders themselves are not interested, and their views have to be taken into account.

Will the Falklands remain British?

By invading in 1982, the Argentinians turned the Falklands into a much more important issue than it had previously been for Britain.  After fighting for the Islands and losing over 250 lives, it is difficult to negotiate them away. For as long as Mrs Thatcher remains alive, and for as long as there is a Conservative government in power they will stay British, and Labour won’t give them up soon either.  In the long term we might prefer to be rid of them, but now we’ve fought over the islands that is much more difficult.

What is the future of the Falklands dispute?

The Argentinians will always want the Malvinas and they will never be happy until they own them. Argentina should be a close ally and important trading partner. They had been very pro-British before the war, and in 1982 many of their weapons were British and they even had two modern British warships. The irony is that if the Argentines had not invaded we might have agreed a handover timetable by now; but equally it was the trauma of the war that has created a functioning democracy which was not there before.  They now seek a political resolution and are pressurising Britain through the UN and other South American countries. There is no question of a war: the islands are much more strongly defended today than they were in 1982, but the question is how long we want to maintain this expensive level of defence, in the face of possible international disapproval.

Rupert Nichol is a retired naval officer who served in HMS Hermes during the Falklands conflict in 1982, and was liaison officer with embarked media teams from the BBC and ITN

No to Norrington

0

After the recent announcement of Keble’s collections reform, I am convinced that the Norrington Table should be scrapped.

 
This ridiculous rankings chart, which will inevitably fluctuate every year on the basis of just a handful of results, does not do students justice. A quick glance at the Table since 2000 demonstrates how inconsistent college rankings are.
 
I write not as a Keble student, but as a Mansfielder. Mansfield college illustrates these fluctuation very well. Until last year, it was known to some as the college that was 29th out of 30 in the Norrington Table. This year, however, the college came 12th. I was very pleased with this achievement; but the reality, especially in a small college like Mansfield, is probably that two or three extra students got firsts than in the previous year.
 
Given this variation in the table, I was surprised to learn that in a recent meeting, tutors raised the question of how students could be made to work hard enough to ensure their college was near the top of the Norrington Table.

This is an astonishing attitude on a number of levels. For one, students don’t need to be ‘made to work hard’ for their finals – we know full well that these degrees are our future and that, without 2.1s in them, entering employment will be considerably more difficult. One only needs to walk through any library in Oxford in the middle of Trinity to witness how hard finalists work. Furthermore, the difference between a 2.1 (three points in the Norrington) and a First (five points) amounts to more than just working harder – in arts subjects at least. Some students will work incredibly hard and miss out on the First, whilst others will do the same amount of work (or even less) but get the right exam questions.

Ultimately, the question raised in this meeting encapsulates everything that is wrong with the Table. No tutor should be asking what is necessary to boost their college’s place in a set of rankings. Rather, tutors should be asking how they can most effectively help students fulfil their potential, guide them through what is actually an immensely stressful process and best prepare them for their future.

We didn’t go through the lengthy application process, work on countless essays or problem sheets and accumulate thousands of pounds of debt in the process, to be statistics for a table. We deserve to be seen as thinking people who need to gain the best education possible in order to be helpful, responsible and intelligent citizens. If the Norrington Table is abolished, perhaps this will once again be the focus of tutors.