Oxford and Cambridge are home, not only to dreaming spires, but also to aspiring drama. Donkeys’ Years is firmly fixed in college. It follows the return of a group of college friends, coming back twenty-five years to catch up and revisit their old haunts. As you’re escorted by a ‘college porter’ past the mocked-up college façade to take your seat, you may wonder why you are here. After all, your real college is much more, well, real. But this charming, witty play will sweep you along, reminding you why you sit up till the small hours writing essays, why you dash desperately from class to lecture, why you love Oxford in the first place.
The characters certainly ring true to my college experience. They’re all here: the popular one who became a minister; the miserable one, still carping about the deficiencies of the college; the one you always thought was gay, but never had the courage to ask, and whose dog collar seems both shocking, and somehow just right. And the girl who married the wrong man, still hoping for a quick drink and a catch –up with the one who got away.
Maanas Jain plays Headingly, a junior minister, perfectly evoking a politician with chummy confidence and slight desperation, while Holly Midwinter-Porter captures the haughtiness and insecurity of Lady Driver with a beautifully balanced and funny, performance. Jain and Dom Conte as a successful surgeon are wonderful from the moment they enter, evoking the stumbling awkwardness of two old friends meeting for the first time in years, and from the beginning the action and the dialogue are snappy and titillating.
The protagonists find the sherry and their half-submerged student selves getting the better of their adult personas. Lady Driver’s assertion ‘I’m an entirely different sort of person now’ is not nearly as true as she thinks, or wishes. This is not so much a regression as a recognition that we never really move on. James Phillips’ Quine, who missed his opportunity to live in college the first time round, and is keen to get a second chance now. As he reminds us, while the world outside may provide you with kids, fame and fortune, the best years of your life happen behind these sandstone walls and dreaming spires.
Desert of the Real is an unfocused but passionate new piece of student theatre. It mixes familiar Oxfordisms (KA, QI Bar etc.) with specific Middle Eastern terms. Set both in Oxford and Iraq, the play follows the fortunes of a student couple, Nick and Alice, when Alice decides to travel to Iraq.  We are thrown in medias res, and it takes a while to appreciate the eccentric Eastern characters who intermingle with typical Oxford types.
The writing captures the tone and idiosyncrasies of Iraqi and Israeli English but tends towards the turgid at points. Even Oxford students don’t regularly philosophize with this intensity, an intensity that would make Montaigne blush. Yet there are some beautifully balanced scenes, notably when Alice, excellently portrayed as a student looking for a cause, breaks down somewhere in Iraqi Kurdistan. She sits by the roadside with the driver, who, between reflectively spitting and cursing the engine, reveals the difficulties inherent in being an ordinary man in modern Iraq. Based on Ben Judah’s experiences in Iraq, this scene palpitates with tension and an undercurrent of strained humanity and concealed violence.
The scenes in Oxford are immediately livened up through the arrival of James Kingston as Ibrahim al-Ansar. Kingston not only captures the bravado of al-Ansar, but also the mystery and danger. His accent, and that of James Schneider as Dr. Regev, may seem incongruous at first, but their shrewdness is brought out by sensitive writing and performance.
The play hides scene changes using news clips, and as all hell begins to break loose, the suspense mounts. Lacking though is a sense of humanity, of hope. We see shadowy and complex politic movements run through a very fast-paced piece of drama, but do not have enough sense of the people involved. As the apocalypse nears, political posturing overwhelms the concerns of the human heart.By Tim Sherwin

Ranjit Majundar visits Peter Tatchell, the man who arrested Mugabe I had no apprehensions about approaching the highly secure abode of the country’s best known human rights’ activist. He had shown a reassuring level of enthusiasm about speaking to a student newspaper and every time I had spoken with him I was struck by his politeness and easy charm – a far cry, it would seem, from the man the Daily Mail once called a ‘Homosexual Terrorist.’ But this derogatory title had been given to Tatchell twelve years before, at a time when he was the thorn in the side of political and religious bigots and all manner of hypocritical closet queens. His peaceful though direct approach, while inspiring to many, also proved particularly provocative to others. Despite his laudable aims, some felt that Tatchell’s tactics were too aggressive, and even those who shared his sexual preferences reflected at times that he did more harm than good for their cause. Yet attitudes towards Tatchell changed dramatically after his courageous citizen’s arrest of Robert Mugabe in Brussels in 2001, in which Tatchell suffered senseless beating at the hands of Mugabe’s bodyguards. His bravery rightly earned him the praise of a generation whose human rights had long been suppressed. When in March 2001 the Daily Mail declared Tatchell ‘Heroic…..an example to us all,’ it was clear how far attitudes had changed.
Having left the Labour Party in 2004, Peter Tatchell joined the Greens. He is currently a prominent member of the Green Left, which he describes as ‘an inner grouping within the party which has a particular focus on social justice.’ From this platform, he hopes to defeat former Cabinet Minister Andrew Smith in Oxford East at the next General Election. According to Tatchell, Andrew Smith is not simply a high profile candidate parachuted into a potentially winnable seat in Oxford with no interest in local issues. Quite the reverse. Although the election could be up to three years away, Smith is already living in Oxford for half the week. Tatchell is keen to confront an opponent whose ideas he finds so disagreeable. Smith supported the Iraq War, ID Cards, Foundation Hospitals and student top-up fees. Labour won the seat with only a thousand votes to spare from the Liberal Democrats – could Tatchell split the vote and keep Smith in Parliament? ‘I might,’ Tatchell acknowledged, but he thinks not, summoning a scribbled graph to show me how he might capture the seat. That victory is even conceivable is testament to his heavyweight presence on the ticket. Since the Greens polled only 1800 votes in 2005, they would have no chance of winning Oxford East without Tatchell.
We know what Tatchell contributes to the Greens, but what do they add to him? Surely the growing awareness of green issues within the three major parties has marginalised the Greens, reducing them to the level of a pressure group? Is this just a ‘Greenwash’? But Tatchell cites the adherence of the two main parties to nuclear power as an indication that their immersion in green issues is not authentic. The Greens, by contrast, are strongly opposed to nuclear power. ‘It will cost £50bn to decommission and dispose of the waste from existing nuclear power stations – Just think how that money could be better used.’ Tatchell argues that for the same cost, and within the same time frame, equivalent concentrated solar power stations could be built in North Africa. We then discuss the Green Party’s ambitions for a more ethical United Kingdom – what might it be like? ‘It’s absolutely obvious [that] we’ve got to do something to stop traffic pollution and in so doing we’re going to have healthier and happier people.’ How can this be effected? ‘Reduce car journeys, move to cleaner fuels and hybrid cars, and plant more trees along roads to absorb toxic emissions. Make walking safer and more pleasant by widening pavements – make cities look and feel beautiful.’ That’s the vision, but what about the policies? ‘Labour plans to waste over £70 billion on Trident, ID cards, road building and nuclear power stations. The Greens would invest this money in energy conservation, renewable power, affordable green housing, and cheaper, faster public transport.’ They also favour a more creative approach to taxation, where the focus is shifted from taxing employment and production, to taxing waste and consumption. Thus under the Greens, those guilty of ecological violations will pay and the ethical will prosper. Except if you’re wealthy – they propose to introduce a tax rate of 60% for all earnings over £100,000. According to Peter, ‘people aren’t going to mind.’ The policies of high taxation are reminiscent of the terrible times for Britain in the 1970s – how then are Tatchell’s policies any different? Tatchell claims that he wants to create a ‘socialism infused with a Green perspective and updated to the 21st Century.’ He wants public services ‘run by the public for the public. We all gain if we live in a more caring, equitable society.’ Likewise, he feels we should be less materialistic, less consumerist, less interested in celebrity. I admire Tatchell’s Utopian vision of society, but I am less than convinced that it is attainable in reality. Do people really want to be told that their lives are wrong? That their pleasures are worthless?
I enquired how the Green Party could encourage better human stewardship of the world without recourse to apocalyptic language. ‘Climate change is the biggest threat to global security, peace, health and economic prosperity. But we mustn’t be disempowered by a sense of doom, gloom and helplessness. The Green Party is motivated by the optimism that we can take the necessary steps to avert climate disaster and ensure our future as a green and pleasant land.’ A positive note to end on. I wish him luck.

Reaction from 3 Oxford Blues footballers, Alex Toogood, Matthew Rigby, and Nik Baker, on their 3-1 win over Bedfordshire University. by Jack Pitt-Brooke and Ben Williams

Vee vill find a vay of tracking you down!
 
UPDATE: Well done QAZ, you’re spot on. This isn’t an article. You clearly haven’t come across the term “blog”.
Cherwell 24 is not responsible for the content of German salami, or external links

Whilst many football fans have their ‘dream team’, I have a dream string quartet, comprising of my favourite musicians and, as of today, one addition to my ‘quartet’ is the Tippett quartet’s cellist Bozidar Vukotic.

The Holywell Music Room was full with an audience eagerly anticipating the Tippett Quartet’s performance of Michael Tippett’s string quartet no.1 and Beethoven’s string quartet in C sharp minor (op.131).  And the young ensemble’s performance did not disappoint, with both energetic and lyrical passages being performed equally effectively.

Tippett’s string quartet no. 1 opened the concert.  The cello’s two cadenza-like solos in the first movement were particularly resounding.  Tippett’s neo-classical music was heavily influenced by Beethoven, which made the choice of Beethoven’s string quartet in C sharp minor as the second piece of the concert most appropriate.  The cohesion of the quartet was apparent in this seven movement work, which was well received by the audience.

The ensemble was generally very well balanced, although the melody line was perhaps slightly lost in the second movement of the Beethoven. However, this was a rare problem in an otherwise excellent performance by all four members of the quartet.

by Robin Thompson, C24 Music Editor

The next coffee concert at the Holywell Music Room is next Sunday, February 3rd at 11.15am, and will feature the Adderbury Ensemble playing quintets by Mozart and Vaughan-Williams (tickets available from Tickets Oxford 01865 305305).

In a motion passed at the Wadham Student Union meeting on Sunday, Wadham students were given the option to opt out of being featured in their college rag-sheet.Students will now be able to email the Welfare Officers who will forward their names to the writers of ‘Wad Words’; this will be carried out in strict confidentiality.In the agenda for the meeting, the SU noted: “One. That Wadham students have a right to go about their lives without fear of being commented on in Wad Words. Two. That Wad Words nevertheless makes a contribution to college life and that there is no reason why it shouldn’t continue to do so.”Katharine Halls, Co-chair of Womens’ Campaign, says she proposed the motion after complaints were brought up at a number of meetings about the “derogatory tone of the college bog sheets”.”Oxford is an extremely stressful environment for everyone but sadly the age-old sexism of the place means it is often worse for women”, says Halls. “College rags are just another aspect of this, setting upon women for their sexual behaviour, objectifying those deemed attractive and deriding those who aren’t. We noticed that the situation in colleges with opt-out systems seemed a bit better, and thought the best way to tackle the problem was probably to take motions to common rooms.”SU President Leonora Sagan says, ” ‘Wad Words’ can sometimes be insensitive and quite cruel. An opt-out was considered to be the best way to ensure that the rag-sheet remains funny.” However, no specific examples of particularly cruel features were cited to support the motion.According to one Wadhamite, there was substantial feeling at the meeting that ” ‘Wad Words’ is not, in comparison to other college publications – for example the Jesus ‘Sheepshagger’ – that offensive.” He says, “The Freshers who chose to opt out are too boring to feature anyway.”Halls says, “I’ll be delighted if this turns out to be true. We never imagined there being more than a minority who’d want to opt out. The important thing is it is there for those who do want to, and if just one person feels a bit happier or less insecure because of it we’ll have achieved our aim. Incidentally, that minority are of course the very ones who are least likely to speak up at SU meetings.” One Fresher at Wadham said he was featured in ‘Wad Words’ for being ‘drunk too often and having to be carried home from events’. He thinks that an opt-out “takes away the point”, but that maybe people who are going to feature should be told in advance.”I wouldn’t say it was specifically sexist,” he said, “but I can see how girls would take offence to features like ‘Most Likely to Walk Funny in the Morning’.” He adds that to have been featured in ‘Wad Words’ means “you have done something noticeable or have a noticeable personality.”The ‘Wad Words’ opt-out motion follows similar motions that have been passed by Magdalen and Jesus JCRs, amongst others.by Sarah Fleming

C24's video preview of 50's rock and roll night Action Stations. Read the full column here.Video by Rachel Williams and Helena Zaba.

Trinity 5-2 University 
The race for promotion from JCR Division Two took another twist on Friday, as favourites Univ were comprehensively defeated in an extraordinary game by mid-table Trinity. The corresponding fixture last term had ended in a comfortable 4-1 win for the High Street club, but the story today was very different. 
Univ were missing several key players, not least mercurial left winger Nima Amini, but started strongly nonetheless. After ten minutes, Matt Miskimmin headed just wide as the promotion chasers dominated the early exchanges. It was Trinity, however, who took an unexpected lead. A long punt from the back was held up by the strong wind, bamboozling the Univ keeper Ed Hardy and allowing Charlie Hill to pass into the empty net. Incredibly, the home side soon doubled their advantage, with a low cross finding David Kaestle, who arrived late and slammed the ball past Hardy. Univ endeavoured to play their usual passing game, but a combination of the windy conditions and tenacity from the hosts meant they just couldn’t get going. Indeed, it was Trinity who scored a third goal just before half time, with Charlie Hill running through and scoring his second. 
The second half began with Univ looking a completely different team, as they chased a comeback of epic proportions. Within a couple of minutes of the restart they had reduced the arrears. A powerful cross from the left was bundled home at the far post by Will Stuart for his eighth goal of the season. Trinity suddenly looked nervous, and just a minute later Univ had pulled back a second. More positive wing play, this time from the right, was rewarded as an unmarked Matt Miskimmin arrived from the left of midfield to make it 3-2. The away side continued to dominate completely, but somehow failed to find a leveller. Miskimmin hit the bar and later volleyed just wide, while the dangerous James Gingell rattled the post with an excellent long-range drive.  
As Univ poured forward however, they naturally left gaps at the back, which Trinity were able to exploit late in the game. With less than ten minutes left, a defensive mix-up led to a fourth goal worthy of inclusion in the next Own Goals and Gaffes compilation. Incredibly, Univ centre-forward Will Stuart ran the length of the pitch from the resultant centre, only to be thwarted on the line by some desperate Trinity defending. By this point though, the game was over as a contest, and the home side scored a late fifth, Charlie Hill springing the offside trap and again finishing calmly to complete his hat-trick and a perfect day for the home side. 
Even the most diehard Trinity fan would have to accept that the 5-2 score line flattered them somewhat, but they still deserve credit for a performance which took full advantage of the windy conditions. As far as Univ were concerned, their inconsistent away form continued. As one pundit commented, a team with title ambitions should be looking to come to places like Trinity and win. Before this round of games it looked as though Univ and Merton/Mansfield might run away at the top of the table, but this result, along with the Merton’s shock 5-0 defeat at John’s, has thrown the promotion race wide open. It has also set the scene for a fascinating finale to the season.

Rating: 3/5 If you don’t think that death, fisting, gang necrophilia rape (which is difficult with a dead body) and your mother’s magic box are all hilarious, then you are a complete prude and won’t like Dead Mother Cabaret. I laughed until my spleen ruptured. The play is a fantastic concept and the writing and production team should be extremely proud of themselves. The script is snappy and gloriously directionless.Dead Mother Cabaret is, however, comparable to the USSR: a great idea which had a few problems when it burst forth from Lenin’s magic box. (I’ll stop stealing that metaphor now). The genius of the concept is somewhat let down in the realisation. The acting isn’t bad by any means, but it’s not as good as the play deserved.Some notable individuals really stand out. Chris Tudor, as Guy Johnson, comes close to the verbosity that this play really needed, and he’s helped along by the fantastic script. Dead Mother Cabaret is at its funniest in these moments, when a member of the cast manages to really go over the top. Tom Corcoran as the Narrator-Son puts on a perfect smoky American film noir hero style voice, though some shameless line forgetting without an attempt at picking up the pieces made me wonder for a moment whether I was back in primary school (you shouldn’t have a prompt, you just shouldn’t!). Real credit goes to Niall Gildea for his hilarious presentation of a Freudian-minded, Derrida driven writer, and Nishani Nijjar is strong in this scene as well. By far the best thing on stage was Philip Aspin as the grotesque Father, who surpassed even Chris Tudor in the bombastic presentation of his character. Aside from these flourishes, the acting tends to be rather plain. It’s not bad, but Cabaret demands over-the-top performance, which not all the cast was able to deliver.Complaining about a whole cast in a student production is a little over-critical, I’ll admit. The play has some fantastic touches. The guest stand-up comedian (on the Tuesday night James Laurence, who was wicked awesome with cream on top) is a brilliant innovation. Musically, Dead Mother Cabaret delivers as well. A live Jazz band is nigh on impossible to assemble in Oxford theatre, unless it’s playing at Satan’s Christmas party. Praise goes to the band, which perform astoundingly. The Oxford Belles are another great addition. However, they seem to have difficulty coping with accompaniment and could do with being louder. They sing beautifully, but that’s what you’d expect. Furthermore, they’re hampered by the same lack of over-enthusiasm as a large proportion of the cast. However, the play really does deserve credit for having the sheer audacity to try to do a musical in the all too frequently mute world of Oxford theatre.I’ve criticised some elements of Dead Mother Cabaret quite heavily, but I would honestly recommend it as one of the best things on this week. As a project, the play is audacious and is definitely what the Oxford stage needs. I’m tired of going to the theatre only to find I could have visited the Tate Modern (for free) to get a similar experience. Well done for putting fun back on the stage in a corset and suspender belt!by Dan Rawnsley

A warning, reader: I have a predilection for eavesdropping. As you sip your pint in the K.A.; as you sip your cocktail at the Grand; as you nibble your ludicrously overpriced salad in Quod, the chances are that I am (or that another of my ilk is) listening. Granted, most of what we hear is trivial, the froth and foam of existence, but sometimes, just sometimes, one of the grand scenes of life drifts through the thrumming air to our ears. For One Night Only appeals for the simple reason that it perfectly mimics the experience of prying.Each episode is improvised around a single occurrence in a single character’s life, and the resulting spontaneity adds real interest to what would otherwise be a fairly un-dramatic plot. On the night of the review, for example, Lucy Kellet, played by Rebecca Baron, fails her A-Level English exam. After a short initial period, where the cast acted just as people in plays do, rather than as people in life, they relaxed into their roles and totally captured the audience’s attention. All the performers seemed both to have absorbed the essence of their characters and poured themselves into their personae, so that they were less acting than living the drama. A special mention must go to Jamie Budd, played by John Gethin, who appeared simply to have strolled into the B.T. and played himself- there was never a moment where he was anything less or more than his character. Production was for the most part good, although scene changes were noisily reminiscent of a school play. All in all, however, this was as enjoyable a foray into contemporary theatre as could be desired.By Andrew Pearson