Thursday, May 8, 2025
Blog Page 44

Review: Les Liaisons Dangereuses at the Oxford Playhouse – “Nic Rackow is revelatory” 

0

This new production of Les Liaisons Dangereuses, a glamorous, engrossing period drama, showing at the Oxford Playhouse, is elevated by its stars into one of the great shows of the year. 

So much of a production owes itself to the behind-the-scenes team, and so the vision for this one belongs to director Lucas Angeli and film-coordinator/co-producer Sonya Luchanskaya. It was a visionary move on their part to project a live film recording behind the onstage action – although the effort only doubtfully comes off. For chunks of the play the audience cannot even see the actors’ faces. The screen is dominant. The camera team obstructs the view. At one point a second screen comes down to distort the projection, with the distractingly psychedelic effect of a 3D film viewed without glasses.  

Still, the director is responsible for moulding the actors and for creating a sense of mood and scene. In that, Mr Angeli succeeds commendably. An orchestra plays vivid music completely in tune with the action onstage – the achievement of composer and musical director Lou Newton. Above all, the performers are a crop of immense talent. 

The lascivious hero, Valmont, played with dynamism and gusto by Mr Nic Rackow, is a cross between two types: the eighteenth-century picaresque adventurer a la Smollett, and the nineteenth-century young man on the rise a la Stendhal. (The play takes place just before the French Revolution). Like the great method actors, Mr Rackow succeeds in effacing his own personality and absorbs himself completely in the character. Valmont’s drawled quips are perfectly timed; his tenderer moments never sentimental; his seductions smooth and frightening; his yelled outbursts malicious with rage; his bestial leers in villainous scenes enough to warrant the trigger warning. His rendering of the character’s final scene presents a scalding view of human vulnerability which is worthy of Othello. Mr Rackow brings to this range of traits a portrayal which burns onstage and remains riveting throughout. He is revelatory. 

Valmont’s great onstage rival is played by Ms Susie Weidmann. Ms Weidmann tells me that this was her most challenging role to date. In fact, her signature expression of slightly resentful contempt is perfectly suited to the strong-willed and scheming Meteuil. Her early monologue about the position of women in French society, and her consistent underlying drive never to play the obedient woman, mark her out as a character of rare and great power. Her conflicts with Valmont are by turns cold, playful, and fierce. Ms Weidmann embodies them all excellently. 

Tourvel, the most passionate character in the play, is played by Ms Alice Wyles. Ms Wyles’s past experiences as a Shakesperean heroine, as Titania last May and Ophelia last November, have equipped her for the explosiveness and poetry of this character. Tourvel’s downfall, which in the original novel is a cliched one, is here presented as the inevitable outcome of the passions which Ms Wyles conveys with such verve, although at times, such as when she breaks down onstage, she acts overzealously.  

Ms Vita Hamilton, playing Volanges, another victim of Valmont, proves herself an immersive performer. She manages, through sheer control of expression and tone, to convince us that she is the mature, middle-aged woman of the play. This is harder than it sounds, and to disguise one’s age is a skill of which few actors are capable. Ms Hamilton possesses the skillset of a great cinematic actress, and it is worth keeping an eye on her future roles. 

Ms Catherine Claire brings to the role of Cecile the same subtle naivete, garrulity, and vulnerability which she mastered earlier this year in Arcadia, her greatest success. Her role here is less central than in the earlier production, and in some ways too similar. But her sensitivities, her fierce internal struggles after the abuses to which Mr Rackow’s character subjects her, are rendered with a befitting gentleness where it could so easily have grown melodramatic. This is especially true when she is in the bedroom with Valmont, the most disturbing scene in the play. Cecile is a minor character, but through Ms Claire’s efforts she becomes a great one. 

Ms Honor Thompson channels the rich, glamorous appeal of the Parisian courtesan Emilie. Such roles can often be reduced stock characters, but Ms Thompson possesses the quality of stardom. She could not have played even the most legendary Parisian courtesan, La Dame aux Camellias, more alluringly and convincingly than she manages here. Her scenes with Mr Rackow are intimate as only the performances of a practised actor can be. 

Mr Vasco Faria, though not onstage for long enough, plays the pivotal role of Danceny. He is charming and witty, his underhand lines and actions delivered with endearment. In his next performance he should be given more time to thrive. 

Mr Archie Johnston, a singer and saxophonist of some note, is given the bit part of Azolan. He has some amusing exchanges with Mr Rackow but, like Mr Faria, would benefit from more stage time.  

Les Liaisons Dangereuses is running from 7-9 November  at the Main Stage, Oxford Playhouse.

Reinventing the epistolary novel

0

Traditionally, the epistolary novel—a story told through an exchange of letters—may seem to be a dying genre. In the modern age, most people have traded in handwritten letters for text messages, emails, and DMs. But while letter-writing might veer towards obsolescence, epistolary novels aren’t following suit. Instead, they are finding footing in a reinvention.

It’s natural that authors would incorporate modern digital communication methods into their writing styles and novel formats—much like how movies now feature text message or email layovers. For example, The Appeal by Janice Hallett is a mystery novel primarily written in emails and text messages. Like the traditional epistolary form, this story is still told through correspondence—just a different kind.

Epistolary novels also seem uniquely suited to address our ever-diminishing attention spans. Chapters shortened into the length of an email are easier to digest, easier to rattle through, especially to the TikTok-adjusted brain. But do we lose anything in the transition from letter-writing to text-messaging? Does the contemporary epistolary novel still deliver on both plot and prose? Or should writers be returning to the epistolary form in its truest sense?

Whatever you may think of the attention economy, reading something short and snappy is inherently engaging and appealing. I could read a novel purely in YouTube comment section arguments. Contemporary epistolary novels definitely cater to our ever-diminishing attention spans. As such, they are a perfect vehicle for delivering a page-turning plot.

Mystery epistolary novels do particularly well. Jumping between text exchanges and email threads adds a unique level of reader involvement in deciphering clues. This works well when the author utilises multiple POVs, such as in The Appeal. Really, it’s just internet sleuthing in book format—and who doesn’t love a good internet sleuth?

Where the contemporary epistolary novel really struggles is prose. For instance, people tend to be much less lyrical in writing through text messages. I’d wager that few readers want to read a book filled with “My Dear Bestie” and “tho” (though if you do, more power to you). Detailed and creative prose is fitting for letter-writing, but not for modern forms of communication where the focus is more generally on brevity and efficiency.

There’s also a more general issue created by the speed at which internet vocabulary moves. Considering the amount of time it takes to get a novel published, creatives always seem to be one step behind when it comes to slang. Have you ever cringed at a movie’s use of strange, outdated phrases and emojis?

Imagine this same situation, but extended over 300 pages. I would suggest that writers can solve this issue by keeping it light on transient “internet vocab” that may quickly die out, and sticking mostly to “established” slang. In any case, it’s a tough line to toe between believable and cringey.

It looks like, then, the epistolary novel isn’t dying out completely—just reinventing itself. The contemporary epistolary novels also have a particular appeal to students who want to read more, but have waning attention spans. Isn’t it nice that, instead of a “quick phone break” from your half-hearted attempt at reading Utilitarianism, you could instead have a “quick book break”? And though reading three emails may not be the same as reading three chapters, it still—surely—beats watching three minutes of TikTok.

Review: Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice

0

With this sequel, Burton truly does justice to his eighties cult classic. Set over three decades after the events of Beetlejuice, this year’s release follows Lydia Deetz’s struggle to keep her family together as they mourn a loss. In the meantime, the demon Betelgeuse has returned to haunt her. The film not only sees several of the same iconic actors reprising their original roles (Catherine O’Hara as Delia Deetz, Winona Ryder as her daughter, Lydia, and Michael Keaton as the titular antagonist, a seedy ‘bio-exorcist’), but it features many new and memorable characters. Jenna Ortega stars as Astrid Deetz, Lydia’s apathetic daughter, and Monica Belluci joins the cast as Betelgeuse’s torn-up ex-wife, hell bent on revenge. 

This sequel’s success owes a lot to its casting. We are yet again gifted with a hilarious and formidable performance from Keaton as Betelgeuse. To see Ortega featured on a cast list is often to expect a dark and troubled teenage character, and Astrid is no different. The actress embodies the ennui and passivity of Gen Z with refreshing nuance, reminiscent of  young Ryder’s quintessential Lydia. She is her daughter, after all. Ortega’s dry comic style also blends seamlessly with the spirited humour and energy of the film. Equally, O’Hara never ceases to charm and Dafoe proves he is just as gifted in a comedic role as he is in anything else. Every cast member in this film is praiseworthy, and as an ensemble the actors bring Burton’s genius as a director and producer to life. Although DeVito’s character feels slightly pointless and Bellucci’s underused, neither of these directorial decisions have a significantly detrimental impact on the film’s magic. 

Burton’s famous gift for mixing the dark and eerie with the fun and satirical shines through once again. He captures the tone and spirit of his original, successfully manoeuvring away from the classic trap into which dozens of prequels and sequels alike fall: a failed, pointless rehash. He is well aware that, just because a formula has worked in the past, doesn’t mean you can simply remake the same film and reap the same rewards. With a piece of media as beloved and memorable as 1988’s Beetlejuice, such a blunder would have been unforgivable. 

Instead, the plot of Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice moves away from the first in a fun and unpredictable fashion. Burton even manages to work in a musical number featuring the demonic possession of several characters. While reminiscent of the iconic Day-O  sequence in the eighties iteration, this reference never feels forced. This is a feat more impressive than it sounds, and one cannot help but revel in the nostalgia of it all. 

The film makes for essential Halloween viewing. The costume design retains its originality and intricacy, enriching the film, and successfully maintaining the spooky atmosphere we have come to expect from Burton pictures. There is no shortage of laughs, either, from Keaton’s hilarious lead performance, to the Soul Train skit, to the relationship between Dafoe’s character and coffee. There are an infinite number of humorous details that generously intersperse this unique , sharp script.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice type of film you’ll find yourself rewatching as the leaves continue to fall. It has all the hallmarks of a new classic. One can only hope it has reignited in many appreciation for the 1988 picture.

Oxford Horror Soc, un-earthed

0

The Oxford Horror Soc, led by Izzy Reese as President and Honor Davies as Public Communications Officer, is Oxford’s first and only society dedicated to the on-screen horror genre. Since their founding, they have shown everything from silent film classics like The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari (1919) to television hits like Hannibal (2013) and modern genre staples like Saw (2004).  

How long has your society been around? Why did you decide to take on the role of President?

Izzy: Purely from looking back at the Instagram profile it looks like it’s been around from 2022 but I’m not entirely sure, it might have existed for a bit longer than that. But, I took it over simply because I was a huge fan of it last year. It was one of the only societies that I consistently went to in my first year and then when I found out that the committee members were all graduating that year, I thought I want to keep it going cause I want to continue my journey exploring horror films. I took it over for purely selfish reasons, just because I like it. 

What do you think is the importance of student film societies? 

Izzy: For me, specifically for Oxford, it’s a nice change of pace from what we are all doing most of the time. Because I study English and German, I can’t bring myself to read for fun anymore, especially during term time, so it’s nice to be able to explore art and creativity through a medium that is so different. To have a society that reminds you to keep going, to keep enjoying things that aren’t just work, it’s important for me, at least.

What differentiates you from other film societies is that you focus exclusively on horror. What do you think makes horror special enough to have an entire society just dedicated to it?

Izzy: That’s a tricky question but I think that it seems like a state of mind that you have to get into. I know that’s so annoying to say but to be in a sort of mood to have a spooky evening feels a bit different from just a film society where you come to see anything. Also I think we attract a particular crowd of goths and emo. I remember last year I’d sit down to watch a film and there would be so much eyeliner in one room. It’s good! It feels like a real community of people who like celebrating Halloween when it’s not Halloween. 

Horror tends to be divisive. It has always been caught up in debates surrounding gratuitous violence, graphic depictions of sexual acts and the appropriation of sacred symbols. However, at the same time it has always been a genre that is really effective at transgression. How do you manage these tensions when making a term card? Do you try to achieve a balance between the two ends of the spectrum?

Izzy: Absolutely! Because it’s a diverse genre in terms of what it means when you’re talking about horror films. It does feel important to have a wide range of what we are actually putting on. If I did seven slasher films in one term, it’s not even representative of horror films – that would be slasher society, that’s a different thing. I think it’s good because it means that more people can enjoy it: I know it’s one of those few genres where people have an actual limitation: some people just cannot do jumpscares, or really scary stuff so I want to open up the society to like people who don’t enjoy being terrified out of their minds. We do like to bring out quite a few different ones so that everyone can enjoy it.

You are a female-led society, the horror genre is notorious for its abuse of the male gaze. When you are picking films and filmmakers for your term card is this something that you have in consideration?

Izzy: I wouldn’t call myself an expert in horror films so a lot of the time I’m going into these films kind of blind or with received cultural knowledge. So, as much as sometimes we do try to focus on things that we want to see, which often end up being more female-led or less exploitative films, I think it’s unavoidable in the horror genre and part of our society is doing a little bit of discussion about that kind of thing. So, there’s an element with horror in which all the things that are happening, completely out-there deaths and things like that. You have to take a step back and sort of think about it as something you are watching, rather than something you are getting too involved in. That certainly helps me when I am trying to reckon with what can be a very misogynist genre. 

Do you find that horror fans drawn to your society are more permissive towards the genre than those less interested in it or are they more critical? And do you find that the films you select tend to spark a lot of debate between people attending?

Izzy: I think there is usually a general consensus that it was fun to watch it all together. We don’t really tend to have people coming who don’t like horror at all. I think they would be making a poor decision for themselves if they did that. But, definitely, there are people who come and don’t necessarily know what sort of genre or subgenre this one’s going to be and so have different opinions and maybe express like ‘Oh this one was made by a nepo-baby’ or ‘This one was boring, didn’t like it’. So, there is definitely a spread of opinions. Most of the time, it’s just enjoyable. Even watching a bad film can be enjoyable and we do have space for that sort of terrible, horrible horror film, you know?

Who are some of the formative horror filmmakers for you? And what do you think makes their horror different?

Izzy: Recently, I’ve been really getting into body horror stuff. So Cronenberg and Carpenter and just like they are really fun for me, just like outrageous. I think that is what I really enjoy most about the genre, it is just taking the films in these completely ridiculous directions and being allowed to do that, being able to play with completely upsetting people’s expectations and things. I really enjoyed The Substance (2024) recently, mostly because I brought my mum with me and she hated the last ten minutes of that film, just saw no point in it. It was so fun to me. So, yeah, I’d say anyone who is in the body horror genre.

Halloween is coming up and as the President of a horror soc you are the best person to ask this question. What are some spooky films that you think everyone should watch at least once – whether or not they are fans of horror?

Izzy: I keep answering questions about what my favourite films are, so I’m very sorry not to give nuances every time. I feel like I should. But I think I’d probably just recommend the Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975) to absolutely everyone, regardless of whether they enjoy horror or not. It’s just so perfect as like a fun Halloween film to me, especially to watch with a bunch of other people. And it’s one of those films where I’ve rewatched it a million times and it just gets better every time you watch it. I don’t know if I can recommend any of the more classic ones, of the more definitely scary ones, with broad appeal because many of my friends would never watch them, anything that has remotely a jumpscare. I’m trying to think of some more fun ones. I mean we put on Killer Klowns from Outer Space (1988) last year. It was completely ridiculous, very camp, so much fun. Anything that just has a ridiculous title I would probably recommend giving a try this Halloween. 

If our readers want to come to one of your screenings, where can they get more information?

Izzy: So, at the moment we are based in Jesus College. Every Friday at 7.30pm, maybe 7.00pm, depends on when we are allowed into the room. Find us on our Instagram or our Facebook page. Search for @ouhorrorsoc on Instagram and I’m sure you’ll be able to find it on Facebook. We keep you updated on what we’re doing and at what times so just follow those!

Interview has been edited for clarity.

The com(m)e(n)t

0

Having written out the future in the pages of my book, 
you tear it out. Just before it’s distributed, 
officially bound and sealed. Scrunching it into a ball, 
you toss it atmospheric, out of sight. 
Burning up, it is a comet, a flaming talking point 
to those below. 
Swiftly falling to earth, a meteorite causing heavy damage.

Candles

0

The darkest winter sits within a kindly light,
A candle burning on the inside of a box of matches.

Dreams are made of candles, pinpricks of a deeper light.

The darkest winter is made up of kindly light,
Harsh reflections in the snow. Dreams of the warmest sun.

Charity shop pirates: Is second-hand shopping as sustainable as we think?

My wardrobe is home to a number of second-hand finds that I have bought impulsively, only to discover: it won’t pull over my head, or is plagued by a stubborn stain, or is simply not an item I would ever actually wear. Buying clothes that you later dislike is not a crime – but an issue certainly arises when this is done constantly and thoughtlessly. For decades, charity shopping has been the most affordable and accessible way to put clothes on your back, but only recently, as vintage has become trendy, has it begun to contribute to our misguided consumption habits.

Following the 2008 financial crisis, a greater proportion of the population found itself reliant on the second-hand market. With the emergence of online second-hand marketplaces, thrift shopping firmly planted its feet in the internet age: Vinted was founded in 2008, followed by Depop in 2011. It almost harks back to pre-capitalist bargaining and trading systems – an expression of disillusionment with the economic reality of the time. Attitudes towards second-hand clothing experienced a shift from being sneered at to suddenly being lauded as chic and unique. Thrift shopping progressed beyond financial necessity into the fashion mainstream, to become an ethically friendly disguise for overconsumption.

Pre-worn clothing is cheap, and its stock is unreliable. What is clinging to the racks or listed on a seller’s profile one day might be gone the next. Like pirates returning to ship with a trunk-full of shiny rocks, we often bring home pieces of clothing for fear that someone else may grab them before we have made up our minds. Not to mention all the statistics we have been pumped up with regarding the catastrophic environmental and social impacts of fashion conglomerates: buying out half a charity shop now also has a moral incentive. But the term ‘fast fashion’ does not solely refer to a rapid production time. It’s also about the shortened life cycle of clothing: how quickly an item is bought and then discarded. The slower repurposing and recycling characteristics of the second-hand market are morphing into this fast fashion mentality.

From Depop sellers ravaging their local charity shops, to influencers filming immense Vinted hauls, we are applying a capitalist, more-is-more attitude to what ought to be a sustainable resource. The rise of excessive second-hand buying and reselling means that clothes are spending more time collecting dust on overpacked racks than they are actually being worn.

With trends constantly and rapidly changing, what is ‘in’ one month is ‘out’ the next. It is a real success that second-hand shopping has grown so much in popularity – but there is a worry that this spike in thrifting is just another fad. Our contemporary desire for vintage fashion is being satisfied by buying pre-owned clothing – for now. But what happens when the trend cycle moves on? When some superior fashion entity decides that vintage is no longer cool?

Wanting to own trendy, new clothes is nothing to be ashamed of, but it is now time to adopt a more judicious approach to shopping. Where we source our clothes can be problematic, but how often and in what quantity must also be assessed. A t-shirt from H&M that has been worn and re-worn is ultimately a more sustainable fashion choice than any vintage item that winds up unworn and devoured by moths. The solution is clear: to consider more carefully our own styles and the longevity of the piece of clothing within our wardrobes, before we tap our credit cards.

The sounds of student protest

0

On 23rd May 2024 the University, in a public statement, described the work of certain encampment protestors as contributing to “a deeply intimidating environment”.  The words were, no doubt, etched into the consciousness of the 200+ students who occupied an encampment on the lawn of the Radcliffe Camera. It is interesting to consider, then, how much of this ‘intimidation’ was wrought through sound and music. Chants, songs, and a range of live instrumentation – often broadcasted through loudspeakers – were used to create a distinct sonic landscape, but the unheard effects they had on shaping public opinion of the protest should not go unnoticed. 

Sonic territorialisation (when sound is used to signal a group’s occupancy, or attempted occupancy, of a space) is one of the most powerful forms of protest. By leveraging the relationship between physical and sonic space an auditory hierarchy is created. The sonic space is an ever-present, but an abstract one, as sound is inevitable in every environment we inhabit. It is also, being immaterial and uncontainable, one of the hardest dimensions to police. In this case, an auditory hierarchy was established when the protestors brought out loudspeakers. Not only could their chants or demands be heard more clearly as they overpowered the speaker-less authorities, but the power of sound is also demonstrated when it is freed from the constraints of visual reliance. The protestors ascended this imagined hierarchy when their immediate and peripheral space was dominated.

When the University recommended that students sit exams wearing noise-cancelling headphones during Trinity Term last year, providing them with tissue to plug their ears during the exams, the institution was forced to acknowledge the auditory force of protestors. Whilst they could still assert dominance over the physical space of the Examination Schools – through police presence and security checks – the institution struggled to reclaim the sonic landscape, and thus, albeit momentarily, were forced to take notice of saxophone-playing, loudspeaker-chanting student protestors. Anyone who has passed Clarendon Building in Trinity Term 2024 during the callout of names of deceased women and children (a callout that took place again just a few days ago), remembers that the sound does not just travel down Broad Street, but that it echoes against those controversial walls and rings throughout the city. For a moment, the protestors reclaimed some seemingly foreign territory; their monopoly on the sonic space meant that they were in charge of disseminating information to the public. In other words, they were not walled off.  

The reworking of Palestinian folk songs also empowered the body of student protestors. The recontextualisation of Zaffa, a traditional Palestinian wedding chant into a ‘Zaffit El Tahrer’, a song calling for the freedom of Palestine, creates a sonic vernacular that is only truly understood by the protestors themselves. The remix demands a holistic understanding of cultural, historical, and social elements to grasp its nuances. Kokym, the artist, subverts the typical theme of desiring gifts at a wedding to convey the intensity of his wish to see an independent Palestinian flag wave over an Israeli prison. There is a type of bitter irony that comes with using musical tropes associated with such jovial themes: the song is underscored by a carefree ukulele strum, whilst a harrowing plea for liberty runs throughout the song. The conflicting tropes in the piece could reflect an emotion that is unique to the protestors themselves, thereby fostering a stronger sense of community through shared experiences. When sung in a protest, its upbeat nature may seem out of place for passers-by. That, however, is exactly the point. It is unassuming to those who are not part of the cause. 

Sonic protest capitalises off the unexpected, and that is precisely why it is so effective. It ensures, ultimately, that protester’s demands do not fall on deaf ears.

Oxford University Hospitals to miss waiting list targets

0

Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (OUH) is on track to miss NHS waiting list targets set to be achieved next year, recent numbers reveal. 

The latest figures from the NHS show that for 3,911 out of 87,600 outstanding treatments, patients had had to wait a year or more for their procedure at OUH – this is around 4.5%. Last year, this figure stood at 2,925. 

This suggests that OUH will fail to meet the NHS ambition that aims to see that “the waits of longer than a year for elective care are eliminated by March 2025.” These targets were laid out as part of the NHS’ plan for dealing with the COVID-19 backlog of elective care (non-urgent and planned medical procedures) released in February 2022. 

At OUH, approximately 55.9% of patients were waiting 18 weeks or less to start treatment. This is better than the average for other hospital trusts, which is 58.3%.The NHS operational standard is 92%. 

The trauma and orthopaedic services had the highest number of treatments waiting a year or more, almost 1000. The urology service had the next-highest, with just over 500 treatments. 

The Care Quality Commission, the independent regulator of health and social care in England, determined that OUH “required improvement” overall in a report published in June 2019, based upon an inspection the prior year. 

Hospital trusts are run by NHS staff but work closely with universities. The OUH consists of the John Radcliffe Hospital, the Churchill Hospital, the Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, and the Horton General Hospital. In collaboration with the University of Oxford, it is one of the largest teaching trusts in the UK.

History Faculty IT system experiences ‘unauthorised access’

0

Oxford University’s History Faculty has experienced “unauthorised access” to its IT system. In response, several systems have been isolated and the IT staff is building a new server. There is no evidence so far that any data has been removed.

Administrative staff worked from home, and the faculty warned that some sources of information “remain inaccessible” for a few days. An undergraduate history student told Cherwell that they could not connect to eduroam in the History Faculty and instead used mobile data. A tutor also attributed delays in the selection of papers to the IT outage.

Department Chair Martin Conway told Cherwell: “The main consequence is that some of the administrative staff have been working off-site with remote access, which is good practice in these circumstances. Teaching and seminars in the Faculty are continuing as normal (with Eduroam access in the Faculty Building). We do not therefore expect there to be any consequences for undergraduates or for our research students.”

The extent of the breach continues to be investigated by the IT team, and its full scale has not yet been determined. The incident has been reported to the Information Commissioner’s office and other appropriate authorities. The faculty also warned students against this risk in their email, stating that if students are contacted by anyone who claims to have access to personal data or information, they should immediately contact the University’s IT services.

A University spokesperson told Cherwell: “The extent of this access continues to be investigated, but, so far, there is no evidence that any data has been removed, or of wider access to other University systems.”