Wednesday 25th June 2025
Blog Page 485

Reading ‘Neurotribes’ in Autism Acceptance Month

Catherine de Guise
-
0
Reading ‘Neurotribes’ in Autism Acceptance Month

This Autism Awareness Month, I decided to become more aware of the history of the condition I’ve lived with my entire life but was only diagnosed with a year ago. Steve Silberman’s 592 page book on autism, written in 2015, seemed a logical place to start. 

Neurotribes is a history of attitudes, research and responses to autism as well as a personalised account of autistic individuals. Silberman recounts shifting understandings of autism, taking us from when it was once labelled as ‘childhood psychosis’ to what we now understand as ‘autistic spectrum disorder’. Diagnostic criteria has come to recognise the variety of forms autism can take, while still being linked by a few key factors - difficulties with social interaction and communication, and restricted and repetitive behaviour. 

The sociability of autistic people is something that can vary greatly, though most will experience a degree of social isolation. This seems a particularly pertinent issue at the moment, when social isolation is being enforced and many neurotypicals (non-autistic people) are discovering what it feels like. For some autistic people, their isolation, caused mainly by difficulty with social interaction and anxiety nurtured by countless negative interactions, is unwelcome. However, solitude can also be comforting and safe. 

A quote in Neurotribes from Tony Attwood, a psychologist who specialises in Asperger’s, describes how the difficulties of autism can disappear when one is alone: ‘You cannot have a social deficit when you are alone, you cannot have a communication problem when you are alone, your repetitive behaviour does not annoy anyone when you are alone. All the diagnostic criteria dissolve in solitude…The signs of autism and the degrees of stress and withdrawal are proportional to the number of people present.’ 

People like Attwood, who have stressed that the difficulties of autism are largely caused by the outside world, have helped to combat the view that it is autistic people that need to change. The focus shifts to the fight for accommodation. Silberman highlights the need for this in his description of ways of ‘curing’ autism. One such way is Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA), which is still in use today. It was created by Ole Ivar Lovaas, and involved trying to rid children of obvious autistic traits through hitting them, starving them and administering electric shocks. Lovaas also went on to apply ABA to effeminate boys to ‘cure’ them of homosexuality and gender non-conformity. His defense in the face of the growing gay rights movement was that it was still easier to change a child than society. 

In sections like this, Neurotribes was an immensely difficult book to read. Silberman discusses the fear of ‘an epidemic of autism’ and the way in which many parents responded by trying to defeat autism through invasive therapy and alternative medicine. Parents mourned for the loss of a child that they came to see as damaged after the diagnosis, and tried desperately to ‘regain’ their child. At times, Silberman tries to show some sympathy for these parents, who were often forced to turn to alternative means as mainstream medicine was offering so little in terms of autism research.  

It was painful to read anyway. The belief that autistic people are incapable of empathy is still widely held, but it is increasingly recognised that we do experience empathy, and are in fact prone to hyper-empathy, which was certainly the case as I read about the suffering of autistic children. Hyper-empathy means that the suffering of another can cause an intense emotional, psychological and physical pain. It hurts to hear about the children who were forced to submit to ‘holding therapy’ – where a parent would grip their child and force them to look into their eyes, while telling the children how bad they made them feel. 

The backlash against vaccinations was another upsetting part of the book, particularly at the moment, as we watch numerous people dying from a disease that we don’t have a vaccine for. Already, I’ve seen some forums discussing whether or not it would be wise to receive a coronavirus vaccination, should one come to exist. Astounding, that some people might be more worried about autism than the possibility of their child dying, but that’s the illogical neurotypical mind for you. 

The book is not simply a traipse through decades of poor research and the mistreatment of autistic people – interspersed through this is hope. Silberman stresses the achievements of autistic people in science and technology and art. He combats misinformation. He reveals decades of fighting for increased recognition and support. The end section is particularly moving, as it describes autism activism that is increasingly led by autistic people themselves.  

In Neurotribes, Silberman is hopeful about the future of autism advocacy, but five years on, the tribe of neurodiverse people is still not a united one. This is perhaps indicated by Autism Awareness Month itself, a name that is disliked by many in the autistic community for its association with Autism Speaks, an organisation that aims to ‘cure autism’. Autism Acceptance has gained ground instead, prioritising the self-advocacy of autistic people.

It goes beyond simply recognising autistic people as different, and looks to accept and accommodate those differences. Perhaps there is still hope for a united tribe of neurodiverse people. 

“I am together”: Love and loneliness in the work of Wim Wenders

Leone Van den Schrieck
-
0
“I am together”: Love and loneliness in the work of Wim Wenders

In the quasi-apocalyptic gloom of these days, we desperately seek ways to pass the time, to numb our loneliness, to move on. The German filmmaker Wim Wenders, however, provides us with a better alternative: his atemporal and comforting creations do not merely let us escape the present void, but more importantly, they wrap us up in its very beauty.   

Wings of Desire (1987), for instance, one of his early works, grants us a unique perspective on what it means to love and be lonely at once. In a world where invisible angels support mortals in bearing their thoughts and cares, being alone means their hand on your back, their head on your shoulder: love and loneliness fuse in these instants of tender touch. Through the speech of his characters, too, Wenders offers us telling insights into the nature of these feelings. “Loneliness is: I am whole at last,” one says, intimately connecting it to love. The words “I am together,” as a result, are no grammatical violation anymore, but powerfully epitomise this intersection between love and loneliness so relevant today.

Wenders also artfully brings the small things that define the human condition to the front of his narrative: “it would be rather nice coming home after a long day to feed the cat, like Philip Marlowe, to have a fever and blackended fingers from the newspaper, to be excited not only by the mind but, at last, by a meal, by the line of a neck by an ear. To lie! Through one’s teeth. As you’re walking, to feel your bones moving along. At last to guess, instead of always knowing. To be able to say “ah” and “oh” and “hey” instead of “yea” and “amen,” says Damiel when explaining his desire to be mortal to his companion angel. 

In contrast, other metaphors make us consider being human in terms of humanity as a whole, on its widest scale. The Alekan circus, one of the central stages of the movie, symbolises life, for example. Wenders’ choices here pick up, in an innovative manner, on this universal mirror that is circus, something which artists like Pablo Picasso and Fernand Leger, among others, had understood some decades prior. Another image given significant prominence is that of the bard, Homer: in the body of a tired old man, he is at loss in modern society and yet intent on writing an epic of peace. “Must I give up now? If I do give up, then mankind will lose its storyteller. And if mankind once loses its storyteller, then it will lose its childhood,” he says in thought. 

Picasso’s depiction of a circus.

In giving us such a simple yet meaningful lens – the repetition of « when the child was a child…» still rings in my ears – on the small and the universal, Wenders becomes our bard, as it were: he is handing us our precarious childhood, our epic of peace on a film roll ; he brings us back to what truly matters. This is what the protagonists mean when writing « I know now what no angel knows. » Therefore, it becomes almost impossible to leave off watching the film without feeling grateful. And especially in the present circumstances, we must re-learn gratitude. 

The movie further lulls us with its poetic character. Watching it is a comparable experience to reading Anne Carson, or Ocean Vuong: there’s almost too much simple, raw beauty to take in. The film’s deliberate slow pace gives us the time to truly absorb these moments in all their flavour. The soft texture of voices and different languages complements this aim: words resound and linger in our heads as we take in the meaning they are escorting. Yet the true poetic signature is Bruno Ganz’ smile, one of the most beautiful and sincere ones I have ever seen. Watching Wings of Desire feels like warmth finding its way through a body.  

In this light, it is hardly surprising that Wenders later in his career produced a documentary about and for the German dancer and choreographer Pina Bausch, called Pina (2011). Both artists stemmed from the same generation, and shared values of realistic, beautiful simplicity in their creations. The blend of their work, as a result, is like a stunning breath of fresh air.    

Loneliness and its intersection with other core emotions is again at the heart of the message of Pina. “All of her pieces were about love and pain and beauty and sorrow and loneliness,” one of her dancers testifies. In choosing to set many of her creations around the city of Wuppertal, where her dance company was located, she brings out the inevitable singularity of the individual within a vast landscape, most of the time deserted. Simple, vigorous movements become a means to express the joys and pains sheltered within this inherent loneliness. There is a certain cathartic quality to her dances, too: movement implies expression, and expression can imply letting go, which is all we need, really.

Wim Wenders standing beside a painting by Edward Hopper, also exemplifying loneliness.

In Pina, just as in Wings of Desire, the eyes through which we look – those of both Wenders and Bausch – are child-like, penetrating straight through to the essential emotions of the human condition. These emotions take the form of touching energies emanating from Pina’s creations and are carefully rendered on film: repeated cycles of movement, prominence of the hands, presence of the breath – a general flow. In Café Muller, for instance, the dancers put so much character into their peculiar, compulsive motion that they become potent summaries of societal behaviour. Whenever words are added, it completes the whole with exactitude, as for example this phrase from « Vollmond »: “I am young; my ears hear promises; my mind is power; my eyes see dreams; my thoughts are high, and my body is strong.” 

Wenders does Pina’s work full justice in his presentation of it. Not only does he take on the challenge of 3D filming in order to capture the dance in all dimensions, he also sequences them thoughtfully, creating juxtapositions of emotions and lending them further strength. The choreographies, moreover, are punctuated with testimonies of the various dancers in their respective languages. Some of them just look at the camera for a single instant– just enough to bring out their character and respect for Pina. We thus get as all-encompassing a glimpse of Pina’s angelic personality and her genius,  as well as Wender’s own.

All in all, these two movies bring out the better sides of loneliness, time and strong emotions, and this is an insight that can soothe and heal us during social isolation. To borrow some words from Wings of Desire, these films can bring back to the center that “feeling of well-being, as if inside of my body a hand was gently closing.”

Department choices show unequal application of safety net policy

Tilly Walters
-
0
Department choices show unequal application of safety net policy

It has been revealed that departments have implemented the University’s ‘Safety Net’ policy with significantly varying approaches.

The policy, released on the University’s website on 20 April, provided a framework in which individual departments could apply their own safety net.

Departments have chosen individual policies within the wider safety net based on their examination structure, particularly whether assessments have been ‘banked’ (submitted) before March 14. Those with 50% banked have the ‘no detriment’ policy applied. 

Policies which will apply across all subjects include:

  • Determining performance on a case by case basis, and taking into account individual mitigating circumstances.
  • Aligning grade distribution with averages from previous years such that the number of Firsts and 2.iis will not go down, and the number of fails will not go up. 

Other policies have been less evenly applied by departments. 

Policies surrounding grade classification include: 

  • Reducing, or eliminating preponderance (number of papers scoring 70 or higher needed to achieve a first). 
  • Changing specific marks required to achieve a certain grade or achieve a pass. 

Policies surrounding exams and marking include:

  • Reducing the number of papers. 
  • Scaling papers where there is a systematic lower average performance. 

Policies surrounding coursework and ‘banked’ assessments include: 

  • Using ‘banked’ papers to identify lower performance. 
  • Preventing students from attaining scores lower than their banked assessments, conditional on 50% of work already being banked.

Classics has limited their safety net just to proportional grade distribution and identifying papers “whose mark-runs are significantly out of line with the recent average”. They will have eight exams all contributing to the final mark. Candidates taking a second classical language will have to take these papers under closed book conditions. 

History and English are among the subjects relying on ‘banked’ assessments in their implementation of the safety net. English reduced their exams from 4 to 2, and increased the value of banked assessments to 60%, however will not be implementing the ‘no detriment policy’, as banked assessments had originally accounted for 43% of the final grade, below the 50% required. 

Laura Ashe, the Chair of English FHS stated: “In English we’ve halved the number of exams (and hence exam essays) required, to make the remote examinations manageable, and we’ve reduced their weighting in the overall marks profile, from 57% to 40%. On top of that we can undertake further ‘scaling’ of runs of marks if they turn out to be significantly out of line with normal expectations. Our intention is to make sure that we are giving grades within the normal expected range for proportions of firsts, 2.1s, etc. 

“Beyond all that work across the board, we’re also of course going to look carefully at every candidate’s individual self-assessment, and all Mitigating Circumstances statements, and the Board will have discretion to make small adjustments to candidates’ marks and classes in response to these. Beyond that, where candidates’ performance in the remote exams has been seriously impacted by their circumstances, and their marks greatly and disproportionately affected, we can use the mathematical ‘safety net’ mechanism to directly adjust their marks.

“One substantial minority of students who have been contacting me with concerns, actually, is those who historically do better in exams than in coursework: these students have been very concerned about the push to give coursework vastly more weight in final profiles, and I have been concerned to reassure them that in cases where students’ performance is weighted the other way, the Exam Board will equally have discretion to respond to that.

“Overall, we’re very confident that we can give a fair result that retains the credibility of the classification while attending carefully to all individual circumstances.”

Similarly, History finalists would traditionally take four papers which would make up four-sevenths of their final degree classification, with the remaining three-sevenths made up from coursework. In response to the coronavirus one paper has now been cancelled, meaning that the Trinity examinations will now make up 50% of their degree classification. Despite this, the History faculty has announced that it will not follow the University’s ‘no-detriment’ policy since Trinity examinations would normally make up a larger percentage of students’ degree.

PPE and Economics and Management will both discount the lowest scoring two papers – these will not count in the average mark. For a First in PPE, preponderance has been eliminated and only the average will apply. For a First in E&M, preponderance will be reduced from two papers scoring over 70 to one. The Economics Department chose not to comment. 

MML has reduced the total number of papers from ten to six, one of which is banked. Oriental Studies have not released a specific policy, but stated that the faculty would “follow the safety-net policy developed by the University.”

Law has not cancelled exams as their Core papers are required for a qualifying law degree, but have adjusted some grade specifications. For a First: four marks of 70+ and nothing below 55 in Core or 50 in Options and/or Jurisprudence OR five 70+ and nothing below 45 in core with no more than two marks below 60 and nothing below 40 in Options and/or Jurisprudence. 

For a pass: five marks of 40, no more than three marks below 35. For Law Moderations, a Distinction requires two marks of 70 and above, with a third mark of 60 and above for Criminal or Constitutional Law or 55 for Roman Law. 

Experimental psychology will have the no detriment policy apply, its finalists having completed over 55% of their degree. PPL will discount the lowest scoring paper, or treat each banked assessment as two units, whatever is higher. The Head of Department, Professor Kia Nobre stated: “We are working hard at applying/adapting the University safety-net guidance in the context of the particular requirements of our degree to ensure a no-detriment policy and to support our students as best we can.”

Music has reduced the number of papers from eight to five or six, dependent on papers and have given a ‘variety of options’ for performance assessments including Solo Performance, which would usually be held in Trinity. 

Alongside the exam arrangements, the University has developed the ‘Safety Net’ policy after an extensive SU consultation of students, results from which showed that students viewed ‘open-book’ exams negatively.

Over 1600 finalists signed an open letter asking for predicted grades as a ‘guaranteed minimum’. Speaking to Cherwell, Ferdinand Otter-Sharp, the author of the open letter, stated: “The main issue with the University’s ‘safety net policy’ is that it isn’t a safety net policy.  

“For the large majority of students, it is a marginal reduction in pressure which should have already been policy to reflect the general effects of the pandemic on students. At best, the University has failed to understand the problems of its students most disadvantaged by home study during a pandemic, and at worst the University has shown a complete apathy towards them. 

“Oxford’s priority should have been protecting its most vulnerable students at all costs, not protecting the rigour of Oxford degrees.”

Cambridge announced their safety net policy on the 31 March. According to Varsity, “as long as they pass their assessments, their result will “only confirm the class awarded in their second year or improve it”. This will not apply for students taking a fourth-year integrated Master’s.”

When contacted for comment, the University stated: “The Safety Net policy aims to reduce the risk of students being disadvantaged by coronavirus, or circumstances surrounding the outbreak that are beyond their control.

“Given the diversity of Oxford assessment regimes, it’s been necessary to give subjects local autonomy to provide a solution that works for the specific conditions related to their courses.

“In instances where no formal assessments have yet been completed we have encouraged subjects to put in place a variety of measures to support students to achieve the outcomes they deserve.

“As we continue to respond to the developing pandemic situation our priority remains ensuring the University functions as smoothly as possible and that the vast majority of students can finish the academic year to their highest ability, and be proud of their achievements regardless of the circumstances.”

Departments were contacted for comment. 

Image: Ellie Wilkins

Refugees in the Time of Corona: How We Fail Those Most In Need

Sofia Cotterill
-
0
Refugees in the Time of Corona: How We Fail Those Most In Need

We are in a time of unprecedented crisis, that is undeniable. In times such as these, it is all too easy to retreat into our own private worlds, build up the walls and bury ourselves away in our own problems. However, it is during the times when it is hardest to do so that it is most vital for us to ensure that the most vulnerable in society are protected. We must not leave them to fend for themselves against injustice.

Refugees, migrants and asylum seekers are routinely the most vulnerable groups within society, yet there are also few groups to whom society and our government displays such intense levels of animosity and indifference. Indeed, it often appears that the sentiments and prejudices underpinning the hostile environment established under the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition have become entangled threads, inseparably woven into the sinews of our political landscape, clouding and obscuring us from truly seeing the suffering of these people.

On the 13th March, Médecins Sans Frontières wrote to the Home Secretary Priti Patel to request that, in light of the Covid-19 crisis, Britain ‘facilitated the urgent evacuation’ of child refugees with complex underlying health conditions, as well as increasing the acceptance rate of unaccompanied minors stuck in the intensely overcrowded and squalid refugee camps of the Greek Islands.

The foreign office replied on the 31st March, asserting that rather than heeding to these requests they would instead continue to support the EU-Turkey deal reached in March 2016. The EU-Turkey deal is an agreement that aims to return refugees arriving in Greece to Turkey in exchange for measures such as financial support and the resettlement of some refugees in Europe. However, the arrangement has led to dire consequences including severe overcrowding in Greek detention centres and camps, to the extent to which camps such as Moria contain 20,000 refugees ‘penned’ into a settlement with a capacity for 3000. The filthy and overcrowded conditions mean that, as noted by Martin Baldwin-Edwards of the Mediterranean Migration Observatory, if or when Covid-19 takes hold in refugee camps “it’s going to be a death sentence” for those who have already suffered so much.

One must appreciate the irony. Our government has, and continues to, repeatedly distance the United Kingdom from all the benefits that came with our past EU membership (including the potential to secure much-needed PPE for the UK), yet they continue to defend a degrading EU treaty that violates human rights and condemns refugees, migrants and asylum seekers to such heinous conditions.

Furthermore, the EU-Turkey deal rests upon the ability to be able to return refugees (and many asylum seekers) to Turkey (supposedly a safe country). Yet even putting morals aside, it is clearly ludicrous to pretend that this is possible when the border between Turkey and Greece is currently closed due to COVID-19. We are led to the inevitable conclusion that it appears that the government is planning on doing precisely zero to help those in need.

However, it is not just refugees, migrants and asylum seekers abroad who are suffering needlessly due to the inaction of the British government and international community; it is also clear that ‘adequate steps have not been taken to protect migrant populations at risk of COVID-19’ in the UK, as noted by a group of thirty human rights and migrants’ rights groups who wrote to Patel on the 16th March to express their concerns.

Currently, the NHS data of patients with medical debts worth over £500 can be retrieved and accessed by the Home Office for immigration-related purposes. Although the Government has introduced an exemption to the NHS charging and data sharing practices with regards to COVID-19 diagnostic tests and treatment, the aura of hostility runs deep, likely preventing many vulnerable individuals from seeking treatment when necessary, putting both themselves and wider society at risk.  Consequently, the group have called for ‘a public information campaign designed to reassure people that accessing care is safe’ and commitments to end all data sharing, which the government appeared to claim they were abolishing in 2018. This was shown to be false in January 2019 in a report by the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration.

In addition, many migrants within the UK have been left extremely vulnerable by the government’s maintenance of the ‘no recourse to public funds’ policy. This policy means that groups ‘subject to immigration control’ (including unaccompanied asylum-seeking children and individuals on spousal or student visas) are unable to access the majority of welfare benefits which are so vital during these unstable times. This has not gone unnoticed, with 98 MPs writing to the government in March stressing the ‘serious challenges and potentially far-reaching, fatal consequences’ of self-isolation on these individuals who are unable to access the lifelines that so many of us take for granted.

The renowned ethicist Joseph Fletcher once wrote that the ‘true opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. Hate, bad as it is, at least treats the neighbour as a thou, whereas indifference turns the neighbour into an it, a thing. This is why we may say that there is actually one thing worse than evil itself and that is indifference to evil.’ Apathy is contagious. It is far too simple and easy for us to dehumanise refugees, migrants and asylum seekers by distancing ourselves from the suffering that plays out on the global, national and local stages around us. But we must care, we must hold our government to account for failing to protect the most vulnerable. If we don’t, who will?

Sources:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/patel-refuses-to-take-children-from-greek-camps-threatened-by-covid-19

https://www.jcwi.org.uk/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=a135b52c-e9d0-469c-aad8-3dde31aec7a1

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/18/eu-turkey-statement

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-latest-deaths-refugee-camps-greece-moria-a9459446.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/13/uk-missed-three-chances-to-join-eu-scheme-to-bulk-buy-ppe

Why Tiger King is the antithesis, not the antidote, to the Coronavirus

Noorie Abbas
-
0
Why Tiger King is the antithesis, not the antidote, to the Coronavirus

There are under 3500 tigers remaining in the wild globally. There are anywhere between 5000-10,000 tigers currently in captivity in the United States. This stunning fact ends the docu-series that has taken the world by a storm. In Netflix’s Tiger King, we are introduced to the deranged world of exotic pet ownership in rural America. For just $5000 you can be the owner of a real, snarling, 600-pound tiger –  which is comparatively cheap even within the market of American exotic pets (as Louis Theroux tells us on his ‘suburban safari’, a baby chimpanzee sets you back $60,000). 

The big cats are an aphrodisiac: the roars of the tigers, lions and ligers (crossbred lion-tigers) pull in a menagerie of husband-killing hippies, gun-toting gays, polyamorous cult leaders, and innocently trapped social-distancers looking for something else to kill the newfound time they have. Yet, as directors Eric Goode and Rebecca Chaiklin soon discovered, those roars and growls seem to beat on like a repetitive background track to the crazy lives of those at the centre of the big cat world – only to be paused when Joe Exotic’s literal soundtrack makes a feature.

Tiger King – and I cannot stress this enough – has literally everything you could imagine and more. If you haven’t seen it already, you have to watch it as soon as physically possible. At every twist and turn your jaw is left hanging on the floor: you don’t think anything crazier could happen until it does. Michael Jackson’s incinerated alligators, genetic experiments to recreate a prehistoric sabretooth tiger, and a GoFundMe for fake prostate cancer are just some of the wild detours the show couldn’t fit in seven episodes. It appears that Tiger King is exactly what we all needed – an unbelievable, blazing fire in our very own houses that we cannot ignore– a fire big enough to distract from the scarier, more absurd inferno that blazes right outside our window in the form of a global pandemic. 

Many have called Tiger King the perfect antidote for anyone in need of a diversion from present reality. Except, make no mistake, Tiger King is not the answer to Corona– it is blatantly its antithesis. In a time of isolation, Tiger King has offered us communal distraction: pulling the world together with an endless supply of memes about ‘that bitch Carole Baskin’. While hundreds of ‘What To Watch During Isolation’ lists populate the internet, the only thing that everyone seems to agree on is that you have to watch Tiger King. Much like Tik Tok, banana bread and risky haircuts, it’s a cultural phenomenon defining the unique moment that we find ourselves in.

However, what sets Tiger King apart from all of these trends is that it is not a product of the Corona era, but instead an unapologetic middle finger to everything that has come to define the last few weeks. While we preach cleanliness, Tiger King advertises expired truck meat pizzas. While the world accesses new levels of selflessness and charity, Tiger King fills our screens with egotistical maniacs who embezzle money from their own mothers. While our freedoms are increasingly restricted, Tiger King’s protagonists exercise unfettered liberty, the sort where owning a striped predator is a god-given, unimpeachable right. Whatever we are told to aspire to, Tiger King is glaringly, brazenly, and often disgustingly the opposite.

Only in America: a graphic representation of the “unfettered liberty” that characterizes the documentary subjects in Tiger King.

Currently, individualized worries have been put on hold while a more pressing concern dominates public consciousness. Yet, in the world of Tiger King, Joe Exotic is almost comically absorbed in a petty personal feud with his nemesis Caroline Baskin. There are not many of us that can say that we truly have an arch-rival, yet the construction of Joe’s ‘Tiger King’ persona requires a villain to give him purpose. From nicking her diary, to stealing her business’s name and rallying his fans to harass her, Joe’s battle with Carole is almost reminiscent of a playground rivalry, that is, until you add the murder, the dildos, and the Carole Baskin sex-doll. Joe is entirely transfixed with the destruction of ‘that bitch Carole Baskin’, so much so that it ultimately leads to his own downfall. 

As many of us find ourselves reconnecting with family or reaching out virtually to maintain our friendships, we appreciate real connections that much more. Conversely, genuine connection in Tiger King is notably lacking. The only glimpses at real endearment – perhaps in Joe Exotic’s marriages or within his zookeeping team –  are undercut by their manipulative and coercive nature, wherein Joe’s supply of meth and demand for money seem to be the only things that keep them going. Even after the tragedy they experience, the dark undertones of the friendship that develops between Joe and Walmart-manager-come-campaign-director Joshua Dial surface in Dial’s lost teeth (a common byproduct of meth usage) and his disheveled demeanour during later interviews. 

Social distancing and increased hygiene measures are now so aggressively ingrained within me that I have started to feel uncomfortable whenever I see individuals behaving as normally as one used to on screen. Handshakes and face-touches set off little alarm bells inside my head, but Tiger King takes my heightened sensitivity to a new level. It cuts straight through any discomfort we might feel as the world is desperately trying to sanitise every environment: it shoves sad animals in tiny cages with visible fleas and puts their keepers’ rat-ridden living conditions right in your face. As one reviewer put it, ‘ask yourself bluntly how badly you felt you needed a shower after watching just one episode, let alone the whole series? Thought so.’

While the internet, newspapers, and your mother are telling you to find things that will make you happy during isolation, Tiger King is a sure way to make yourself feel lousy. If Harry Potter and Friends are your ‘guilty pleasure’ viewings during isolation then Tiger King gives a new more literal meaning to the term. ‘Guilt’ is as good a word as any to name the feeling you have after realizing how excited and entertained you’ve just been by the atrocious behaviour and awful consequences on screen. 

And, the saddest contrast of all: while we are all told that everyone can be a hero by thinking of others and remaining at home, Tiger King ends without a good guy. No one serves a redemptive role: not Bhagavan Doc Antle, the calculating cult-leader who collects young women and hands out breast implants, not the ‘true neutral’ Rick Kirkham whose past involves domestic abuse and a documentary-worthy crack addiction, and not Carole Baskin, who even without Netflix’s assertion of husband-killing would be an insincere woman who knows too much about sardine oil and still keeps big cats behind bars. And, of course, it is certainly not Joe Exotic, who despite Cardi B’s support, remains a narcissistic, selfish individual who coerced men with meth and money and probably abused loads more animals along the way. Everyone in the big cat world is as self-centered at the end of the documentary as they were when it started. 

As The Atlantic put it, the whole show is truly an ‘ethical train-wreck’. It’s hard to say for sure that we would have been able to look away if Tiger King wasn’t providing such a striking contrast to the current situation we find ourselves in. However, I think it is pretty telling that as we all watch it from the confines of our homes with no end to lockdown in sight, many of us fell prey to feeling sympathy for the person who has his freedom taken away.

Friday Favourite: A Month in the Country

Kavya Deshpande
-
0
Friday Favourite: A Month in the Country

Sometimes you reread a book because it is beautiful; sometimes you do it because a mysterious benefactor on your flight gave you a concerning level of exposure to Covid-19, and you are now a high-risk contact who must be sealed in a bedroom where the only other source of entertainment is staring at the Guardian’s coronavirus live blog as it describes hourly the laughably low probability of your loved ones ever accessing a ventilator. I have read J. L. Carr’s A Month in the Country three times this week, and can confirm that it is indeed beautiful. 

A Month in the Country does exactly what it says on the epigraph, announcing itself via Dr Johnson as “a small tale, generally of love”. Carr gives a little over a hundred pages to the story of Tom Birkin, a shell-shocked veteran who spends the summer of 1920 in the village of Oxgodby, where he has been hired to uncover a medieval wall-painting in the local chapel. It is a gentle exploration of recovery, craft, and the secret project of finding companionship that quietly occupies everyone. It is also a guide to isolation. 

Oxgodby is small and far from London, where Birkin has temporarily left behind a fraying marriage and nightmares of Passchendaele. It is unsurprising that he approaches his job in search of respite; Carr’s descriptions of early-modern art restoration would convince the most resolved of undergraduates to rip off their tie and escape through the window of their investment banking assessment centre. Birkin’s work is near sacred. He is engaged in the slow, meticulous revelation of beauty and detail, in the surfacing of histories so particular that they need him to imbue them with humanity so that they hold together. He resurrects the personality of the original artist by studying his flourishes, imagines the community that gathered under the mural through the decades of candle-grime they left on it. “You put that bit extra into the job, you go at it with emotion as well as diluted hydrochloric”, he says. Despite the solitary nature of his business, Birkin’s love of art and its effort means that people have a way of keeping him company even when they are not necessarily present. 

And then there are the curious villagers who drop by to watch him work, gradually drawing him into conversation and their own lives. The friendships that burgeon from these interactions are felt with an understanding of their impermanence. Birkin knows that he will soon leave Oxgodby and is unlikely to return. There is a kindness to Carr’s writing, a generosity he extends even to the closest thing the novel has to an antagonist: a bad-tempered vicar who eventually admits sadness over his unpopularity (“People one doesn’t care for, even dislikes, make most of us feel uneasy when they appeal against their sentence,” thinks Birkin). Not much goes wrong; not much reaches a conclusion that allows for that distinction. Love is unconfessed and unregretted. The end of summer is occasionally anticipated, but until then, the narrative remains suspended in the heat and light and high-noon colour of the Yorkshire Wolds in August. 

In lonely times, A Month in the Country offers an assurance that people are people through other people, even in distance and stillness. This past month’s parade of apocalyptic news has made it feel long; at the very least, Carr gives us hope that summer, whenever it arrives, will be better and longer. Pick a warm day, and read this slowly.

EXCLUSIVE: Oxford Union releases term card for Trinity 2020

Felix O'Mahony
-
0
EXCLUSIVE: Oxford Union releases term card for Trinity 2020

The Oxford Union Society has released its term card for Trinity Term 2020, Cherwell can exclusively reveal. The term card includes a range of well-known speakers including activist Gina Miller, United States Senator Ted Cruz, and journalist Christina Lamb.

Gina Miller initiated the court case R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, which ruled that the Government could not withdraw from the European Government without an act of Parliament. She also successfully overturned the prorogation of Parliament by Boris Johnson in 2019.

The lineup of speakers also includes Jeb Bush, who ran against Ted Cruz in the Republican primary which would eventually elect Donald Trump to the nomination of the Republican Party. Mr Bush is also the second child of President George H. W. Bush and brother of President George W. Bush. He served as governor of Florida between 1999 to 2007.

Soumya Swaminathan is also due to give an individual talk this term. Soumya is currently the Chief Scientist at the World Health Organisation.

Prue Leith, prominent cooking journalist and host of the Great British Bake off, will also give a talk at the Society.

A number of sports personalities including the Brownlee Brothers, Irish rugby player Brian O’Driscoll, and Daniel Sturridge, are also due to speak.

The Union will also host two presidents this term: Kersti Kaljulaid, the current president of Estonia, and Egils Levits, president of Latvia.

Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the Union has announced that all talks and debates will take place in podcast format in Trinity term. All individual speakers’ talks will be recorded in advance of their release. Debates will be presented in a panel format, with the hosts interviewing speakers one by one, followed by a general discussion. There will be the possibility to submit questions for each event on the Union’s Facebook page. 

The lineup is 40.4% female or gender non-binary, and 40.3% of the speakers are BAME. 71.6% of the term card will be international. The proportion of international speakers is higher than would typically be possible due to the online-only format of the talks.

Other prominent speakers include Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize-winning economist and former chief economist at the World Bank. Mr Stiglitz also chaired the Council of Economic Advisers, the body which advises the President of the United States on economic policy, from 1995 to 1997, serving under President Bill Clinton.

The Union will host twenty panel debates, more than twice as many as were hosted last term. The debates include four in a “COVID-19 Special Series,” which will interrogate a range of topics including the economics of the coronavirus and the marginalised voices of the coronavirus.

Another four debates will be hosted as part of their “Weekend Special” series. These will be released on the weekends in addition to the talks which would traditionally occur on Tuesdays and Thursdays. The Weekend Specials will include a “Chef’s Roundtable” and a talk titled “Demystifying Mindfulness”.

Other topics which will be debated during the term will concern the refugee crisis, the future of Hong Kong and the war in Afghanistan.

The podcasts will be released on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.  

A full list of the speakers this term can be found below, and a PDF of the term card here.

Individual speakers

Winnie Byanyima・Executive director of UNAIDS

Katya Adler・Europe editor at the BBC

Miriam Haley・One of the two main accusers in the trial of Harvey Weinstein

Prue Leith・Judge of the Great British Bake Off

George Foreman・Two-time world heavyweight champion and Olympic gold medal boxer

Brian O’Driscoll・Irish Rugby Union player

Clive Woodward・Former England Rugby Union coach

Ángel Gurría・Secretary-General of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

Gina Miller・Political activist

Joanna Lumley・Actor and model

Marc Randolph・First CEO of Netflix

Soumya Swaminathan・Chief Scientist of the World Health Organisation

Daniel Sturridge・Professional football player

Joshua Wong・Founder of Hong Kong pro-democracy party Demosisto

Ted Cruz・United States Senator of Texas

Jeb Bush・Former Governor of Florida

Mike Schur・Producer and writer of The Office, and co-creator of Parks and Recreation

Judith Heumann・Disability rights activist

Rainn Wilson・Actor, portrayed Dwight Schrute on The Office

Phil Neville・Coach of England women’s football team

President Kersti Kaljulaid ・President of Estonia

Alistair and Jonathan Brownlee・Olympic brother triathletes

Sean Rad・Founder of Tinder

President Egils Levits・President of Latvia

Steve Aoki・American DJ and producer

Missy Franklin・Five-time Olympic medal-winning swimmer

Lindsey Vonn・World Cup winning alpine ski racer

Joseph Stiglitz・American Nobel Prize-winning economist

Opal Tometi・Human rights activist and founder of Black Lives Matter

Christina Lamb・Foreign correspondent at the Sunday Times

Ryan McCarthy・United States Under Secretary of the Army

Loretta Lynch・Former Attorney General of the United States

Christopher Plummer ・Candian actor with a career spanning six decades

Charles Leclerc ・Formula One racing driver

Jane Goodall ・Primatologist and anthropologist 

Debate Speakers

Hong Kong: What Does the Future Hold?

Nathan Law

Eddie Chu

Regina Ip

Amb. Kurt Tong

Russia: Do We Live in Putin’s world?

Amb. Fiona Hill

Arkady Ostrovsky

Alexey Minyaylo

Sir Laurie Bristow

Behind the Bars: How Do We Fix Our prisons?

MiAngel Cody

Dean Stalham

Marcus Bullock

Dyjuan Tatro

Afghanistan: The West’s Lost War?

Matthew Hoh

Marvin Weinbaum

Carlotta Gall

Ben Anderson

Afghanistan: Is Peace a Lost Cause?

Fahrakhunda Naderi

Kathy Gannon

General Sir Richard Barrons

The Rohingya Crisis: Humanity on Trial?

Wai Wai Nu

Dr. Maung Zarni

Kway Win

Latin America in 2020: Another Last Decade?

Maximo Torero

Moisés Naím

Andres Velasco

Helen Mack

The Democratic Party: No Place for Moderates?

Peter Baker

Clare Malone

Justin Bouen

Love Island: Should We Regret the Summer of Love?

Jack Fowler

Amy Hart

Amelia Morris

Malin Andersson

Refugee Crisis: The Moral Failure of Europe?

Notis A. Mitarachi

Joan Clos

Catherine Wollard

Yusra Mardini

Justine Greening 

The Future of Work: Imagining the 21st Century Workplace

John McAfee

William Kerr

Jonathan Rochelle

Prof Kate Kellogg

Prof Nancy Rothbard

India: A Failure of its Founding Fathers’ Vision?

Kanhaiya Kumar

Rajdeep Sardesai

Harish Salve

Indira Jaisingh

The Economics of COVID-19

Jason Furman

Michèle Tertilt

Dr Eric Feigl-Ding

Ian Bremmer

The Marginalised Voices of the Pandemic

Nicole Jacobs

Dr Kamiar Alaei

Paul Farmer

Linda Bauld

COVID-19: A Gatway to Authoritarianism?

Linda Sarsour

Erica Frantz

Rami Khouri

Prof Lawrence Gostin

COVID-19: Finding Solutions

Leana Wen

David Baltimore

Robin Swann

Arthur Caplan

Weekend Special Speakers

The Chefs’ Roundtable

Asma Khan

Ana Ros

Shamil Thakrar

Tim Raue

The Book Club

Chigozie Obioma

Juan Gabriel Vasquez

Joyce Carol Oates

Demystifying Mindfulness

Sharon Salzberg

Amshi Jha

Gelong Thubten

The Comedy Club

Shazia Mirza

Simon Evans

Deborah Frances-White

Samantha Bee

Paul Sinha

Harry Goes to Hollywood

Eleanor Ruxton
-
0
Harry Goes to Hollywood

‘They must pay!’ tweeted an unimpressed Donald Trump at the end of last month. His response to reports that Harry and Meghan are moving to the Los Angeles area reflected the hostility that they have faced both at ‘home’ in the UK and abroad since announcing their split from the Royal Family. This initial hiccup aside, might it be possible for the couple to rescue their fresh start from the negative press?

This move to the US is the best chance of a fresh start they’ve had yet. Unlike the move to Canada, this is not an attempt to secure geographical distance between their family and the Firm. Presumably, they are pursuing work, something which Meghan has already had some success at; this is not a retreat into the Canadian wilderness, but the active pursuit of a productive lifestyle. And in a place where PR means everything, we can assume that the Sussexes’ public image is awaiting a major revamp.

Crucially, what a move to California would offer is an opportunity to re-work the couple’s relationship with the media. Ostensibly, the press knows its place in LA. In theory, the boundaries and roles of photographers and interviewers are clearly defined. They belong at premiers, on red carpets, and outside those venues used for the odd ‘candid’ photo op. 

Yet this is not the reputation that the paparazzi has in practice. In reality, they go out of their way to violate the boundaries we imagine for them. They stalk and harass, with big invasive cameras and even more invasive questions. Whilst this can be a useful, although often resented tool for young actors, musicians and influencers, the Sussexes are not any of these things. Like it or not, they are a unique package, a family, not individuals in the public eye. This makes them all the more interesting to ravenous photographers and makes their situation considerably harder to control. 

It is clear then, that reworking one’s image is no mean feat, and the City of Angels represents something from which Harry and Meghan have supposedly been running since the beginning: visibility. Here in lies the great paradox of Meghan and Harry. This is a couple already trying to avoid scrutiny by turning off Instagram comments after a few ill-judged posts. It is feared that in moving to the LA area, one of the most notoriously image-obsessed places in the world, Meghan and Harry won’t be able to be so selective in their media engagement.

Moreover, the self-presentation of the couple hasn’t always been that successful. Take for example, the infamous South Africa trip. Meghan’s soundbite ‘I am here as a mother, as a woman of colour, and as your sister’, was a strong start in a society struggling to curb acts of violence against women and children. But it was soon overshadowed by the painfully self-serving, ‘not many people have asked if I’m OK’. Perhaps raising awareness about elephants is more their speed.

It was on a trip to Angola that Harry admitted, when asked about his mother’s relationship with the press, ‘Every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash, it takes me straight back.’ In Britain at least, the press knows its place in relation to the Royal Family, how could it not in a post-Diana era? It seems then that Harry and Meghan have fled a relative ‘safe-space’ in favour of the big bad world.

And maybe this is what they want. Nobody can claim- not even the tabloids, try as they might- to know the inner-workings of Meghan and Harry’s mind. Not yet married for two years, the couple are likely still finding their feet. Tarred by a background as privileged as Harry’s, it might take a while for the two to figure out exactly what ‘independence’ means to them. It will likely take even longer for them to establish the perfect, or at least an appropriate relationship with the press. 

If their past record is anything to go by, Harry and Meghan will surely struggle to create a more comfortable dynamic between the hungry paparazzi and royal personalities. Having transferred the management of their public image to a new team in one of the most fame-obsessed cities on earth, this task will only grow harder by the day. As Harry and Meghan get ready to stand alone, it remains to be seen how successful any attempts to revamp their public image will be.

University losses to cost economy £6bn and 60,000 jobs, while Treasury resists bailout

Imogen Duke
-
0
University losses to cost economy £6bn and 60,000 jobs, while Treasury resists bailout

The COVID-19 pandemic and consequent recession will lead to a steep reduction in student numbers, causing a £2.5bn funding “black hole” with dramatic impacts on the wider economy, warns a new report.

Meanwhile, the Treasury is opposing a sector-specific bailout of UK universities, in face of calls for doubled research funding among other detailed measures from Universities UK. The Financial Times reports that this has caused “division in Whitehall” and “objections from senior figures in the university sector,” but that the Treasury is “not receptive to what is viewed as universities’ special pleading.”

The report, by London Economics for the University and College Union, estimates that 30,000 university jobs and a further 32,000 jobs in the wider economy will be lost. The “total economic cost to the country” from direct and indirect changes is expected to be more than £6bn, and “may be much worse… unless there is significant government intervention to support universities through this crisis.”

It estimates that 111,000 fewer UK first-year students and 121,000 fewer international first-year students will start university this year. This means 47% of international first-year students are expected to delay or cancel plans to study in the UK.

The analysis predicts that 91 institutions will be left in a “critical financial position where income only just covers expenditure.” It warns that Universities UK’s recent proposal to allow institutions to recruit up to 5% more students would shift the financial impact onto less wealthy institutions.

The report states that the University of Oxford and the University of Cambridge are “assumed to be the least negatively impacted” when modelling the impact of an economic recession and the pandemic on institutions.

In an economic recession, Oxford and Cambridge are assumed to face the “relatively largest increase” in the number of full-time students and the “smallest decline” in part-time students and international undergraduate students. Deferral rates from UK and international first-year students due to the COVID-19 pandemic are also predicted to be lowest for Oxford and Cambridge.  

However, Oxford is predicted to have a negative net cash inflow from operating activities in 2020-2021, which means a deficit-based on day-to-day operations. This does not consider cash flow from investing and financing activities.

36 institutions, out of a possible 125, are expected to similarly have a negative net cash inflow from operating activities. 91 institutions, almost three-quarters, are expected to have a net cash inflow of <5%, which puts them in a “critical financial position.”

Oxford and Cambridge are predicted to see an average loss of 255 jobs each: similar to the average 240 job losses per institution, but much fewer than the predicted job losses for the second tier of institutions (the 22 other Russell Group members and some other older universities).

The report states that: “While the analysis assumes relatively optimistic outcomes for higher education institutions, in reality, the potential financial impacts may be much worse than those presented here unless there is significant government intervention to support universities through this crisis.”

The UCU says the government must act to protect the income of universities, otherwise it risks inflicting damage to “a sector which will be crucial to the national recovery.”

The Financial Times reports that a cross-departmental meeting last week showed “broad support for a bailout” for the higher education sector, but that “the Treasury refused to be drawn.” The Treasury’s opposition was “confirmed by officials from three Whitehall departments.” A Treasury official said: “We are working with our colleagues at the Department of Education to come up with a sensible and targeted solution.”

UCU general secretary Jo Grady said: “This alarming report shows that university staff and students are now staring over the edge of a cliff and desperately need the government to step in and protect the sector. The government’s own analysis puts universities most at risk of financial pain from the current crisis and this report does not take account of other income losses, such as accommodation or conferencing.

“Our world-renowned universities are doing crucial work now as we hunt for a vaccine and will be vital engines for our recovery both nationally and in towns and cities across the UK. It is vital that the government underwrites funding lost from the fall in student numbers. These are unprecedented times and without urgent guarantees, our universities will be greatly damaged at just the time they are needed most.

“Even with the current unfolding crisis, universities are still itching to compete to recruit students. This analysis shows how Universities UK’s student recruitment proposal simply shifts the financial pain around the sector. What students and staff really need at the moment is the government to stand behind their universities and for institutions to work cooperatively in the wider interest.”

Dr Gavan Conlon, partner at London Economics, said: “Many institutions have a very considerable exposure to international students, and the pandemic will result in a very substantial loss in enrolments and income. Government support of universities is crucial to protect students in the short term and institutional research and teaching capacity in the longer term.

“The proposed student numbers cap will not be enough to avoid an overly competitive market for the remaining pool of applicants, with the impact of this actually being worse for some institutions than the effect of the pandemic itself. Given the expected financial losses across the sector, the government’s response clearly needs to be sufficiently well funded and well planned.

“The vast majority of universities do not have the cash reserves to cover these losses and we would expect no university to exploit the crisis. They need to work with us to protect jobs and the sector.”

Tim Bradshaw, Chief Executive of the Russell Group, said: “The whole Higher Education sector – like almost all others in the UK – is at risk at this unprecedented and challenging time. There are no simple solutions and while our universities play their part in responding to the immediate crisis through research, testing and practical support for the NHS, they are also taking steps to make savings and deliver the best value for every pound they spend.

“To secure long-term sustainability for students and for the UK’s vital research and innovation base, sector-wide support across both teaching and research will be needed to help universities mitigate the disruption caused by COVID-19.”

Oxford University has announced measures to save costs and preserve income streams, including a recruitment freeze, a pilot furlough scheme in six departments, and continued engagement with the government to seek funded extensions to disrupted research.

A Taste of Honey Today

Jade Calder
-
0
A Taste of Honey Today

A Taste of Honey, a play by the Salford-born writer Shelagh Delaney, debuted in 1958 and is widely considered to be a landmark work of 20th century British literature. With the back drop of bleak, working class society in post-war Manchester, and the themes of single mothers, pregnancy out of wedlock, abortion, interracial relationships, and homosexuality (a decade before it was legalised in Britain), it is difficult to think of a literary work, the rest of the oeuvre of ‘kitchen sink drama’ included, which was more against the grain than the accepted social norms in contemporary British society. In particular, the enduring aspect of the play is the sheer realism of the characters, including the strong mother-daughter character duo who dominate the play’s story. This achievement was made all the more remarkable when one considers that Delaney was a mere nineteen year old factory worker when the play was released into the world.

A Taste of Honey would go on to have a seismic and readily identifiable impact, not least with the repeated National Theatre revivals and its place as a regular fixture of provincial local theatres (or so it would appear in the north). Morrissey, the lyricist of the iconic Mancunian band The Smiths, notoriously plundered lines from Delaney’s works with wild abandon for his songs in the 1980s.

Elsewhere, it was a formative inspiration for the Salfordian television soap Coronation Street, and other works in a similar vein point to how important the stage and screen can be with regards to challenging social values. Like Delaney, Bradford’s own playwright Andrea Dunbar had much made of her ‘unconventional’ (read: working class) background as a writer, but was another teenage prodigy whose play The Arbor followed similar themes of class, motherhood and race at a time when one of the most popular figures in British life was Enoch Powell. It, like A Taste of Honey, was an instant success. For another example, Cathy Come Home, although a product of those from more comfortable backgrounds, provided a sympathetic illustration of poverty and homelessness which catalysed founding of the homeless charity Crisis in the 1960s.

And so, at least for a brief time in the hazy days of post-war ‘meritocratic’ Britain, theatre could have been a vanguard of change in cultural attitudes. Thus, I cynically arched my eyebrows at the recent suggestion by the stage director of Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s hit Fleabag, Vicky Jones, that the show ‘felt like a tipping point for feminism’. Once I had recovered from my automatic aversion to middle class ‘peak Guardian’ social commentary, however, I began to realise that it is difficult to think of a stage production (and television show, of course) which has captured the public’s attention quite as much in recent years. Perhaps there are reasons for this.

As improbable as Delaney’s success was in the 1950s, a similar success story is difficult to envisage today. It has been often repeated elsewhere that the costs of training in the creative industries can mean that an artistic career can be untenable for those from lower income backgrounds, leaving cultural milieus to be populated by more economically secure classes. State schools, when faced with ever sharper cuts to funding, have to focus their efforts away from the ‘softer’ creative arts when faced with difficult decisions. Furthermore, the London-centric nature of the media, coupled with insufficient Arts Council funding for communities compared to those in continental Europe, is hardly fertile ground for creative output throughout the country. All of this adds to the enduring (no matter how much we try to pretend otherwise) notions of class which pervade our habits of cultural consumption. Whilst my friends and I would regularly attend music concerts and art house cinemas relatively cheaply, the theatre was a much less obvious choice of venue for us to visit, perhaps due to some unspoken belief that the theatre was a more ‘middle class’ setting. The Rocky Horror Picture Show aside, we would only tend to step foot inside a theatre if we were on a school trip. Being exposed to A Taste of Honey in my early teens, however, proved to me that this preconception needn’t be the case, and that theatre could be open to everyone.

I do not doubt that there are countless working class, female, ethnic minority, queer (and so forth) would-be writers with stories to tell, but we need sympathetic figures throughout the creative arts industries who can give these writers a fair hearing and take a punt on their work. Sadly, however, our television screens are more likely to have a gamut of reality TV and ‘poverty porn’ programmes which intend to exploit and demonise working class people, largely because they are a proven formula for popularity.

So perhaps the Fleabag director was not wholly misguided when she stated that her production had initiated new conversations about feminism; it represented a white, middle class world perspective which could easily be accepted by the cultural establishment, and thus became an obvious focal point for public feminist discourse. Of course, it goes without saying that the artistic merits of the show are not at all diminished because it has represented that perspective.

That being said, the progress since the 1950s in diversifying and extending the parameters of what could be considered to be a critically and commercially successful work has not been as great as it could have been. There remains an inherent snobbery and numerous financial barriers against writers from minority or non-traditional backgrounds. And Fleabag will never speak to me and my life experiences as much as A Taste of Honey was able to (as awkward as that comparison is), but I suspect that for many people the opposite is true. That is fine, obviously, and I’m sure I could watch the show and appreciate the talent behind it. But we all benefit when theatre is a platform for creatives from a wide range of backgrounds.

1...484485486...2,514Page 485 of 2,514

Support Student Journalism

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

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

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

Website by James Ashley