Tuesday, May 13, 2025
Blog Page 506

Review: ‘American Dirt’

0

There was high expectation placed in American Dirt, what with Oprah Winfrey evangelising on Apple TV and a flood of celebrity endorsements on Twitter and television. The aggressive marketing campaign didn’t even peak with the many pictures and appraisals from prominent Latinx actresses and minor authors. It went further, with claims of it being “The One”, and comparisons to Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. Sandra Cisernos even seems to think it “not simply the great American novel, it is the great novel of las Americas”.

This “great American novel” follows Lydia and her son on the run from a vengeful drug cartel, on their journey towards safety. Her quiet suburban life as a bookseller unravels when she unwittingly befriends the leader of the improbably named drug cartel los jardineros (the gardeners). Without knowing who he is, she befriends him, reads his poetry (it gets worse), until her journalist husband uncovers who her new friend really is. When his exposé piece results in the suicide of the boss’s daughter, retaliation comes in the form of the massacre of Lydia’s family at a quinceañera. What follows is an attempt to humanise the emigration process, but it reads instead as a bland pastiche of stereotypes and a drama better off in a telenovela.

The dialogue and pacing is quite terse and quick, as befits a thriller. What weighs it down, and has provoked the anger of most reviewers, is the needless inclusion of what has been termed “google-translated Spanish” into every bit of the novel. Sentences are absurdly long, for example: ‘manned by gangs of narcotraficantes, or soldiers who may also be narcotraficantes, and policemen who may also be in league with narcotraficantes’, and the novel is interspersed with needless chunks of dialogue in which characters address each other in untranslated Spanish for one part of the conversation and then continue in English. And then the odd Spanish word, dotted around pages of English speech, ‘my sweet son, so intelligent, so guapo’. This may have been a bid to lend the novel more authenticity, but instead it contributes to the many stereotypical elements that pervade the book.

The characterisation is similarly flat, with the novel populated by a series of one-dimensional characters. A degree of ventriloquism is inevitable in thrillers – one need only think of the thinly concealed propaganda of Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan books or the law-and-order police dramas manufactured by Patterson. Far from the searing character portraits of Tom Joad and Jim Casy that give the tragedy of the Grapes of Wrath its depth, American Dirt offers only thin stereotypes. In this case, the Catholic priest harbouring immigrants, the rapist narco, twin sisters on the run from domestic violence, and further stock characters that make up the “Mexican” in the American popular imagination. Even the ridiculousness of “La Lechuza/ The Owl”, the bloodthirsty, creepy poetry-writing leader of the cartel is far from the worst example of this. The missed opportunity here is to give an identity to the sheer number of people who cross the border and carve out a life in a hostile America, or have died trying. Far from refuting Trump’s rhetoric of hate, the novel perpetuates stereotypes, such as that of Mexico standing in for the whole of Latin America. The entire continent is yet again presented in the binary of violence and drug cartels. 

The improbable, if sometimes blithe plot is another victim here. One of the few good things about the book is an attempt to lay out the geography of the route to the US, especially the “train of death”, “La Bestia”, the infamous cargo train perched on by migrants to get to the border. It gets worse from there. Cummins manages to reduce what would otherwise be a terrifying and profound journey to a series of cliff-hangers and monotonous flash-backs worthy of the crappiest of Netflix series, with lines such as: ‘without a thought in her head except Luca, she jumped.’

Despite the best efforts of magazine and newspaper owners to censor them, a raft of critical reviews, spearheaded by prominent chicana author Myriam Gurba have protested against many aspects of the book. Over 120 writers, including Mexico’s leading novelist Valeria Luiselli called on Oprah’s book club (the gatekeeper to ‘making it’) to boycott the novel. Accusations of racism, cultural appropriation have flown around. Targeted first against the claims of ‘representation’ and an authentic account of the immigrant experience, to the poor quality of the writing. Cummins’s publishers have had to cancel a nationwide book-tour citing threats of violence. The problems seem to stem from whether Cummins, a self-identifying white woman with Puerto Rican roots, has the right to tell the story of America’s Latin American migrants, as well as the quality of the book, and accusations of making profit from other people’s suffering. This is not helped by the fact of the hefty seven-figure publishing advance, or the inevitable schmaltzy Hollywood movie. Or even the ‘border-themed’ launch party, with decorations of barbed wire and flowers. 

The reaction surrounding this book is yet another symbol in a longstanding culture war. At best it can be described as a marketing bid gone wrong, a cack-handed approach to wanting to initiate a public discussion. Again, publishers knew better than Latinx writers as to the Latin-American experience and identity and any of their criticisms have been silenced. The ‘controversy’ includes the usual amount of celebrities hand-wringing, giving and withdrawing endorsements and punditry that seems to be the staple of American cultural life. What began as an over-ambitiously marketed thriller has degenerated into a perfect example of muzzling minorities and white-saviourism.

The role of fiction to criticise and hold a mirror to society is a tradition in which all the great and minor novelists have taken part. And in a nation such as America, with a politics and society ranging from hypocritical to sheer tragedy, biting social critique is all the more urgent. Cummins does this in her own minor way. The impact this will have on shaping the view of Latin American immigrants for good or for ill will be there, and there are good intentions behind it. What crosses the line is the blatant attempt at money-making, the artificial engineering of ‘a classic’, and the reality that Latinx authors who do write these stories just don’t get the same platform. It seems that American corporate capitalism can reduce any spirit or principle to the calculus of profit.

Oxford City Council maintains tax reduction

0

Oxford City Council has unanimously voted to maintain its council tax reduction (CTR) scheme into 2020/2021 as part of its commitment to tackle poverty and inequality in the city.

The measure supports households with the costs of council tax, allowing claimants on low income or benefits to have their bill reduced by up to 100%.

Households on weekly incomes of less than £131.99 in 2020 can receive a full exemption from the tax, while households earning over £398 per week become ineligible for any reduction.

Since the national council tax benefit was abolished by the government in 2013, councils have been in charge of designing and implementing their own CTR schemes.

Lack of support from the central government has made the cost of the program unfeasible for many councils who have had their budgets cut. Oxford City Council is one of the few remaining local authorities in England to opt to continue fully funding CTR.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) found in 2019, that nearly 90% of English councils had made cuts to their CTR schemes since the government began to phase out revenue support grants for councils. The most common change has been the elimination of the 100% reduction; two fifths of councils have now increased minimum payments to at least 20%.

The program has been estimated by the council to cost £1.6 million in 2019/20, rising to £1.7 million in 2020/21.

Marie Tidball, cabinet member for supporting local communities, said in a statement: “Oxford City Council is one of a small handful of councils to retain our council tax reduction scheme at 100% for working age households.

“This demonstrates our commitment to preventing homelessness and our support for financially vulnerable people in our communities. The 100% discount benefits more than 1,000 households in Oxford. This provides a significant financial benefit for people who have suffered the most from the cumulative impact of policies like welfare reform. Government funding cuts mean that three million more households across England now have to pay some council tax or a greater proportion of their bill than in 2013. I’m proud that Oxford is bucking that trend and that we’re doing what we can to protect people who can least afford to pay the price of austerity.”

Twin city Wroclaw expresses friendship with Oxford

0

Oxford’s twinned city Wrocław has responded to the UK’s exit from the European Union with a display of friendship. Students of the Polish city accompanied mayor Jacek Sutryk to raise a Union Jack in the city’s Market Square on Friday.

The Oxford City Council took to Twitter to thank those who showed “their friendship with Oxford citizens.” Leader of the Council Susan Brown tweeted that ‘ties will remain strong’ between the two cities, whilst the Lord Mayor will be visiting Wrocław and other twin cities later this month to show unity and solidarity.

Oxford residents are encouraged to send the Mayor messages of friendship to share with the cities. Speaking exclusively to the Cherwell, the Council said “We are very grateful to the Mayor and citizens of Wrocław for their demonstration of support on Brexit day. The response online shows how much this gesture was appreciated by people here, and particularly the Polish community.”

The Council has also responded with a similar display of friendship. Having flown the EU flag above Oxford Town Hall on Friday, the flags of the five EU twin cities with be raised on consecutive days this week. Oxford’s other EU twin cities are Bonn in Germany, Grenoble in France, Leiden in the Netherlands, and Padua in Italy.

Each of these towns have released statements expressing their desire to maintain close ties with Oxford.

The mayor of Grenoble, France says: “The strong ties that unite Oxford and Grenoble are precious. We shall keep them growing!”

Meanwhile, Wrocław citizens had their say on Brexit in an interview by BBC Oxford. One described it as “heart-breaking” and another said, “for me being part of the EU is fantastic.”

When asked about Polish citizens in the UK, a Wrocław resident described that “Whereas before they were happy there, now because of the overall sentiment, and the overall approach of some people, they are thinking that they’re not really wanted there’.”

Despite Brexit, the Council is committed to retaining strong ties with Wrocław. A spokesperson said “we will continue to strengthen ties with our twin cities post Brexit, and do not see any reason for Brexit to affect these relationships.”

University city Wrocław is the fourth biggest in Poland and has been twinned with Oxford since 2018. The two cities have participated in cultural exchanges and one of Wrocław’s famous gnomes can be found in the Covered Market.

Oxford has eight twin cities, including three outside of the EU: Perm in Russia, Nicaragua’s former capital León, and Ramallah, the administrative capital of Palestine.

Mansfield displays anti-Brexit menu

0

Mansfield College had a topical Brexit themed menu for lunch on the day the UK left the EU.

Entitled “We didn’t vote for it lunch”, the menu prefaced every menu item with a pro-EU comment.

The main courses included highlights such as “Where’s David Cameron now?… Squash and mixed bean casserole” and “Russia’s manipulation of Facebook data… Salted beef on bagels.”

The sides continued the theme, offering “Human rights… peas” and “Free movement of people… mushy peas.”

The menu was picked up by a journalist from The Spectator, who wrote “perhaps unsurprisingly, Britain’s departure from the EU isn’t going down well in Oxford.”

The menu is one of many examples of Oxford’s dismay at leaving the EU.

The Vice Chancellor of Oxford sent an email to all students on the day the UK left the EU saying: “Many of us hoped this day would never come but the majority of those who voted in the 2016 Referendum felt otherwise.

“We now have no choice but to make the best of the situation in which we find ourselves.

“It is, perhaps, worth remembering that this University thrived long before we joined the EU and we will continue to thrive after our departure, however reluctantly we leave.”

A candlelit vigil was held in the city centre to say goodbye to the EU on Brexit Day.

In the 2016 referendum, Oxford voted to remain by 70%.

Oxford’s heartfelt farewell to EU

0

On the evening of Brexit, pro-EU groups organised send-off events in central Oxford, involving songs, speeches, and candlelit vigils. 

A candlelit ceremony outside the Town Hall began the evening, with speeches from Will Hutton, Principal of Hertford College, and Anneliese Dodds, MP for Oxford East. 

Crowds then moved inside to hear speeches from local leaders and activists, including Layla Moran, MP for Oxford West and Abingdon. 

The meeting ended as the audience sang ‘Ode to Joy’, the anthem of the European Union, which was also being played by the ‘Horns of Plenty’ jazz band outside on St Aldates. Many were adorned with creative EU-flag accessories. 

A candlelit vigil was held in Bonn Square from 10:45pm. Local leaders and event organisers, including the Lord Mayor of Oxford and Labour city councillor John Tanner, gave speeches about the sadness of the day and hopes for the future. 

The Mayor told the crowds: “it’s really important in times like this that we show solidarity,” announcing the train journey he is about to take over Europe. He encouraged Oxford citizens to send him messages of support to take to Oxford’s twin cities. 

One Oxfordian played a self-composed song on the accordion to say goodbye, with memorable lyrics such as: ‘Should we offer thanks to the Daily Mail, as we sail away on a barge with Nigel Farage?”

11pm, when the UK officially left the EU, was marked by the crowd signing ‘Ode to Joy’ again, waving EU flags, and holding torchlights and candles. The mood was sombre but defiant. 

There were some opposing shouts from passers-by. One heckler, a ‘Boris-supporting Remainer’, told Cherwell: “They’re not taking into account the views of other people… I care about the future generations.” 

The event was covered by international media, including AP-TV, Television France, and BBC Oxford. 

This week, the council has been flying the city flags of Oxford’s five EU twin cities: Bonn in Germany, Grenoble in France, Leiden in the Netherlands, Padua in Italy, and Wrocław in Poland. 

Councillor Susan Brown, City Council Leader, says: “We’re flying the flags of our EU twin cities as a symbol of our ongoing ties, a sign of friendship and co-operation for our futures. I know the Oxford city flag will also be flying in Europe today, and I’m proud of the partnerships we’ve built.”

The mayors of Bonn, Grenoble, Leiden, and Padua have each released statements expressing commitment to ties with Oxford and confidence that strong relationships will continue. 

Moran takes aim at “Dickensian” homelessness law

0

Layla Moran, the Liberal Democrat MP for Oxford West and Abingdon, has moved to abolish the Vagrancy Act in the new parliament.

The Act makes it a criminal offence to sleep rough, leaving homeless people open to arrest by the police. The nearly two-hundred-year-old Act was passed in 1824; it has already been repealed in Scotland and Northern Ireland but remains in force in England and Wales.

Regarding her attempt to scrap the Act, Moran said: “Even one person sleeping rough in 2020 is a disgrace, and repealing the Dickensian Vagrancy Act is the first step on a journey to taking a more compassionate and holistic approach to homelessness.

“In Oxford and elsewhere, we’re fining the homeless instead of helping them.

“With this Government’s blessing, we could bring back my Vagrancy (Repeal) Bill, introduced in the last Parliament, and finally scrap the Act.

“If there was a sizeable amount of political will to try and spend £500,000 making Big Ben bong for Brexit, then I firmly believe that there must be the will to repeal this heartless and outdated law.

“This campaign was first raised by Oxford students, and I won’t stop until the Vagrancy Act is repealed, either through my Bill or other means.”

Moran has highlighted recent statistics from the charity Crisis, which show that 71% of people believe arresting people for sleeping rough represents a waste of police time, while a majority support the view that sleeping rough is not a crime at all.

Moran’s effort to repeal the Act rests on the willingness of the Conservative government to support the measure. The approval of Robert Jenrick, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, will be essential in achieving this.

Speaking in Parliament, Moran acknowledged this, stating: “I know the Secretary of State is keen to make his mark, and I’d like to think we’re giving him a golden opportunity to do so.”

Members of the government did not respond to Cherwell’s request for comment.

Moran penned a piece in Politics Home last week, in which she laid out her case for repealing the Act, and explained why the government has so far failed to do so.

Moran wrote: “We will also repeal it this year because it’s easy to do. I don’t mean to sound crass, but I just cannot understand why an ambitious politician like Robert Jenrick doesn’t want to make his mark and scrap the Act. A simple action that shows you’re taking homelessness seriously.

“And to make it really easy for him, my Vagrancy (Repeal) Bill that I introduced in the last parliament can be brought back, with his blessing, in a heartbeat and become law. I stand ready.

“So, there’s the public will, increasing political will, and it’s easy to do. Then why haven’t we scrapped the Act yet?

“Because it hasn’t been a priority for the Government, who insist on waiting for the results of their review before deciding what to do, despite the incredible team at Crisis having put all the evidence together into a single report for them. Even the police in the West Midlands and the Metropolitan Police have now committed to moving away from using the Act. It’s time to go the whole hog.

“This Government has said a lot in the past few months about those left behind, about the domestic agenda. Homelessness will surely be up there, a priority. Well, I hope so.”

She also added: “That’s another reason I firmly believe we will succeed in scrapping the Vagrancy Act this year: a growing number of parliamentarians can’t avoid seeing what’s happening on our own doorsteps, and I plan to shout from the rooftops to make them look.

“Because what are we doing if we can’t even help those who are literally at our feet?”

Moran has previously attempted to repeal the Vagrancy legislation, introducing the Vagrancy Act (Repeal) Bill in March 2018, during the last Parliament. Her effort was blocked from advancing through the parliamentary process by Conservative MPs.

Moran said at the time – “I am shocked, if not surprised, that the Government have blocked debate on this legislation that would change the law to end the criminalisation of rough sleepers.

“I’ll be keeping up the pressure on the Government and will continue to fight to change the law.

“We must end the situation where homeless people can still be arrested and dragged before the courts using a heartless, Dickensian law dating back to 1824 just because they don’t have anywhere to spend the night.”

Moran’s move to repeal the Act this year, comes after she significantly increased her majority in the election to 8,943, up from 816 in 2017. There has also been speculation that Moran will mount a bid for leader of the Liberal Democrats, after Jo Swinson, the previous leader, lost her seat in December.

St John’s alumni threaten to withhold donations

0

Alumni of St John’s College, Oxford, are threatening to withhold donations unless it commits to divestment from fossil fuel companies.

This follows last week’s events which saw students occupying St John’s front quad to protest against investments.

The five-day student occupation ended with organisers promising to “continue to hold the College, and the University as a whole to account.”

Hundreds of graduates have signed a letter accusing the college of “dismissing” the action taken by students, urging them to “cut all ties” with fossil fuel companies.

St John’s was further criticised for its treatment of student protesters during their occupation.

The letter, sent to the Principal Bursar Professor Parker and the college’s President, says: “In light of your troubling response to this peaceful occupation and continued refusal to align your endowment with climate justice, as alumni and alumnae, we cannot in good faith donate to St John’s, the University of Oxford, or any college which has not made a divestment commitment at this time.”

The wealthiest college in Oxford, St John’s currently invests around £8 million in BP and Shell, two of the corporations most guilty for worldwide ecological destruction.

Both the protest and the letter come shortly after Balliol College committed to divesting from fossil fuels “as far and as fast as is practicable.”

Balliol joins four other colleges (Wadham, Wolfson, Oriel and St Hil- da’s), as well as over 70 UK universities in divesting.

Julia Peck, who initiated the alumni open letter, told the Independent: “I think this occupation will be a watershed moment. It comes at a really crucial time when student campaigners are actively taking divestment proposals to the highest decision- making bodies of the university.

“This is a moment where Oxford leadership have clearly seen the amount of public support among the students, the faculty and the alumni. This kind of thing has never happened at an Oxford college.

“Now the heat has really turned up on the colleges who have their own endowments. They can make just as strong a statement about aligning themselves as climate justice as can the university.”

Direct Action for Divestment (DAD), a large group of students from across Oxford University, set up camp last Wednesday in protest of St John’s College’s investments in fossil fuel companies. Their exit statement read: “During our occupation, the College disabled the keys of St. John’s students seen to be assisting the protest. They have prevented us from bringing food, hot water, and blankets in from outside, and even responded to our demands with trivialising suggestions that the College switch off the central heating.

“In contrast to the antagonism from College administration, Oxford has united in a show of heartening support and solidarity. Students inside the College have brought food and hot tea; tutors have made our case to senior College officials; alumni have spoken out in support of our cause. We would like to express our deepest gratitude, and crucially to thank college staff for their understanding. This gives us confidence that the discussions around divestment will continue after we leave, on every level of college life.”

“Yesterday, our representatives met with President Maggie Snowl- ing to discuss our demands. The President acknowledged that our occupation had brought divestment to the top of the agenda, and we are pleased to say that she has promised to make some small steps in the right direction. She agreed to increase student representation in their Ethical Investments Working Group, and will no longer invite BP and Shell employees to advise on College investment practices. Finally, she said that the working group plans to put forth a recommendation to the Governing Body by the end of the year – two years after St. John’s students first raised divestment.”

“In our five-day occupation, we brought divestment to the forefront of people’s minds. We have reignited a conversation not only within St. John’s, but across the University. We will continue to hold the College accountable throughout the divestment process. We are glad that the College has recognised the importance of this issue. We hope that the College will continue to make this a priority. If they do not, we will be back,” they added.

St John’s College said in a statement on their website: ” Thank you for the open letter concerning the recent demonstration in the Front Quad of St John’s College.

“In response we would like to tell you what we are currently doing with regard to the College’s investments, to detail the actions we are taking to lessen the environmental impact of the College’s activities, and to explain what we did in relation to last week’s demonstration.

“You will appreciate that we have received a lot of correspondence following on from last week’s protest at St John’s and, it is fair to say, the views expressed have been varied on both sides of the debate.

“We can assure you that, like many of our students, the President, Bursar and Fellows of St. John’s are deeply concerned about climate change – indeed some are directly working on aspects of the subject.

“The College is conscious of many calls for divestment. We are, of course, asking ourselves how to move in the right direction and to identify the resources necessary to bring about change. We hope to be able to apply those skills that we do have to ensuring incremental progress towards a better future for the College, its students and, we hope, the wider community.

“We set up a working group in autumn 2019 made up of Fellows and students. This is conducting a wide-ranging review of current policies, sustainable finance and ‘intentional’ investing – how trustees might reflect their charity’s aims and values in their investment policies.

“This work will, of course, continue and we expect to bring recommendations to Governing Body by the end of the academic year. The College is working with all the colleges in the University of Oxford on sustainability.

“We take environmental concerns seriously, both in the refurbishment of our existing buildings (the oldest of which date back to the fifteenth century) and in the planning of new buildings, such as our newly opened Study Centre.”

” The College is in a similar position to much of the UK and many other countries in that it is not immediately possible to move all the College’s buildings to combustion-free sources of heating. There are other changes that the College is implementing which will make important incremental carbon-reducing contributions, notably the replacement of existing gas boilers by modern energy efficient boilers, better glazing and better insulation all contribute. These are routine steps in every building or maintenance project and the College is very grateful to the workforce in planning and implementing these improvements.

“It is absolutely crucial in our view, that divestment does not become a divisive debate. Responding specifically to your comments about the College’s approach last week, the majority of the demonstrators who occupied the College were not members of St John’s and could not be in a position to speak on behalf of the entire student community of the College. We would like to assure you that the protesters were treated courteously whilst camping in Front Quad and that the only security measures taken were to protect the safety of College and its members.”

Coronavirus: Students sent home from year abroad in China

0

The outbreak of coronavirus in China has forced Oxford undergraduates to return to Britain from their year abroad.

The majority of Oxford students, who had been in China on their year abroad, have now returned to the UK.

Students, all of whom study at university in China rather than gaining employment, have had their studies suspended.

Term was supposed to begin on Monday 17th February, but this original date has been postponed until further notice.

With the Chinese universities closed indefinitely, Oxford University is setting up classes for second-year Chinese students, so that the interruption to their education is limited.

Concerning coronavirus, the University’s official advice focuses on harassment and discrimination. 

In the latest update on the website, the University said: “The health, welfare and safety of students and staff is the number one priority for the University. Oxford has a strong history of welcoming Chinese students and staff to the UK, and they are an integral part of our international community.

“We understand that students and staff may be worried about friends and family members in China, and our thoughts go to all those affected by this outbreak.

“We ask that students and staff support their fellow friends and colleagues at this difficult time. Harassment and discrimination of any kind, including racial harassment, are totally unacceptable at the University.

“Any instances of harassment should be reported immediately either to staff harassment advisors, or to college welfare leads in the case of students.”

Coronavirus,  a new strain of coronavirus first identified in Wuhan City, was declared a public health emergency of international concern at the end of January. 

The UK Chief Medical Officers have raised the risk to the public from low to moderate, and there have now been two confirmed cases in the UK.

Despite this, the Government maintains that the risk to individuals in the UK has not changed. It continues to advise only precautionary measures to prevent the spread of infection.

As of 5th February, a total of 468 UK tests have concluded, of which 466 were negative and 2 positive. 

Of the 1,466 passengers and 95 staff who arrived in the UK from Wuhan between 10th to 24th January, 162 passengers and 53 crew have left the UK and the remaining 1304 passengers are not outside the incubation period. 

In a statement, the four UK Chief Medical Officers on novel coronavirus said: “We have been working in close collaboration with international colleagues and the World Health Organization to monitor the situation in China and around the world.

“In light of the increasing number of cases in China and using existing and widely tested models, the 4 UK Chief Medical Officers consider it prudent for our governments to escalate planning and preparation in case of a more widespread outbreak.

“For that reason, we are advising an increase of the UK risk level from low to moderate. This does not mean we think the risk to individuals in the UK has changed at this stage, but that government should plan for all eventualities.

“As we have previously said, it is likely there will be individual cases and we are confident in the ability of the NHS in England, Scotland and Wales and HSC in Northern Ireland to manage these in a way that protects the public and provides high quality care.”

Fresher fashion – the conflict between comfort, identity and productivity

0

A nervous incoming fresher in early October, I can remember trawling through Oxford student articles desperate for fashion do’s and don’ts before I packed the world’s largest suitcase and unpacked it into my college’s smallest room. The conclusion I reached was vague and unsatisfying. Utterly dismayed, I read page after page telling me that the standard look was a hoodie and jeans, or God forbid, trackies, before glancing at my growing pile of ‘outfits’ in mild panic. “Stash” was a foreign and equally distressing concept, because “what if I don’t suit a puffer jacket?!”. When you put something on in the morning, (or the afternoon if it’s the Friday after a particularly heavy Bridge), you want it to say the right thing about you. My wardrobe at the time screamed “casual sixth form dress code and the odd vintage shop success” but I didn’t know what it would say to the potential friends and flirts I’d be meeting. Statistically, your impression of someone is gained within the first 10 seconds of meeting them – so if you don’t speak fast, your outfit will do the talking for you, or so I feared! In fact, I think we all had a fresher fashion panic in first term – trying not to look like we were trying as hard as we almost certainly were. Managing your wardrobe can feel especially tricky in a place where often what you wear can associate you with a certain group. It may be literal, like a puffer jacket with your college crest on it, or it could be being told you dress like an English student… whatever that means? Arriving in Oxford, I was scared the way I dressed would decide my friends for me.

Let’s be honest, aside from the balls, Oxford gives us no real reason to make an effort. Even clubbing I’ve neglected my bodysuits and glittery skirts for a simple crop top and black jeans. But when it comes to your everyday wardrobe, there are two basic tribes. There’s those who can happily go about their day in their most casual clothing and those (like me) who like dressing up too much. (Though I am now firmly wedded to my puffer jacket.) I mean, I love to be comfy (you’re reading an article written by a girl who brings slippers to a house party) but I personally never feel further from comfortable than when I leave my room in loose-fitting, oversized clothes.

 I actually think that those of you out there who do are incredibly confident individuals with a ‘don’t give a’ attitude of your own, even if it’s something you’ve never really thought about. Especially if it’s something you’ve never thought about – because God knows we’ve got bigger worries here than how we dress for the library and you aren’t wasting precious moments of your life on ‘what to wear’. You don’t need your wardrobe to talk for you and you probably also look really great in a hoodie. But when I’ve woken up late for a Saturday morning brunch, I have to really psych myself up to leave my room in trackies, because while I don’t want to miss the hash browns, it’s still easy to feel vulnerable without my armour on.

The second Oxford fashion tribe is the one I find myself in. I’ve always loved dressing up. Imelda Marquez has nothing on my growing collection of quirky soles and I’ve quickly gained a reputation here for always being seen in heels. Partly this has come from an attempt to overcome my own insecurities, because making an effort with my appearance has been my armour when social situations have been less than straightforward, and it’s a hard habit to shake. When you’re wearing a bold outfit that requires a bit of attitude, you’ve got no choice but to hold your head up a little higher. What makes me comfortable in the clothes I choose to wear is that they are ‘me’. Vanity aside, because I’ll be the first to admit that vanity is involved in my decision not to dress down, I’m at my least productive when I’m in my comfies. Putting on something that makes me feel good is also what puts me in the right mindset to work, whether I’m sitting at my own desk or braving the many eyes of the Bodleian. Feeling good about myself isn’t just something that comes from what I’m wearing, but in a cute skirt and top I feel far more ready to face the day. Not to mention if I’m wearing anything vaguely pyjama-like my desire to nap increases tenfold.

‘Enclothed cognition’ is the idea that wearing specific articles of clothing, especially if they have a certain meaning to you, can influence your psychological state. I associate my trackies and oversized hoodies with a night in, Netflix and maybe a face mask, which is a very different vibe to the one I need in the College library the week of Collections. But if you’re used to being cosy when you work, you can resist your basic urges to nap and you’ve got the banging self-confidence to rock any look, however casual, then by all means take to the streets in those trackies. I wish I had the confidence to!

But really, wear whatever you want to. Whether you give a monkey’s about your appearance or not, there’s a deeper relevance to what we wear that shouldn’t be ignored. An outfit you’re completely comfortable in gives you confidence and the ability to work productively. Whether you wear trackies and trainers or a cute dress and heels, we should all wear what we wear for the same basic reason; it makes us happy. People may assume things about you from what you wear (I’m actually a History student?) but there’s only so much a funky skirt or even a really loud jumper can say about you. Ultimately, people are going to like you for who you are, not who you wear.

Marika Hackman and queer sexuality in music

0

Bolshy, brazen and unapologetically sexual – in Oxford, the first group of people to spring to mind from this description is likely to be a post-crewdate rowing/rugby club tearing up the Bridge dancefloor. How about in music?

Discussions of the objectification and empowerment that coexist within women*’s expressions of sexuality in the music industry have proliferated in recent years, and platforms such as Cosmopolitan have increased popular awareness of sexual pleasure from a perspective not necessarily imbued with the male gaze. Although efforts are often made to make these discussions more inclusive, women*’s sexuality in mainstream music is still overwhelmingly filtered through a heteronormative lens. Increasingly, however, there are exceptions. Amongst many others, a standout is Marika Hackman’s third studio album, Any Human Friend.

Over the years, Hackman’s sound has metamorphosised – from ethereal folk on EPs Sugar Blind and That Iron Taste in 2013 to snarky, petulant grunge on 2017’s I’m Not Your Man. Her sound transforms again on 2019 album Any Human Friend, an indie-pop powerhouse which testifies to her determination to not to be contained or constrained. In the past, she has expressed frustration with her music being pigeonholed, but clearly does not shy away from calling a spade a spade herself. A brief glance at the track-list is enough to reveal one of the core themes of the album: sex. Specifically, queer sex.

Gritty, unapologetic and at times lyrically uncomfortable for the casual listener, Any Human Friend rides an emotional rollercoaster through the year after the end of a long-term relationship and the trysts, triumphs and trials that come with it. The album explores topics including detachment and commitment in sexual relationships (‘come undone’), frustration with feeling like someone’s experiment (‘conventional ride’), and masturbation (‘hand solo’). Aside from horny, there are songs for every term-time mood – from sardonic self-pity (‘send my love’) to watching your mates go off the rails on a night out (‘blow’) and desire to find genuine connection (‘any human friend’). Sound familiar?

Although the themes of the album feed into contemporary conversations on gender, equality and sexuality, this is accomplished in a way which is fundamentally personal and honest. Partly out of tongue-in-cheek intention, mostly as a side-effect of its subject matter, the record challenges stereotyping of women* as polite and accommodating and reclaims ideas often used to put them down. Merchandise for the album has included a t-shirt with fried eggs for boobs (catch me rocking this in the Rad Cam) and a pair of big ugly y-fronts with ‘Attention Whore’ stamped on the waistband (catch me rocking these if you’re lucky). Hackman is not afraid to bare her soul, and other parts too – the album cover, inspired by a photography series focusing on new mothers, features her in mock-maternity underwear and holding a piglet in lieu of a newborn. The photo is unedited and, in tune with the album, a refreshing expression of vulnerability, imperfection and all the blips and blemishes being human entails – take it or leave it. At its heart, that’s what Any Human Friend is about. In an interview with NME, Hackman says she wanted to create a space where people could see and embrace all the messy, unpleasant and confusing parts of themselves and not feel ashamed.

Sure, we’ve come a long way from the days when a young Mary Lambert was excited to hear Weezer’s Teenage Dirtbag on the radio, thinking it was a lesbian love song, but it’s still harder for queer people to find music which speaks to their everyday experience. Especially stuff which doesn’t feel gimmicky or superficial. Although increasing LGBTQ+ representation of all kinds in music should be welcomed, the emphasis on marketability and gaining “woke” points can leave many queer people feeling a little alienated by what is perceived as simply band-wagoning or pride-month-esque rainbow capitalism.

I was introduced to this album by one of my housemates when it was released in August; since over half us identified as LGBTQ+, its confessional refrains soon became part of the furniture. I remember a conversation about the lyrics of ‘all night’ with a different housemate, a queer person nearly a decade older than me. Almost bashful, she said she couldn’t remember ever hearing a song where a woman was so sexually explicit about other women. Hackman writes first and foremost from experience, rather than explicitly as activism, and perhaps it is precisely this – rather than straight artists’ support and queer cameos in music videos, however well-intentioned – which helps the LGBTQ+ community feel seen in popular music.

It may not have made it to the Brits or Grammys but, for me, this album deserves a special mention for its openness. In an ideal world it wouldn’t be something to remark on. However, in a society still dominated by heteronormativity, the simple act of honesty can have disproportionate consequences for those whose narratives are not always heard. Let’s hope Any Human Friend becomes one of many pieces of creative expression where openness on the part of all women* – including regarding sexuality – becomes unremarkable.