Sunday 13th July 2025
Blog Page 528

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.

Oscars 2020 Roundup

0

It is difficult to argue that the winners of Academy Awards in a certain year still represent that year’s greatest achievements in cinema. Debates still rage about whether nominations are representative of the diversity of the film industry, both in terms of gender (it is a bleak truth that in 92 years only five women have ever received a Best Director nomination) and race (though the years following the inception of #OscarsSoWhite did show signs of progress, it is still too soon to know whether the hashtag will translate into lasting progress in diversifying the acting nominees, especially when only one 2020 nominee is a person of colour). Even with the steady diversification of the Academy’s voting body in the last few years, this step arguably does not tackle the deeper-set reasons for racial and gender bias in the film industry. Moreover, just last year, the forgettable Green Book managed to secure Best Picture, despite its racially sanitised fairytale narrative and the uncomfortable real-world controversies that surrounded it, and despite the presence in the nominations of auteur magnum opuses such as The Favourite and Roma and more acute political satires such as BlackkKlansman and Vice.  These are not an indication of the industry’s best storytelling talent.

However, the Oscars may not be accurate or particularly meaningful, but this does not necessarily mean they are not relevant as a lens through which to examine current developments in Hollywood. If the two most influential events to happen in Western cinema in the last decade have been the #MeToo movement and the unstoppable rise of streaming services, then this year’s nominations can be meaningfully analysed in the light of these events. Regarding #MeToo, a pessimist might argue that the nominations cast doubt on whether the movement has led to greater respect for women in the industry, when films such as Joker and The Irishman that explore the extremes of male emotion (often at the expense of women) lead the nominations pack ahead of those such as Little Women that unapologetically tell the stories of women and particularly their desire for professional recognition and respect. Furthermore, should Once Upon a Time in Hollywood earn Quentin Tarantino his first Best Picture or Best Director win, this could be viewed as redemptive, given that the film is Tarantino’s first independent of the Weinstein Company and following the revelation that the director ‘knew enough to do more than [he] did’ about Harvey Weinstein’s abuse. With the advance of streaming, it has similarly been asked whether such a fundamental change in the way we consume films is heralding a change in what constitutes an award-worthy film; Roma’s origins on Netflix were commonly cited as a reason for its Best Picture snub last year, and thus it will be interesting to see whether The Irishman or Marriage Story can succeed where it failed (especially considering that the directors of those films, Martin Scorsese and Noah Baumbach respectively, are white Americans, unlike Roma director Alfonso Cuarón). With these ideas in mind, the traditional category-by-category Oscars analysis is still worth writing, even if artistic merit is not always the main factor being considered.

BEST PICTURE

What’s striking upon first looking at the nominations for the night’s most prestigious award is just how male they all are. Once Upon A Time In Hollywood and 1917 take place in the respectively very male-dominated worlds of 1960s Hollywood and the WWI trenches (additionally, the latter film features only one, very brief, female role), and Joker and The Irishman both deal intimately with male anger and violence (to the extent that the Oscars were lampooned on SNL for their capacity to nominate ‘white male rage’ films) – even Taika Waititi’s tonally jarring dark comedy Jojo Rabbit has as a central theme the toxic masculinity of the Hitler Youth and Nazi militarism and a young boy’s attempts to make sense of it, though it also does tackle the experiences of ordinary Germans under Nazism more generally as well. The notable exceptions to this rule are Little Women and Marriage Story, with its unflinching depiction of both its male and its female lead as deeply flawed over the course of their divorce, but the lack of a Best Director nod for either of these films probably prevents them from winning the top prize (although this did not keep Green Book away from Best Picture last year). With regard to who will receive the accolade, at the start of the season, the money initially lay with Once Upon a Time in Hollywood; this is the ninth of the proposed ten films Tarantino will ever make, so the Academy’s desire to award him Best Picture before he retires may work in his favour, and moreover the film’s aesthetic homage to a bygone era of Hollywood seems designed to appeal to the Academy voting body. However, 1917, with its pathos and directorial splendour, also stands a chance, given its prestigious wins at the Producers Guild of America (PGA) and Directors Guild of America (DGA), both statistically strong indicators of Best Picture winners. Though these two films are probably the strongest contenders, it would nevertheless be an emphatic decision on the Academy’s part if Best Picture went to Parasite, the critically acclaimed (though not yet released in the UK) class satire and the first Korean film to gain a Best Picture nomination – a win for Parasite would not only indicate a more internationalist outlook from Academy voters, but would also redeem their failure to award last year’s only foreign-language Best Picture nominee, Roma.

BEST ACTOR

This category is surely Joaquin Phoenix’s to lose – critics were divided over the direction, story and social impact of Todd Haynes’ villain origin story Joker, but a uniting factor tended to be Phoenix’s unhinged, wildly oscillating central performance. Furthermore, voting for Phoenix would appeal to the Academy’s tendency to redeem themselves for failing to award the right person on earlier occasions (see Al Pacino losing for The Godfather Part II but later winning for Scent of a Woman); in this case, a win for Joker could be seen as making up for Phoenix’s performances in Gladiator and Walk the Line losing to much more forgettable performances. This being said, it would certainly be refreshing to see Antonio Banderas win and thus for the Academy to reward a subtitled performance in a foreign-language film (this has only ever happened on six occasions), while this reviewer is personally rooting for Adam Driver’s performance in Marriage Story, which ranges from excruciatingly awkward reunions with his estranged son, to the devastating release of pent-up fury at his wife, to an affecting eleventh-hour rendition of Being Alive from the musical Company.

BEST ACTRESS

Coverage of Cynthia Erivo’s Best Actress nomination have revolved around her status as the one person of colour nominated for an acting Oscar this year – while a shocking statistic when one considers the snubs to the likes of Lupita Nyong’o in Us and Constance Wu in Hustlers, this should not overshadow the fact that Erivo is a strong contender for the award, having stood out for a powerful performance as the abolitionist Harriet Tubman in a film that was otherwise criticised for being sentimental and formulaic. Also criminally underreported is a striking achievement of Erivo’s: should she win either this award or her other Oscar nomination (for Best Original Song), the Broadway actress will become the youngest person, and only the sixteenth ever, to win the prestigious EGOT award combination. In an ideal world, Erivo should have a strong chance, though doubt is cast upon the matter by Renée Zellweger’s nomination for her portrayal of Judy Garland, which should appeal to the Academy’s love affair both with a strong comeback story (Zellweger returned from a six year hiatus in 2016) and with portrayals of real-life showbiz figures (echoing Rami Malek’s win for portraying Freddie Mercury last year).

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

The nominations for this category read like an ode to a dying breed: the big-name, usually male, movie star. Whoever wins on the night will have done so because they have appealed to a sense of nostalgia in the (still mainly white and male) Academy voting body, but Pacino and Pesci perhaps exemplify this more than the others; The Irishman is essentially a celebration and culmination of the decade-long body of work in the ‘gangster’ genre of those two actors, along with co-star Robert de Niro and director Martin Scorsese, and its use of de-aging technology on septuagenarian actors is surely the epitome of nostalgically reviving a bygone cinematic age. However, Pacino and Pesci do have the curse of being nominated in the same category for the same film, so this award may just go to Brad Pitt. His role as a stunt double in 1960s LA and real-world status as one of the last ‘true’ movie stars will appeal to the same wistfulness about a bygone era of macho Hollywood as that which stands Once Upon a Time in Hollywood in good stead for many of its other nominations.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

With her career currently going through a renaissance with acclaimed turns in films such as Little Women and the series Big Little Lies, Laura Dern seems to be in the ‘right place’ to win an Oscar, and seems worthy of it, with her turn as a family lawyer in Marriage Story executed with a balance of tenderness, obsequiousness and vitriol, and climaxing in an impassioned monologue on the double standards to which mothers and fathers are respectively held. Some of Dern’s competition were nominated for slightly more predictable performances, notably Johansson and Robbie, but Florence Pugh deserves special mention – having shown her versatility over the last decade in films ranging from Lady Macbeth to Midsommar, she has finished the decade with her first Oscar nomination, and there certainly could be worse surprises on the night than her beating Dern for her reimagined depiction of the typically shallow Amy March as creatively repressed and living in her elder sister’s shadow. 

BEST DIRECTOR

In the words of Natalie Portman at the 2018 Golden Globes, ‘here are the all-male nominees’. This category’s nominations are deservedly overshadowed in most of the press coverage by Greta Gerwig’s snub for Little Women, despite the directorial ingenuity shown in the film’s use of a non-linear timeline and the new feminist meanings extracted from Alcott’s classic. It serves as an indication that merely diversifying the voting body is not enough, and that instead a deep-set bias about the necessity of women telling stories about women needs to be overturned – it is no coincidence that the only ever female-directed Best Picture winner was a male-led Iraq War epic, surely as typically masculine as films get. Furthermore, many may argue that Lorene Scafaria, Marielle Heller and Melina Matsoukas, directors of Hustlers, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood and Queen & Slim respectively, were snubbed both in this category and for Best Picture. With regard to which one of the male nominees will instead receive this award, Tarantino is again in the ‘last chance to win’ zone for his penultimate work, but in this reviewer’s mind, 1917 is the strongest film directorially, with its claustrophobic views of the trenches and intimate focus on its two leads, as well as its one-shot approach. There is also a possibility that Parasite’s fate will echo that of Roma from last year and win Best Director while losing Best Picture; while this would be a success for Korean cinema, it would indicate a concerning trend of Best Director being a ‘consolation prize’ for foreign-language cinema not deemed worthy of Best Picture. In any case, a man will win the Best Director Oscar in 2020, and the Academy will have proven that it has a long way to go in terms of being representative and respectful of women’s contributions to cinema.

South African victory should not make ‘Root’s England’ complacent

0

Joe Root and his England teammates lifted the Basil D’Oliveira Trophy on Monday afternoon, after some inspired bowling from Durham’s Mark Wood sealed a comfortable 3-1 series victory. They seemed, for once, a settled side; there were half-centuries for each of England’s top six across the series and four bowlers took ten or more wickets. With both Dom Sibley and Zak Crawley averaging over 30, top-order instability began to feel like a thing of the past. Ollie Pope was a joy to watch and Ben Stokes was, well, superhuman. ‘Root’s England’, Jonathan Agnew called them, afterwards. It was a well-deserved snippet of praise for a captain who has finally, three years into the job, started to take control of the side and make it feel like his own.

But with the sun setting over the Western Cape, one question remains unanswered: where next for this England side? Quite literally, Sri Lanka. The two-test series beginning in Galle on 19 March is their first trip to the subcontinent since Root’s men toured the same country in November 2018. England were 3-0 winners in that series, their first in Sri Lanka since 2012, but winning is by no means a certainty this time around. The series is worth the same amount of World Test Championship points (120) as the one England have just contested in South Africa. But with only two test matches to be played, each will have twice as much impact on England’s standings in the Championship table. There is so much more at stake for Root’s men this time around. Already 214 points behind table-topping India and only a third of the way into the competition, if they lose this series, it is unlikely they will reach the final scheduled to take place at Lord’s in June 2021. But this is not just about Sri Lanka; there’s a five-match series away to Kohli’s India on the horizon and so to lose this, their first of two critical encounters on the subcontinent, would be ominous indeed. The next two months are make-or-break for this England side.

Moving forward, their focus has to change. South Africa served Root’s men well; with the exception of the third test at St George’s Park, the wickets offered the bowlers bounce and good carry. They won the final test in Johannesburg with a five-man seam attack. The four-match series saw the resurgence of Mark Wood (12 wickets at 13.58) and continued reward for the dependable Stuart Broad (14 wickets at 19.42), while Sam ‘makes things happen’ Curran got the breakthrough for his skipper on more than one occasion. Root’s men did it all, for the most part, without their leading wicket taker Jimmy Anderson, who suffered a broken rib at Newlands, and the electrifying Jofra Archer, side-lined with a shoulder injury. All looks rosy in the seamers’ garden; England’s fast-bowling cartel is, you might say, in full bloom. The ECB has even been sowing seeds for the future; it was reported just this week that they have awarded the first Pace Bowling Development Contracts to Olly Stone (Warwickshire), Saqib Mahmood (Lancashire) and Craig Overton (Somerset).

This is all well and good. England is a ‘bowler’s paradise’ and there is no doubt that the home international summer will bring even more success for our crop of fast bowlers. Competition for places in the playing XI will be higher than ever and England’s attack will knock over the West Indies and Pakistan with ease. But the standard of opposition England will face on the subcontinent (India and Sri Lanka currently sit first and fifth in the World Test Championship table; Pakistan and the West Indies fourth and eighth) is far higher than that which they are due to face at home, in favourable conditions. And with the same number of Championship points up for grabs in every series, no matter its length, Root and his men simply can’t afford to rest on their fast-bowling laurels. After all, fast bowling won’t win you test matches in India and Sri Lanka.

With two of their remaining four series due to be played on the subcontinent, spin must be England’s focus from now on. It is the key to success in their World Test Championship campaign. The 3-1 series victory in South Africa proved that life will go on at the top of the order without Sir Alastair Cook and showed there’s ‘strength in depth’ in the fast-bowling department, but it didn’t solve the spin-bowling question. It is a question England have been trying to answer since Graeme Swann’s retirement in 2013. England’s first-choice option, Jack Leach, is known and loved among England fans for his heroic batting performances and glasses-cleaning antics, rather than his bowling. He has been a steady performer (34 wickets at 29.02 so far) but illness has kept him out of the side since the first test in New Zealand. In any case, England will need two or three spinners at the very least, if they are to win on the subcontinent. Leach alone will not be enough.

There are options aplenty; they could go back to Hampshire’s Mason Crane, who made his test debut in Australia, or there’s the young Lancashire leg spinner Matt Parkinson, selected in the touring party for South Africa. But, as was the case with Adil Rashid, Joe Root and the England management seem to have little confidence in either player. Crane hasn’t featured in an England squad since the Ashes defeat Down Under and Dom Bess, called up when illness swept through the England camp ahead of the first test at Centurion, leap-frogged Parkinson into the XI at Newlands. Bess went on to take 8 wickets at 25.75 in the series but is yet to really prove himself on the international stage. England would desperately love to have Moeen Ali back in the side, but there is a question-mark hanging over his future in test cricket, as he continues to take time out of the five-day game for personal reasons. He has also signed a deal with the Multan Sultans in the Pakistan Super League, which takes place during England’s two-test series in Sri Lanka. What that means is, right now, Moeen Ali isn’t an option. Joe Root and the England management must learn to trust the options they do have instead. But victory on the subcontinent is a tall order, and if Root is doubting his options, then I can’t say I blame him.

Tributes to Kobe Bryant: The player and the man

CW: Sexual Assault

A transcendent icon

81 points in a single game; the most in the modern era. 60 points in his farewell game at the age of 37. 5-time NBA champion. 2008 NBA Most Valuable Player.

These achievements are enough to disarm even the fiercest Kobe critic, but it is not the accolades that make him truly great. It is something much more intangible; it is something that can be felt every single time he steps onto the basketball court. It can be explained in two words: Mamba Mentality.

Lamar Odom, Kobe Bryant’s former teammate, alluded to Kobe’s invincibility in his Instagram tribute – “I just knew if he was in a helicopter crash he would have been the one to survive. Somehow he would have jumped out and landed on his feet” – pointing out how Kobe always, always found a way. It is not what he achieved that is so impressive; it is how he achieved it. Whereas other NBA superstars score 50+ because they want to, it felt like Kobe did it because he had to. His relentless desire to reach the pinnacle of his sport, and beyond, meant that passing the ball was not an option. He had to shoot an impossible fadeaway over three defenders, and he had to make the shot.

Some criticise him for being strong-willed to the point of selfishness. Others point to how he gets into conflicts with even his own teammates because he is so demanding. While these would be considered faults in any other player, Kobe somehow turns them into his greatest strengths. He thrives because of his selfishness, not despite it. He demands the best from everyone around him because he has no other choice: failure is not an option.

While the oft-quoted truism “you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take” serves as inspiration to many, Kobe takes it a step further. He holds the NBA record for most regular season missed shots and wears it as a badge of honour. The sheer physical endurance, and mental will, required to shoot 50 shots in 42 minutes, as he did in his last NBA game, is something 99% of the league will never possess.

He is not a 6’1”, 147kg giant like Shaquille O’Neal. He does not possess the athletic ability, both in terms of strength and speed, of a LeBron James. In fact, despite having a father who also played in the NBA, Kobe does not have hereditary shooting pedigree of Steph Curry. Therefore, what truly makes him great is his mentality – one that is almost unparalleled in the history of sport.

His 4am workouts have now become basketball folklore, perfectly epitomising his unrelenting attitude. If an average professional is someone who works hard in training, then a basketball great is someone who puts extra hours in when others are resting. However, Kobe has transcended even this definition of greatness: he admitted, in 2018 (two years after his retirement), that he still rose at 4am to work out. How many great, never mind average, athletes would do that when there is seemingly no goal to work towards?

Kobe’s choice of the number 24 jersey, which he wore for the latter part of his career, can be considered a metaphor for his motivation. The player he is most like is none other than Michael Jordan, possibly the GOAT (greatest of all time) of basketball, who famously wore number 23. It is clear, both on and off the court, that Kobe looks up to Jordan and wishes to emulate his success. Kobe’s 60-point swansong is analogous to Jordan’s ‘flu game’, an NBA Finals game in which Jordan posted impressive numbers despite badly suffering from illness. Kobe, in response, massively outscored every other player (no-one else on the court even reached 20 points), even though most of them were in peak physical fitness in their 20s.

Although his impact on the world has clearly transcended basketball – it is common for people who know nothing about basketball to shout ‘Kobe’ as they toss something into the bin – the saddest part of this tragedy is that he will never be able to achieve Michael Jordan’s post-retirement success. Kobe was working closely with his daughter Gianna, who also tragically passed in the helicopter crash, to raise the profile of women’s basketball. Just like a young Kobe, she was considered a precocious talent in basketball circles and would undoubtedly have benefitted from his guidance.

Ultimately, his story is one that has been tragically shortened and thus he will not be able to achieve his true off-court potential. However, he, like his idol Jordan, has massively transcended the world of sport and that is perhaps the greatest compliment one can give to Kobe Bryant. RIP.

A complex legacy

In a world where public figures are so often boiled down to polarising characterisations of good or bad, inspirational or toxic, charismatic or despicable, it seems impossible to adequately pay tribute to a man like Kobe Bryant. At some point or another in his life, Kobe embodied every one of these characteristics on or off court.

Bryant was undeniably one of the biggest stars of his generation. His 20-year career spent at the Los Angeles Lakers yielded 5 NBA Championships, 2 Olympic gold medals and worldwide renown from obsessive die-hard fans to casual would-be basketballers, shouting his name as they threw balls of paper into the bin in their kitchen. But no matter if you were a fellow elite sportsman or a 5-foot-7-ish white kid from Ireland with little to no sporting talent such as myself, Kobe also crucially came to represent something else entirely: a universal mentality. Unwaveringly competitive, inexhaustibly hard-working, it was Kobe’s work ethic and competitiveness which undoubtedly drove him to greatness and ignited a similar set of principles within those who admired him. ‘Mamba Mentality’, a mantra which would become the title of Bryant’s 2018 autobiography, represented a single-minded focus and commitment to achieving your goals. For Kobe, this meant practicing in empty gyms at 4 a.m. before training. This meant commanding his teammates to put the ball in his hands every possession, putting up unprecedented numbers of shot attempts per game, even playing through injuries to ensure success; when Bryant tore his Achilles in April 2013, he refused to leave the court until he’d shot the free throws earned from the foul which caused the injury. He converted both, earning the Lakers two points before leaving the court. He wouldn’t return from the Achilles injury until that December. The Lakers ended up winning the game – by two points.

However, this single-mindedness also drew the ire of many. As a team-mate, Kobe could be – and regularly was – brutal. During practice sessions, Kobe would regularly become frustrated and vulgar towards his team-mates. During timeouts, Kobe did not make ‘suggestions’, nor did he listen to his coaches. He told his team-mates to “get the f**k out of his way” (as he said mid-game in 2014) and proceeded to dominate the ball. His excellence and star power were clear for all to see; but all the same, right from his unprecedented decision to join the NBA aged 17 straight out of high school, Bryant’s brazen self-confidence was unparalleled.

However, as much as discussions of sporting excellence have dominated the discourse of Kobe in the days following his untimely death, it is perhaps his personal life that is the most complicated thing to reflect on of all. It would be remiss not to mention the case in 2003 which, notably, did not derail Kobe’s career. While married and with a daughter, Kobe was accused of rape by a 19-year-old woman. The accuser’s medical examination revealed lacerations “too many to count” around her genitals. “I recognise now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way as I did”, stated Bryant following charges being dropped against him by the accuser, who had in turn been accused of promiscuity, gold-digging and mental instability during the trial.

Bryant later established a charitable foundation alongside his wife Vanessa in 2010 and, 13 months ago, Kobe launched the Mamba Sports Academy. It was while travelling to a game in heavy fog for the Academy’s girls basketball team that a helicopter containing Kobe, his 13-year-old daughter Gianna and six family friends crashed into the side of a mountain, killing all passengers and the pilot.

It would be no exaggeration to say that I loved Kobe. My early teenage years were mostly spent watching old Finals games from the Lakers’ championship three-peat between 2000-2002 and simulating them on my Xbox, and my later ones were mostly spent refusing to go out, locking my door and Mamba-ing out yet another essay so that I could make it to, and survive at, Oxford. Certainly, Kobe’s work ethic and his gleeful undertaking of the role as a family man, as shown in the endless stream of now-viral videos of his interactions with his daughters, were genuinely inspirational. But I, nor anyone else, should refuse to ignore the difficulty in summarising Kobe Bryant’s legacy. His one-track mind led to clashes with the people he worked with throughout his career and, amidst the seemingly infinite outpourings of love and admiration, the spectre of his sexual assault case still looms large. In the wake of a death which has stunned the world, perhaps the most fitting way of remembering Kobe is as a man who was unashamedly and unreservedly himself.