Skip to main content

Day: 2 December 2010

Manchester Literature Festival 2010- Bewilderbliss and Corridor 8

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Books.

Bewilderbliss and Corridor 8 are two Manchester based creative writing magazines. Bewilderbliss was established by a creative writing MA student, in order to pull together the Manchester University and MMU’s creative writing courses. Corridor 8 was begun only 18 months ago, and has since published two editions.

The afternoon included readings from contributors to both magazines, as well as discussing the best ways for new, low budget magazines to get material and recognition. Both magazines are sold in Cornerhouse; to contact the magazines visit www.corridor8.co.uk and www.bewilderbliss.com.

Sea Monsters on the Devonshire Coast- Sense & Sensibility & Sea Monsters

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Books.

Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters is Ben H. Winters’ imaginative parody of Jane Austen’s nineteenth century classic. With Austen listed as a co-author, the majority of the text is her original work, embedded with gory scenes of deadly ocean killers.
The story begins with Mrs Dashwood’s and her daughters’ disinheritance from Mr Dashwood’s fortune, following his death. In Winters’ version of events, he is massacred by a hammer head shark. They are driven out of their stately home, and forced to relocate to the Devonshire coast. The parody is centralised around “The Alteration”, which is described as change in a noxious stream, poisoning all waters in the world, making even the gentlest of sea creatures ‘aggressive, blood-thirsty predators, hardened and hateful towards our bipedal race’.
The Dashwoods are in grave danger, isolated on the uninhabited Pestilient Isle. Here they become acquainted with handsome Willoughby and Colonel Brandon, who is unfortunate enough to possess ‘a set of long, squishy tentacles protruding grotesquely from his face’, a humorous adaption of Austen’s less than handsome Brandon. Both men fall in love with Marianne Dashwood and thus commences the much enjoyed Austen love triangle, concluding with the young Marianne eventually marrying the octopus-esque gentleman.
Winters manages to cleverly weave the sea monsters into the original story, and they are eventually pivotal to the plot, yet it becomes predictable, repetitive, and at times, rather strained. Although Austen fans may be initially sceptical (I certainly was), Winters creates a slightly less dull version of this dearly loved classic. Whether he is paying homage to Austen, or completely destroying Sense and Sensibility must be a matter of opinion, but personally, I’ll be sticking to the Austen originals.

Zombies Ravage Hertfordshire- Pride & Prejudice & Zombies

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Books.

A satirical, thrilling take on Jane Austen’s most acclaimed and beloved novel, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies blends a classic story of social prejudice and romance, with a gruesome tale of a zombie plague ravaging the English countryside. Closely echoing Austen’s classic, the plot follows a tale of romance in which Elizabeth Bennet realises her own prejudices, and Mr Darcy learns to subdue his pride; extended amidst a setting of zombie chaos and scenes of action and combat.

As the menacing threat of a “strange plague” spreads, the dead are being transformed into bloodthirsty zombies, and it is up to the Bennet sisters to protect Hertfordshire. However, Elizabeth’s attention is distracted from the battle against the deadly “unmentionables”, by the mysterious and intriguing Mr Darcy. This comical and beguiling novel sees the Bennet sisters face not only the challenge of daily combat, as they train to become zombie-fighting warriors, but the far more difficult pursuit of alluring a wealthy husband.

Despite initial apprehensions when reading this book, considering the masterpiece of Austen’s classic, I found Pride and Prejudice and Zombies thoroughly engaging and amusing. A blend of comedy, romance, thrilling swordfights and contemporary horror, makes this ¬novel spinoff certainly worth a read this Halloween.

18th Century Gothic Horror- The Castle of Otranto

Written by Clair Gordon on . Posted in Books.

This traditionally endearing tale, The Castle of Otranto, is often regarded as “the first Gothic novel”, and was thus incredibly influential to the works of Bram Stoker, Ann Radcliffe and Edgar Allan Poe. It introduced a style that was to become tremendously popular with authors and readers alike, in the late 18th and early 19th Century.
When Manfred, the prince of the castle, discovers his only son and heir to his throne, has been mysteriously killed on the day of his wedding, he fears that this signifies the end of his line. Flying into a tempestuous rage, Manfred decides to cast aside his wife who is incapable of bearing him any more sons, in order to pursue his dead son’s bride-to-be, the beautiful and chaste Isabella. Unsurprisingly, Isabella is horrified at Manfred’s proposal so flees his imperious clutches, and hides in the ‘subterraneous passages’ of the castle. A wild goose chase to return Isabella to the evil Manfred ensues. Of course, there is light at the end of the labyrinth and in true romantic style, the villain is forced to repent and the pure young woman falls into the arms of her Prince Charming.
Everything you would expect to find in an early piece of Gothic writing is there; the labyrinths of darkness, the hero and the villain, and the swooning damsels. An enjoyable, albeit predictable, read.

Deadly Seducers- Dead Until Dark

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Books.

Charlaine Harris’ now infamous Sookie Stackhouse series is essentially soft-porn for the vampire obsessed generation. However, unlike Stephanie Meyer, Harris is an able writer and the sensuous scenes between Sookie and her vampire boyfriend Bill, are seductive rather than cringe-worthy.

‘The nightshirt slid up to the top of my thighs. My hands began to rub his arms helplessly – He stood up with me still wrapped around him.’

To add to the stress of a human-vampire relationship and the perils that befall it, there is a murderer on the loose and his pattern is “fang-bangers”; people who seek out vampires to sleep with. With two girls Sookie knew already dead, and her grandmother found murdered in the home Sookie shared with her, it becomes clear that the wrong person was killed, and it was Sookie the murderer was looking for.

Perhaps the allure of the novel is that the narrative voice is Sookie herself; a telepathic small-town waitress from Bon-Temps, Louisiana. The simplicity of her overall character is a spectacular contrast to the world that surrounds her, and is seemingly determined to engulf her in its seedy vampire-controlled under-belly.

Harris’ creation is an addictive read that will leave you with an appetite for a little more than food.

Victorian Vampire Slayers- Dracula

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Books.

Bram Stoker’s famous novel Dracula, does not have the same effect on us 21st century readers, as it did the Victorians. This I feel is something that has to be kept in mind when reading the novel; and it has more to do with sex, than instilling blood-curdling fear.

The imagery captured by Stoker of a strange man entering a woman’s boudoir in the dead of night, would have been shock-value enough in the late 19th-early 20th century. If we then consider that he “penetrates” these women without their consent, and out of wed-lock, it is possible to see how the novel caused such a stir.

Dracula’s first victim in the novel is Lucy Westenra. Her ill health due to his slowly turning her in to a vampire and draining her blood, cause four men, one of whom is her fiancé, to infuse their blood in to Lucy’s body. Lucy has effectively shared fluids with four men. It is these four men who, following the necessitated slaying of vampire Lucy, endeavour to ensure her master reaches a similar end.

The novel is brimming with taboo images of the sexually repressed Victorian period. The attempted seduction of Jonathon Harker at Castle Dracula by the three, voluptuously lipped female vampires, being one of the more obvious examples in this classic gothic novel.

Tedious democracy

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

Wednesday 20th October saw the first successful UMSU General Meeting in 18 months, with six motions being passed. Yet whilst I was in the meeting I began to understand why it rarely reaches quorum. The whole process is wrapped in bureaucratic red tape, making it dull and boring; for every motion at least four speeches are made, with room for questions in which the speakers just tended to repeat themselves. If someone wants a motion to go straight to vote, then another two speeches are made.Most people that come to General Meetings come to support or to block a particular motion. These people come with their minds already made up. Case in point:  this reporter believes that Manchester Labour Students (MLS) and J-Soc (Jewish society) came to the General Meeting in order to block the Peace Through Education motion, by leaving the meeting at a crucial point, in what appears to have been an attempt to break quorum. If that is the case, then they had just come to the meeting with their minds already made up, so what was the purpose of all the speeches anyway?

General Meetings would be more productive, and enjoyable, if there was a one-minute summary of both sides, five minutes for questions, then a vote. All the essential information is in the agenda, which is published online in advance. No-one appears to know this though, so I would call for UMSU to publicise this fact. Then, students can make their minds up as to where to stand on the issues that are to be discussed. The agenda should also be available in the Student Unions, (possibly in this paper) so that students can read and discuss the motions before the meetings. This would make the meetings snappier, making the experience a better one for everyone. The result: more students attending general meetings, more motions being passed.

I was pleased to see that the Students in Charge of the Union motion were bolstered up to the top of the list and that students voted in favour of it. This means that in the upcoming months there will be a referendum on online voting, which I think is a brilliant idea and might end the need for General Meetings altogether. Speaking against this, was one student who was concerned about online voting as he felt that we would lose the democratic atmosphere. He said, “Doesn’t it feel good to come here, in person and partake in a democratic process?” My answer: No, not really.

I have essays and articles to be writing, I want this to be swift and effective. This does not feel “good” it feels like time wasting. This particular speaker had not planned a speech, and was not competent at answering questions with the likes of: “No one had a statement against it, so I thought I’d have a go” The chair should have intervened and saved time, but due to the aforementioned red tape, was not in a position to do so.  If we want a real democratic process we need online voting, and we need more common sense and efficiency – that is the way to combat student apathy.

The importance of getting to know your breasts

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

Young women in today’s society are often said to have it all – the power to have what we want when we want. Unlike our parent’s generation we have fewer issues with women’s rights (though not completely eradicated) and are largely free to live in a society where men and women have equal privileges. For the large part, as women our autonomy remains largely uncompromised – we can go to university, study a subject we like, get a job we want – without our sex compromising it – or so it would seem. There is however one part of our lives that remain uncontrolled and an unfathomable force of Mother Nature, not understood by men and women alike – our breasts.

And yes I’m totally serious – whilst breast cancer is affiliated with old age there is still the fact that out of 46,000 women who are diagnosed with breast cancer, 20 are under the age of 25. Thankfully the CoppaFeel campaign is hitting Manchester- and yes, it does what it says on the tin- it wants you to cop-a-feel of your boobs; getting aware of how to know what your boobs look and feel like could potentially save your life someday.

CoppaFeel is the UK’s youngest battler in the fight against breast cancer. The charity was founded by Kristin Hallenga who herself was misdiagnosed twice for breast cancer. When she was finally correctly diagnosed, the cancer was found to have already spread to her lower back. Kristin, rather than concentrating on solely on getting better, decided to set up CoppaFeel to ensure other young women do not find themselves in a similar position. The charity was founded in April 2009 and became an official charity in October 2009.

Together with her Boob Team, Kris travels the length and breadth of the UK informing young people to get to know their boobs. Kris decided it was time to flick the switch on breast cancer awareness and bring it to the forefront of young people’s attention as they are the ones too often dismissed by breast cancer campaigning. CoppaFeel’s task is simple, get to know your boobs; the sooner you do this, the sooner you’ll notice any changes.

I had a criticism earlier this week about the charity’s name, “CoppaFeel”, being offensive because it is using the objectification of women and their breasts to promote a breast cancer charity. However, it is important to see that the aim of the marketing campaign is bringing this issue to younger people in a frank, funny way. This does not demean or objectify women, but rather enables the issue of breast cancer to become more approachable. Women can therefore become more empowered and in control of what might happen to their bodies. CoppaFeel’s active campaign work strives to instill confidence in young women wishing to seek professional advice when concerns arise.

Furthermore, there are so many myths concerning breast cancer on whether to look for lumps. CoppaFeel provides a comprehensive guide of exactly where to look and what to look for. These can be found on CoppaFeel leaflets being given out on campus, and at our fundraising day taking place on the 29th October in the Students’ Union from 10-4pm.

Manchester is one of 14 Universities who are taking part in this campaign, so if you are interested in getting involved, talk to any of the Boob Team or check the website http://www.coppafeel.org

Political Principles

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

It is a well-worn path to criticise the hypocrisy of many Liberal Democrat voters. While in the run up to the general election many were brazenly calling for “new politics” (a phrase that dated as fast as it was coined) and making a plea for an end to the tribalism of the two party system, these people (many of whom are students) are now reeling and seething at the Lib-Con marriage that is the coalition Government.

It particularly hits hard for those fresh faced, youthful and idealistic voters first time voters, who felt they were riding the crest of a wave (where everyone agreed with Nick) to a better country. Many of them are now hardened cynics. They feel betrayed; many will never vote Liberal Democrat again.

To a large extent, this new politics acted as an alibi for a deeper political need. While compromise in politics is admirable, and often necessary, it is clear that the new politics, if we wanted it at all, was not really about compromise and an end to blind party loyalty, but was instead about principles and values.

This underlying call for a return to political principles is not confined those on the Left. Just as there are many Liberal Democrats horrified at the Lib-Con partnership, there are many Conservatives equally appalled at what they see as the betrayal of their core values.

Speaking to The Guardian’s John Harris at the Labour party conference, Labour MP Jon Cruddas says, from the perspective of a new era in the Labour party, “We need to talk about identity, nationhood, class, race […] it’s a much deeper sense about what is going to happen, and what the country wants to do.” Such concerns transcend Cruddas’ own party, and represent the politics that was being called for in the spring.

Forget the new politics of the “Big Society” – we should look forward to the new politics of Big Ideas.

Panem et Circenses (Bread and circuses – the students’ choice.)

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

Twitter was busy this week with Manchester students moaning about the cold whilst protesting against cuts outside the Tory conference in Birmingham. Black and red posters appeared hastily pasted up in their usual fashion around the campus, “Stuff your cuts, we won’t pay!” read the slogans. But it’s not just the Commies who are upset; there is an atmosphere on campus from many students and staff that they are on a collision course with the Conservative-Liberal government.

It’s a fashionable norm on campuses to despise the Conservative party; we must be sure to hate them with a burning passion without logic or question for thirty-year-old prejudices. Eating baked beans, drinking wine from jam jars, listening to peculiar music, reading The Guardian and hating the Tories are all well respected student pastimes.  What I find puzzling is that the majority of the political student body want to be waging a vitriolic war against the Con-Lib coalition’s austerity measures, yet they are only implementing cuts that must happen.

Public debt is at an eye watering level of £800 billion; that amounts to an astonishing £77,770 for every single Briton with a job. It’s a debt that we all inherit upon graduation. According to the Labour party’s own pre-election figures, this amount will continue to rise rapidly, up to £1,400 billion by 2014-15 if left unaddressed. It was Labour’s own Liam Bryne who, in a parting shot to his Conservative treasury replacement left a note: “Dear Chief Secretary, I’m sorry to tell you there is no money left. Kind regards and good luck.” Yet students seem resolute that public spending needs to be maintained at the very least, if not expanded upon to pre-recession levels. It’s a peculiar stance to take, especially from university student who are expected to become the new social-elites and the next generation of decision makers in our society.

The situation is brutally simple. If there isn’t money in the treasury, then government spending cannot occur, because the money doesn’t exist. If the treasury continues to spend money it doesn’t have (or prints money to pay its huge public sector), then either workers will not be paid or inflation increases. It appears to be a difficult formula for some to follow or understand, but one the European Commission is desperate for at least our politicians to comprehend.

The situation of the current government is especially interesting because it draws a clear parallel with the situation that many students find themselves in, graduating with £23,000 worth of debt, another popular subject for twitter discourse.  This debt is due to the reckless lifestyle many students lead, living well beyond their means, borrowing money they are ill prepared to pay back. Perhaps it was inevitable for a generation who had grown up under New Labour to lack any monetary discipline.

What is worse, is that none of the student critics of austerity have any real suggestion as to who should repay the huge deficit created by the Labour government, (or indeed their own student loans) as long as it’s not them. “Tax the rich” members of the angry crowd cry, “Flog ‘em at the same time!” scream some others. But the fact is, that that particular beast doesn’t exist. Less than 15% of working people in the country pay the top rate of tax (which is already at 50%). Crippling the wealthy with Robin Hood taxes won’t cut the budgetary deficit.

Bread and Circuses is a metaphor for a superficial means of appeasement. In the case of politics, the phrase is used to describe the creation of public approval, not through exemplary or excellent public service or public policy, but through the mere satisfaction of the immediate, shallow requirements of a populace. It’s a policy that governments resort to when they are out of ideas. The Tories did it during the late 1950’s and many of the last Labour government’s public works schemes fall under this category. Maintaining or increasing public spending at a time like this is exactly that. It’s a short-term strategy for us to feel better about ourselves without thinking about the future.

Students’ Union’s across the country often argue on behalf of their members that they aren’t taken seriously. Be it by their institutions or the government, the claim is that people aren’t listening; but must we ask if our views are sensible or demonstrate reasonable thought? Is it rational or at all feasible that many of us want to have nearly twenty years of fully state sponsored education and retire only forty years later at the age of 65 on a full state pension, with benefits and health care? It’s complete lunacy, hence, ‘Bread and Circuses’.

Austerity cuts are undeniably necessary in Britain. Nobody likes cuts to defense contracts, which render whole Scottish ports without work. Nobody wants to see public funding slashed for higher education, leaving students struggling. But if the money isn’t in the bank, then it cannot be spent. David Cameron and Nick Clegg aren’t milk snatchers, they’re realists and as students studying history, economics, philosophy and politics, we should be to.

“I’ll have a rugby ball, scalpel, and some clunge please, mate”

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

There are a section of people present at most universities in Britain who probably accumulate more dislike from the rest of the student body than any other. They are the only group cliquey enough to organise their own ski trip, whilst being the only sports team more unbearably annoying than the organisers of the normal ski trip. I’m referring to the single most ‘banterific’ group of students that has ever walked the Earth, the Medic Rugby Boys.

These bench-pressing, ‘get your rat out’ singing, six pints an hour lads encompass everything there is to dislike about students, and well, people in general.  They’re the British university’s equivalent to high-school jocks. The difference is that they’re several years older than their American counterparts and are studying something far more challenging than third grade maths, so we should be able to safely presume they have the intellect to not act like complete tools. I really can’t quite grasp what it is that makes them prance around like they own the place, or rather, that bit of Manchester between the Stopford building and the gym.

Any niggling annoyances I had were emphatically confirmed during the Medics’ Panto last year; a performance of The Wizard of Oz with a twist. I’m no amateur theatre critic, but I thought the whole thing was well written, and would have enjoyed watching Dorothy follow the Medic Prick Road a whole lot more if it wasn’t for that particular section of the audience who thought it was funny to scream abuse at Dorothy every time she came on stage. I understand I sound like a teacher who’s lost control of his class and “Just can’t understand why they have to ruin it for everyone”, but it equated to a two hour long barrage of “Get em out Dorothy, you shlagg!”. I didn’t like the fact that I’d paid five pounds for something I could have seen by standing outside Robbos for ten minutes during an initiation.

I do have friends who fall within this category, so whilst I clearly am making a very sweeping statement I do realise there are some exceptions.  Just be aware, if you do recognise yourself in my words, not everyone is giving you ‘lad points’.

Influence and North Korea

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

“I am who I am because of everyone” was the tag phrase of the old advertising campaign of a certain mobile phone company, and a tag phrase that also I took personal disagreement with, despite it being a very arguable, if pretentious, slogan.

We are, certainly, shaped by the people around us, but that seems a very narrow minded point of view; I feel that we are cultivated by our own personal response of what others say and do, that our natural disposition is just as important as the world around. The slogan is also extremely cyclical, as it suggests that those who form us are formed by others, and then again those people are influenced by other people, and so on and so on until all humanity becomes the same person. Our own nature must form us; a man fixated on money would want to become a banker over becoming a teacher, whereas a philanthropic man would more likely become a doctor.

The word ‘influence’ really has two levels to it: influence that is forced upon us, and influence that we choose to be shaped by. Everyone has role models, be it footballers, movie stars, or physicists, and we all try to emulate the actions of another at least once in our lifetimes, be it because we are told we look similar to that person, or we sound or act similar, or because we find what they do impressive, and that from this those people will indeed shape our lives.

Still, we are fortunately born in a free state, where newspapers are largely uncensored, and the entertainment industry provides much to distract, delight and inform the public. Yet in a few countries the press is bound to political party policy (Maoist China and the old Soviet Union instantly spring to mind).

Of the current age, North Korea is perhaps the most obscure. The repressed country with the capital of Pyongyang has done remarkable work in oppressing its people whilst in turn making them cherish a leader more interest in aggression against the U.S. than in feeding its impoverished countrymen. If anyone has the time to find a documentary by VBS on North Korea I would implore one to do so, it is what, I suppose, really influenced me to write this article.

North Korea has found itself to be in the news frequently as of late, launching missile tests over Japan, allegedly sinking a South Korean ship, and most pertinent to this article, has held its first party conference since 1980. At this conference the countries hierarchy has made a profound signal in the countries shift in power from Kim Jong il to his youngest son Kim Jong un, who was promoted to a four star general of a military dictatorship.

Of course, for many years Kim Jong il will remain in power (at least until the time of his death) but this promotion is an interesting case, promoted over his older brothers (the oldest, Kim Jong nam, denied a promotion due to an attempt to leave the country to visit the Japanese Disneyland in 2001) Jong un is the son of a Japanese woman and, critically, has had the benefit of a European education.

Though indoctrination of North Koreans is very effective, it is easy to assume from even the small amount of Western influence Kim Jong Un that perhaps there will be a shift, culturally and politically, if and when Jong un assumes power. There is also Jong un’s own problems of a lack of a power base, that within the military (of which he has not served) it is only the influence of his father that secures his place, and there is either the choice to reform, which would perhaps make him popular with the people, or to instigate conflict on its borders, to prove his worth as a general. Even so, the quality of life that his people suffer through should be thought of as an important factor in his regime.

Influence is a powerful thing, as has been said we are formed by those around us, and one hopes that indoctrination is not so effective on a man who has lived in a Western culture, even for a short period. Though it will be a long time to wait to see what changes may occur in North Korea, the last major military dictatorship may see a change in its manner when power has changed hands, and a small, highly aggressive and delusional state may finally look at itself and wonder how spectacularly it has gone wrong.

The state of higher education

Written by Henry Hill on . Posted in Features.

In the wake of the release of Lord Browne’s recommendations on the future of higher education in Britain, Union Counsellor Henry Hill presents the case for tuition fees.

Ever since the government set the target of fifty per cent of school-leavers attending university in the nineties, the higher education system has been struggling to adapt. The surge in student numbers has hugely overstretched university resources, and also raised the cost of higher education massively. Despite the hopes of the government, the graduate premium produced by a small proportion of young people going through university and into the professions was not simply conferred upon the swollen ranks of the new graduates. Instead, we have seen the devaluation of degrees and chronic graduate over-qualification and unemployment. With fierce competition in the current job market, more jobs now require a degree for a successful application – sucking more school leavers into higher education and fuelling the downward spiral.

The view I share with successive governments is that variable tuition fees are the answer to these problems. Tuition fees allow a student to decide for themselves whether or not a degree is worth the investment of time and money required, and serves to discourage people taking degrees that they don’t envision making a sufficient return – be that material or personal. In addition to covering the costs of higher education, by reducing the number of students they allow universities to concentrate their resources more effectively. By placing a tangible cost on your degree, they incentivise hard work to get your money’s worth. By curbing the flow of graduates flooding the employment market, they will help to stem degree devaluation and the graduate surplus, with its trickle down effects of raising barriers to employment for non-graduates who would otherwise be perfectly capable of doing the job.

My problem with the alternatives is that they encourage a high number of wasteful degrees, serve to penalise those who get good jobs out of their hard work and are innately unfair. Having higher education be free as it was before 1998 would be ruinously expensive and would require further tax rises on the working population, whilst a ‘graduate tax’ makes a poor return degree a risk-free option by having economically productive students pick up the tab for the rest as well as their own education. In either case, the burden of a lot of low-value degrees is placed upon the shoulders of the hard working.

There are as many definitions of fairness as there are human beings, but I do not believe that a degree is an entitlement. Nobody else owes you the right to spend three years as a student. If you value a degree enough to foot the bill for it you will, and if you don’t that is your decision and responsibility. Government grants and student loans mean that anyone who wants to go to university can do so without worrying about the upfront costs. But if you don’t think that your degree will boost your income enough to be worth paying for, you should reconsider it.

As for the commodification of higher education, it is really an inevitable consequence of trying to hugely raise student numbers. University has shifted from simply being a natural stage in the life cycle of the professional classes to a competitive investment in your employment prospects. There simply isn’t room in the ivory towers for fifty per cent of school leavers, and there never was.

The demise of Barack Obama

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

As political analysts pour over the stats and stories from the mid-term elections, the jubilant scenes that greeted Barack Obama’s election victory in 2008 could not seem further away. Two years of continued economic stagnation and rising unemployment have handed Obama’s Democratic Party a crushing defeat. The Republican’s have seized control of the House of Representatives and would have won the Senate had they not picked two crazy people to run for seats in Nevada and Delaware.

Buoyed by the election results, the Republican Party, driven by the Tea Party movement, are on the warpath. They are desperate to destroy Obama’s health care bill, kill any chance of tackling global warming, and are determined to freeze all government spending; a policy that could prove to have disastrous consequences for a nation where the poverty rate has leapt to 15 per cent in the last two years.

What’s remarkable is that this has all occurred just two years after America’s Liberals were celebrating the election of America’s first black President, and heralding a new age of progressive government. So how on earth have things gone so badly for Barack Obama?

In truth, Obama himself must take much of the blame for his misfortune. His reforms have been too weak, his compromises with a deeply corrupt Washington establishment have been too frequent and his campaign promises have been broken too readily. Health care reform, so desperately needed in a nation where nearly 50 million do not have health insurance, has been passed but will still leave over 20 million Americans uncovered.

Obama has also reneged on his promise to close Guantanamo Bay, has continued George W. Bush’s unconstitutional policy of warrantless wire-tapping, has escalated an un-winnable war in Afghanistan, and has failed to pass meaningful financial reform; leaving the US extremely vulnerable to another financial crisis. As a result his base has been demoralised and his opponents have been resurgent. Of the American’s that voted in the mid-term election, 88 per cent stated that they thought the country was heading in the wrong direction. While a recent poll showed that of the first time voters attracted to Obama’s campaign in 2008, 54 per cent said that they were unlikely to vote in the mid-term elections.

Yet to blame Obama solely for the Democrats’ election woes would be unfair. Yes, his reforms have been weak but, in a deeply polarised political environment, he did well to get anything passed at all. Two years into his term, a poll conducted by CNN found that more than a quarter of American’s doubted whether he was even born in the US. Meanwhile, a similar poll found that more than 15 per cent of Americans believed that Obama is a Muslim. This kind of misinformation has promoted by key members of the Republican Party whose only input during the debate over the health care bill was to claim that government run ‘death panels’ were a key part of Obama’s agenda.

When such a vast proportion of the electorate are so misinformed that they think that you’re a closet Muslim with a penchant for eugenics, how can one be expected to have any chance of running a rational, progressive government?

Yet even if we concede that Obama had little hope of getting his progressive policies through such a divided and ignorant political system; that still does not excuse Obama’s apparent lack of effort in terms of trying to ensure that his key pieces of legislation got passed. His constant compromises with Republicans and conservative Democrats over the health care bill and financial reform have made him seem weak; particularly as those individuals he sought to compromise with – the likes of John McCain and Joe Liebermann – clearly had no intention of ever voting with him anyway. Obama’s unwillingness to fight for progressive causes such as the repeal of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” and the closure of Guantanamo Bay, coupled with his decision to appoint staunch Republican’s like Larry Summers and Tim Geithner to head his economic policy and his willingness to cut deals with health insurance companies and the banking sector have caused many progressives to begin to question just whose side the President is on?

The collapse of Democratic Party in the Mid-term elections last week was caused by a number of things. A resurgent opposition party backed by a powerful ‘news’ channel, a terrible economy and a widespread deep-seated hatred of the President all had an influence; but firstly the blame for the defeat must be placed at Obama’s door. He came to office with the biggest mandate for change a Democratic President has had since Lyndon B. Johnson, but by choosing to cut deals and compromise with the Washington system rather than seeking to change it; he blew it. How he deals with the consequences of his failure will define his time in office.

Partying with Politics – Why Co-operation for Co-operation’s sake will lead us down the wrong path

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

Partying with politics
Why co-operation for co-operation’s sake will lead us down the wrong path
Tom Hoctor

While the rhetoric of ‘new’ or ‘grown-up’ politics has worn out faster than an X Factor winners’ success, we will be left with an important legacy of peacetime coalitions as a direct result of this election. Most critics have so far been surprised by the stability of the coalition and it seems that the attractiveness of cooperation has entered the psyche of the British public. Well, sorry to burst the collective bubble, but adversarial politics is the fundamental backbone to our political discourse.
While the amount of point scoring within politics may be regrettable, we have seen a reinvigoration of debate between political parties following the election and the development of a contentious comprehensive spending review. But to assume that the fashionable coalition rhetoric is not simply point scoring itself is something that should be challenged. It was a strategic victory for Nick Clegg that he was allowed by Cameron and Brown to define cooperative politics as being mature. The creation of Cleggmania hinged on defining single party based politics as immature, ‘old’ politics.
Taking his lead from Clegg’s characterisation John Leech, Liberal Democrat for Withington, claimed that Britain, “might mature to adopt grand coalition” (Mancunion 25/10/10). This shows a flawed understanding of continental politics (or a penchant for misrepresentation) that needs to be challenged.
It is true that grand coalitions do occur in European government and the most recent was between German SPD and CDU from 2005-2009. However, Leech’s core assumption that grand coalition is an expression of political “maturity” should be contested. Neither of the German parties would have chosen this method of government if either could have had a coalition with a smaller party and therefore been the dominant force. The only party that stood to gain from the arrangement was Angela Merkel’s CDU because she was President at the time, something Clegg should bear in mind. There is too much ideological tension in a grand coalition for it to function in a truly efficient manner for a long period.
In addition, continual cooperation between the parties, while potentially popular, could stifle debate. It is certainly not true that the ability to form coalitions in British politics is a sign of maturity. In reality the British press and public have been the victims of a rhetorical coup by Messrs’ Clegg and Cameron. By talking of grown-up politics and mature coalitions they have ingrained the idea that their enterprise is progressive. They have also implicitly convinced the public that cooperation for the sake of cooperation is more important to political process than real, rigorous and thoughtful debate on issues that affect all of our lives.

The Political climate

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

Being a keen Geography student and therefore in a state of constant indecision between science and society, I am enthralled by the politics of climate change. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, there can be little question that humans have influenced, and will further alter the climate on an enormous scale. The political use of this ‘science’ both fascinates and terrifies me. I fear the over-use of science in relation to climate change, because our automatic reaction is to believe anything citing empirical evidence. I do recognise that the only reason we even know anything about it is due to climate scientists, and that it is fantastic that the environmental movement has been able to use scientific evidence to bring climate change to the forefront of global debate. Inevitably this has forced acknowledgement from even the most conservative of powers, and installed it prominently in the forefront of the public imagination.

Nevertheless, I am afraid. Using the ‘science’ to construct a national consensus about the need to change our ways, without tarnishing it with the red brush of ‘radicalism’ will not lead to a just or desirable change, but merely an extension of the status quo. The temperature doesn’t strike us as particularly political. However, the climate is global and our national and personal interaction with it has colossal ramifications all around the world. This puts the issue of climate change up there with imperialism as a firm marker of political persuasion.

Using only ‘science’ to argue for the transformation in the way we use energy , even by the good guys, takes climate change out of its proper political and economic context and allows our imaginations to be influenced because of its unquestionable authority. Regrettably, those most able to influence us are not the well-meaning environmentalists who brought climate change to our attention. Thus, the concept of climate change has been swallowed whole by Neoliberals. It is in the realms of the ‘post-political’. Neoliberals are ideologically committed to a small role for the state and a big role for business, with little participation from us. At present this ideology is firmly gripped by not only the majority of Britain’s media, but also our three leading parties; hence it can safely claim ownership over the ‘middle ground.’ We can map this ‘middle’ ground onto the greedy end of the political axis of climate change, which, crudely put, can be considered as running between mitigation and adaption; us taking the hit for the benefit of others, or ignoring the vulnerable to preserve our present way of life. A further politicisation is the use of public money or private investment to facilitate any reform. Sadly, corporate-capitalism has no heart. Regardless of ‘consensus’ the sole motivation of profit will leave the poor destitute and the self-congratulatory rich moving forwards in ‘greener’ cars and planes.Corporations have heartily embraced the environmental movement and its over-use of science, because it means that we do not hold them accountable for our incessant increases in fossil fuel consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions. The ‘objectivity’ of science paints out the role of capitalism in climate change, so it can continue unthreatened.

Consequently, ‘Climate Change’ has been given its own a-political character as the baddie in our global fairytale. Carbon is the ghastly, oily beast looming menacingly over our nice, clean Arctic ice sheets. Warned of its imminent approach, in a fluster of environmentalism, we frantically chose our weapons from the modern day eco-warrior’s arsenal, ready to hurl at the monster; recycled toilet roll, jute bags-for-life, concentrated fabric softener, refillable coffee pouches, travel mugs, milk-in-jugs, washable nappies and this month’s ‘special eco-edition’ of Grand Designs magazine. Any self-proclaiming ‘green’ product will suffice. You might as well chuck our ‘greenest ever’ coalition government at it too, for all the good it will do.

David Cameron Half-term report

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

David Cameron
Half Term Report

George Robinson, Boarding Master and Head of House

Note from the Headmaster: I am delighted with David’s progress this term. He’s settling in well, and has found a whole gang of new friends. When he first started David was getting a lot of hassle from some boys who were bigger than him; I remember another young David was particularly cruel. These issues seem to have resolved themselves, as they so often do, and I am looking forward to another term with a pupil who is a delight to teach.

Citizenship: This subject is new to our school, an unfortunate consequence of some well meaning government initiative. Despite some of our own reservations, David is very enthusiastic. He is very vocal in class; talking earnestly about “the National Interest” and “Britishness”. He seems particularly keen to emphasise his cosmopolitan upbringing; he has several times repeated an anecdote involving a black man who served in the navy for forty years. B

Economics: David lacks confidence in economics. He relies on one of his smaller friends, master Gideon, to help him out. I regret to inform you that I suspect David may be copying some of young Gideon’s work. Even worse, Gideon himself seems to be myopic in his approach. I have noticed that he only reads samples of the selected texts. And this has fostered a very rigid and orthodox approach to the subject. Gideon seems to be keen to put what he has learned into practice; he has been lecturing some of the younger boys on financial prudence, and reprimanding those who spend to lavishly on lunch. This behaviour has to stop. I have already informed Gideon’s parents and I would be grateful if you could have a word with David about his behaviour toward the other boys. C-

Music: David loves music. Unfortunately, his interest seems to be in the entirely wrong sort. I apologise if I am overstepping the mark, but I think it outrageous that someone so young could be allowed to listen to band called “The Killers”. It is a truly vulgar name, Worse, I suspect David really has more traditional taste than he leads his peers to believe. And that his professed love for what he describes as “indie music” is really more a kind of youthful posturing that reflects a deep-seated desire for popularity. David’s attitude toward music does really reflect all of the worst facets of his character. D

Modern Languages: David has shown certain hostility toward learning French and German. I think this reflects a slightly Euro-sceptic attitude which seems to be developing in the school. I assure you that this is an issue that the staff are addressing. I will keep you updated. B

Extra-Curricular Activities

Debating Society – David is secretary of our school debating society. The chair is an older, slightly bookish boy named William. David is a confident public speaker and address complex issues with a notable simplicity. A few of the staff have mentioned that his speeches do have a certain air of smugness; this is something David should work on if he is keen to pursue this interest in the future.

Cross Country – David was never particularly talented at rugby. He has shown a measure of talent for running and the staff have tried to encourage this.

Voluntary Service Organisation (VSO) – David talks a lot about volunteering. He speaks passionately about the need to foster “strong and vibrant” communities. His words have yet to be backed with action, and we will have to wait and see how the VSO develops with David as its chair.

I Heart: Lars and the Real Girl

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Film.

Lars liked to talk for the both of them

 

  ‘Anatomically correct blow up sex doll’ and ‘heart rending tearjerker’ aren’t usually phrases that appear in the same sentence. This film, however, somehow manages to seamlessly entwine the two and sit them together as naturally as emos and Twilight.
  Set in rural Wisconsin, slightly disabled, delusional recluse Lars bewilders his family when he introduces them to his new girlfriend Bianca, who is, in fact, a sex doll. The locals, who are fond of Lars, think it best to indulge his delusion and welcome Bianca into their lives. Ryan Gosling’s character in this flick is a far cry from that of Noah in sob-fest The Notebook, but don’t fear ladies, he is still fit, despite sporting a questionable moustache.
  The relationship that Lars forms with Bianca is genuinely touching; enough to thaw even the coldest of hearts and the film approaches the difficult topic of mental illness with great sensitivity. Gosling’s portrayal of Lars’ childlike innocence is endearing and most importantly, believable. Coupled with quality performances from the supporting cast, in particular doe-eyed Emily Mortimer as sister-in-law Karin, this film really is something special.
  If you fancy a refreshingly different take on the rom-com then look no further. Lars and the Real Girl manages to charm the viewer while at the same time successfully avoiding ‘cutesy’ territory. The end result is a seriously heart-warming film with just the right amount of bittersweet to keep you smiling right ‘til the end.

Sarah Mcloughlin

Preview: The Social Network

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Film.

The Social Network

 

  If you spend a lot of time worrying that you don’t spend enough time on Facebook; sitting at your computer unable to take your eyes off an essay and only flicking back to the website for three minutes at a time; then this movie might be the one for you. It’s an accessible way to catch up on all of those hours wasted reading books and going on walks, when you should have been on the web familiarising yourself with every notification, every status update, every ‘Like’ and every photo of someone you don’t know.
  The Social Network follows computer genius Mark Zuckerberg, a kind of Peter Parker figure who found his big break not in swinging around New York City, but in creating what is possibly the greatest internet phenomenon ever: Facebook. Zuckerberg faces constant challenges and lawsuits with his idea, not least from the Winklevoss twins who he initially works with, but who later sue him for ‘misinformation’ on the project. Zuckerberg is presented as a fairly unpleasant man, a nerd and also a recluse; he is, in fact, noted to have said on this film: “I just wished that nobody made a movie of me while I was still alive”. When looked at from this angle, The Social Network is an incredibly substantial idea for a film: a character study of a man who created a socially oriented website, has 500 million friends on said website, but in real life, ironically, has barely a chum in the world. It seems like it will follow a sympathetic, admirable and slightly unlikeable character: a breed of literary creation usually only dreamt up by authors like Patricia Highsmith.
  Zuckerberg came up with the notion at Harvard and launched the primitive website from his dorm room. Weird to think; that something that has become a scarily large part of everyday life for 500 million people, was started in what a lot of first years are experiencing now: a room where old beer cans used as ashtrays are literally heavy with cigarette butts, where old orange skins cling to the bottom of waste paper baskets and where blackish grime and bits of indefinable matter stick to an unwashed bowl on your desk. Maybe it’s different at Harvard, but it’s still a fairly novel (if disgusting) notion.
  Released in America last week to critical acclaim, it should be on our screens by the end of this one. This is definitely something to look forward to and is also, whether you think it a good or bad thing, unbelievably relevant to students.

Steve Jones, Film Editor

Review: Mr. Nice

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Film.

Rhys Ifans plays Nice

2 Stars

  Few crime biopics can claim to reach the thrilling heights attained by Martin Scorsese’s 1990 tour de force Goodfellas, and Mr Nice, for all its technical accomplishment and subversive swagger, is yet another entry in a long list of films that fall depressingly short of the ‘wise guy’ mark.
  Directed by Bernard Rose and starring Rhys Ifans, Mr Nice charts the life of Britain’s most notorious drug smuggler, Dennis Howard Marks. At the peak of his criminal career, Marks was estimated to control over 10% of the world’s marijuana trade, and there would certainly appear to be the seeds of an extravagant ‘rags to drug-bought riches’ tale in his improbable true story. Born in small-town Wales in 1945, Marks defied his working-class odds and gained admission to Oxford University, whereupon he was introduced to the murky world of drug dealing by some of his more ‘enlightened’ peers. In principle, therefore, Mr Nice seems to contain all the narrative ingredients of classic cinema; think An Education meets Scarface, with the added bonus of a Welsh accent. Fatally absent from the finished product, however, is any sort of charm, depth, or cause for emotional investment.
  Taking its inspiration from Marks’ 1996 autobiography of the same name, Mr Nice is unsurprisingly reverential and seems reluctant to ask any real questions of its protagonist. Most crucially, by presenting Marks as ‘Mr Nice’, the film fails to explore the moral dilemma inherent to his profession. Instead, Rose’s script opts for a rather shallow pro-legalisation, pro-Marks stance which ultimately suggests, to quote one glib piece of dialogue, that ‘it’s the law that’s wrong’. The result of this is an emotional detachment that means we do not care when Marks is finally sent to prison, nor do we care when he is reunited with his family. In essence, Marks’ flaws are the films flaws, for he is not nearly an appealing enough character to pull off his proposed mythic status as a weed-smoking bastion of liberty. Like the man himself, Mr Nice is a charmless and long-winded exercise in bloated self-importance.
  Despite all this, there are some positives to be taken from the film; most notably, Ifans’s wholehearted and, by all accounts, accurate portrayal of the lead role. One memorable scene, shot in evocative black and white, sees the forty-three year old actor inhabiting the part of a teenage Howard Marks, and he does so with his trademark mix of sensitivity and aplomb. Indeed, as demonstrated by his infinitely superior depiction of Peter Cooke in the television drama Not Only but Always, Ifans is surely one of the most multifaceted British actors of recent years, which makes it even more disappointing that his talents should be wasted on a movie as sickeningly one-dimensional as Mr Nice.

Verdict: All style and no substance make Mr Nice a dull film.

Josh Gulam