Skip to main content

Day: 4 November 2011

Are we starving UK education?

Following the publication of the international university rankings last month, Director General of the Russell Group Wendy Piatt had words of warning for the British education sector. ‘Our global competitors are pumping billions into higher education and snapping at our heels.’ At a time when the government is hell-bent on reducing its contribution to university funding, Dr. Piatt insists that ‘money really matters.’

Figures show that under the current funding system, the UK government invests just 0.6 percent of GDP in Higher Education. This compares with an OECD average of 1 percent of GDP. The government has called for UK universities to source more of their income from the private sector. But the University of Manchester’s published accounts from the last financial year show that the public funding for UoM (not counting tuition fees to be repaid) stood at just a quarter of its income. In short, 73.5 percent of Manchester’s income stems from the private sector.

How does this compare with other universities ranked by THES in the top 50 institutions? The University of Hong Kong for example, receives a staggering 60 percent of its income directly from the HKSAR Government. This does not include student loans for tuition fees. This places HKU a mere 14 places ahead of Manchester in the rankings at no. 34 in the world. These figures clearly show the level of financial commitment required from the UK government if it wishes to maintain Britain’s competitive edge in education.

In terms of the student experience, some differences between the two institutions are noticeable. Whilst on exchange at HKU I took courses in humanities and social sciences, so I cannot speak for applied or life sciences, or business. However, One of the greatest advantages HKU had over Manchester in the educational experience, is class sizes. My history lectures, for example, had on average 9 people in the class. This may sound intimidating to some, or perhaps a sign of a failing department. I can however testify to the excellence of arts teaching at HKU, it certainly isn’t struggling. Rather, these small class sizes had the noticeable effect of engendering detailed, incisive and informed class discussion. Everyone prepared because they couldn’t hide in the class. The small lectures took the form of 2 or 3 hour long tutorials and I left them with a head full of information.

The difference as I see it, between Manchester and HKU, is not the standard of teaching. Rather, it is the richer form of teaching that is possible because of smaller classes. Manchester is far better equipped with physical resources at its nine libraries. But the availability of those resources cannot account for the value of a better and more personal education that is facilitated by smaller classes. If these are the advantages that more money can provide, it seems Britain is at a real risk of falling behind.

Facebook ‘rioter’ jailed

A Facebook user who posted messages on the social networking site urging rioting in Manchester has been sentenced to three years in prison.

Philip Scott Burgess, 22, posted messages on his profile page following unrest in London, Liverpool and Birmingham calling on people to riot.

“We need to start riot’n” posted Burgess on 9th August, under Facebook name ‘Philip Rio Burgess’, “We need to put Manchester on the map”.

Shortly after he wrote his messages rioting began near his home in Salford, before spreading to Manchester city centre.

PC John Hepke from the Bolton West Neighbourhood Policing Team said: “The widespread disorder in Manchester city centre and Salford drew disbelief and shock.

“Everyone witnessed the disgraceful scenes of violence, looting and arson and it is clear that social networking sites were used to incite certain elements of this disorder.”

Burgess was arrested at his home on 16th August as a huge police response to the riots worked round the clock to identify any offenders involved in the looting and rioting.

PC Hepke said, “At that time, Greater Manchester Police vowed that we would identify anyone involved in using social networking sites to stir up hatred, and once Burgess had been exposed, our team in Bolton was brought in to investigate.

“The comments he posted on Facebook were clearly designed to incite people to commit disorder in Manchester just hours before those awful scenes.

“Such postings could only have caused distress and upset to those his abuse was targeted against.

The sentencing comes after two ‘Facebook rioters’ James Blackshaw, 20, and Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, from Cheshire had their appeals against their four-year prison terms rejected.

Police say they continue to pursue anyone involved in the August rioting.

Assistant Chief Constable Ian Hopkins said, “Our officers are continuing to identify those involved in the disorder, whether it be a looter, someone who set fire to property, an offender involved in violent disorder or those who helped organise the disorder via social networking and we will pursue those offenders until they are brought to justice.”

Mercurial Muppets

The Contact Theatre describes this adaptation of Romeo and Juliet as giving ‘new life’ to the play, which has been adapted countless times. It attempts to achieve this through the use of puppetry, innovative lighting and a much shorter performance time. In cutting much of the original play, the play is able to entice a younger audience, whilst performances that span three hours or more are often daunting.

This performance focuses upon the meeting of Romeo and Juliet, wonderfully choreographed fight scenes, and ultimately the key characters deaths. The strength of this adaptation lies largely within these fight scenes, where the audience is mesmerised by the use of light in replacement of weaponry, and trance-like music. These scenes are fast paced, and exciting if not particularly emotive. It is difficult on the death of Mercutio to feel anything more than amazement; the throwing of light is bewitching but fails to convey the fury and rage of close combat.

Puppetry in Romeo and Juliet sounds exciting, and leads to a great sense of anticipation as to how these puppets will be used, and what they will look like. However, sadly, this anticipation was soon replaced by confusion. The puppets employed are operated on stage by two or more of the cast. It was hard to ignore the fact that there are so many people on stage representing so few characters. I found myself wondering which member of the cast would speak the lines, and looking to them for facial expression. Furthermore, the puppets varied vastly in style, from traditional puppets to figures that resembled Star Wars characters. This was confusing, and I was unable to comprehend which characters all of the puppets represented.

This reimagining of the infamous play was acted well, and the shorter length allows the audience to be engaged throughout. For me however, this adaptation would have been far more effective without the puppetry, it was an exciting idea but one that for me, fails to convey the raw emotion of this doomed love story.

Use of puppets = 1/5    Costume = 1.5/5     Acting= 3/5 

Use of innovative lighting and props= 3/5    Music= 4/5

Overall= 2/5

Rosie Panter

 

The Contact Theatre is well know for staging original and innovative drama and this production of Romeo and Juliet followed the trend, bringing puppetry into the adaptation of one of Shakespeare’s most famous plays.

However perhaps the most interesting thing about the performance wasn’t the innovative use of puppets but, in fact, that the performance would have served better without the inclusion of this addition. The main problem with the use of puppets was that they seemed incongruous. Whilst half the puppets used were star wars characters the other half were simply a collection of mismatched figures. There didn’t appear to be any symbolism of the star wars characters, or particularly the puppets in general. The fact that the puppets were unable to offer any facial emotions meant your eye was drawn to the cast member holding the puppet – who more often than not was acting out the part, far better than the puppet itself was.

In fact, other aspects of the performance far outshone the use of puppets. The use of light during the fight scene which results in Mercutio’s death was a use of original stagecraft which really enhanced the drama of the moment when Mercutio was struck.

One very noticeable element of the performance was the way in which it evaded being tied to any particular contextual setting. This enhanced the comic value of the moments when the actors ad-libed without making it seem as though they were trying to drag the script into a certain direction to fit a certain context. Whether on purpose or not, the lack of definable context highlighted the play’s ability to transcend time as its ending still remains as sad for any audience today.

Use of puppets= 1.5/5    Costume= 2/5    Acting= 4/5

Use of innovative lighting and props= 4/5    Music = 3.5/5

Overall= 2.5/5

Hannah Lawrence

 

The prospect of seeing Shakespeare’s arguably most famous play, Romeo and Julietin the Contact Theatre, Manchester, stirred both feelings of excitement and anxiety. It appears that there is an element of fear around this play: that it should be untouched and left simply to the likes of Baz Luhrman’s 1996 film adaptation or the traditional thespians of the RSC. Therefore, it seems appropriate to award some credit to Night Light Theatre for simply undertaking such a heavy weight text.

The production was undeniably imaginative: puppets, live music, stage fighting, creative lighting, magic, choral singing and so on. The set itself, a multifunctional circular raked wooden stage, was reminiscent of the Globe, whilst creating a practical and beautiful platform for the action to take place. The music transformed moments: a highlight being the party scene, in which Romeo and Juliet meet for the first time, was effectively underscored by a folk rendition of the Shakespearean text. A perfect example of how music can be intertwined into the action to give the performance a fuller sensory impact. However there was an underlying sense that this multi-layering of production features was an attempt to distract from the mediocre standard of acting. I find it hard to comprehend that, when the theatre world is inundated with actresses, casting directors can get the role of Juliet so wrong.

Night Light Theatre had consciously edited the script by almost half, allowing the play to run for ninety minutes without an interval. This created a simplified version of the turbulent narrative and a far more accessible performance for the many sweet – eating children in the audience. I have no issue with this decision and applaud their attempt. Yet, it seemed that the play’s most important moments, such as Mercurtio’s death, were lost.

Puppets were used to replace all the adult characters in the play. This was an interesting addition to the performance and created a different visual element. The fairy-like nurse in particular was humorous, endearing and entertaining. However, despite the obvious craftsmanship, the reason for the implication of the puppets was unclear and the connection with the other characters and actors themselves was clunky. This incongruent link between narrative and creative choice was also apparent with the use of magic. Rather than violence, the youths fought with light beams to represent magical forces.  Once again the creative meaning behind this, other than being visually alternative, was never made clear.

The overall impression was that Night Light Theatre was attempting to do too much whilst not really doing anything at all. There were parts which looked attractive and as if there was the opportunity to create something quite special but were never fully executed. Furthermore, there never seemed to be a reason why. Why include magic instead of violence? Why include puppets instead of actors? They had good intentions but the additions were only there for the sake of it. It is a fine line between creative ambition and delusional aspirations, and in spite of great efforts, Night Light Theatre’s Romeo and Juliet unfortunately falls into the latter.

The contact theatre is well know for staging original and innovative drama and this production of Romeo and Juliet followed the trend, bringing puppetry into the adaptation of one of Shakespeare’s most famous plays.

However perhaps the most interesting thing about the performance wasn’t the innovative use of puppets but, in fact, that the performance would have served better without the inclusion of this addition. The main problem with the use of puppets was that they seemed incongruous. Whilst half the puppets used were star wars characters the other half were simply a collection of mismatched figures. There didn’t appear to be any symbolism of the star wars characters, or particularly the puppets in general. The fact that the puppets were unable to offer any facial emotions meant your eye was drawn to the cast member holding the puppet – who more often than not was acting out the part, far better than the puppet itself was.

In fact, other aspects of the performance far outshone the use of puppets. The use of light during the fight scene which results in mercutio’s death was a use of original stagecraft which really enhanced the drama of the moment when Mercutio was struck.

One very noticeable element of the performance was the way in which it evaded being tied to any particular contextual setting. This enhanced the comic value of the moments when the actors ad-libed without making it seem as though they were trying to drag the script into a certain direction to fit a certain context. Whether on purpose or not, the lack of definable context highlighted the play’s ability to transcend time as its ending still remains as sad for any audience today.

Use of puppets = 3/5     Costume = 2/5     Acting = 2/5

Use of innovative lighting and props = 2.5/5     Music = 3/5

Overall= 2/5

Claire O’Neill

 

Romeo and Juliet ran at Contact Theatre between 18th and 20th October