Skip to main content

Day: 1 February 2016

TEDxManchester Ticket Giveaway

Written by Nicole Tamer on . Posted in News.

In association with TEDxManchester, The Mancunion is giving away 24 passes for the sold out event for the final session at 3:30pm on the 14th of February. After a two-year break, HOME is hosting the popular event which will feature a wide range of inspiring live talks.

The audience can expect engaging and provocative speakers from the arts, technology, media, science, academia, industry and more. The event’s innovative and thought-provoking talks inspires the masses with over 3 million subscribers on the TEDx youtube channel which boasts over 30,000+ videos from organisers in more than 130 countries.

TEDx is based on the model of the TED conferences which are comparatively very expensive. TEDx talks are organised independently of TED conferences and inspired a more local approach in the spirit of the TED conferences’ mission: ‘ideas worth spreading’. Each event curates speakers on their own, but based on TED’s format and rules.

Fill in your details here and you might be one of the lucky 24 people who can have some food for thought on Valentine’s day!

Preview: Earth Week

Written by William Brown on . Posted in News.

This week, Earth Week will be hitting the University of Manchester Students’ Union for the third year running. Lectures, events and giveaways will be scheduled throughout the week, all centred on the theme of preservation of the planet—with the aim of challenging climate injustice.

The week will kick off on Monday 8th February at 6pm in Room 6 of the Students’ Union building with a general debrief of the week. There will also be a pop-up vintage charity stall in the Students’ Union foyer all day.

Tuesday 9th February is called ‘Capitalism is climate change’. There will be a panel discussion on the topic discussing ‘Why fracking spells disaster for society and for the environment’ at 6:30pm in Room 2 of the Students’ Union. Local fracking activists and members of the People & Planet network will be present.

Wednesday 10th February will be based around the topic of food waste and poverty. At 5pm there will be a campaigning session on the social and environmental implications of the prevalence of food waste in the Council Chambers at 5pm and a pop-up charity vintage shop all day inside Owen’s Park Café.

On Thursday 11th February, there will be a free cyclists’ breakfast from 8am – 12pm in Biko’s Café. Also, at 1pm at Manchester Museum there will be eco-action climate games with the aims of raising awareness amongst the general population.

Friday 12th February will centre on discussions of the recent floods across much of England, and how cuts and climate change are increasingly endangering the UK. At 7pm in Manchester Club Academy, there will be a benefit rally and gig. According to the event’s Facebook page, proceeds will go to the local victims of climate change in Salford and Greater Manchester.

“No prospect” of Freedom of Information exemption at universities, says Straw

Written by Charlie Spargo on . Posted in News.

Former Justice Secretary Jack Straw, currently sitting on the commission reviewing Freedom of Information (FoI) legislation, has said that there is “no prospect” of universities being made exempt.

Straw has said in response to complaints by universities that the playing field needs to be levelled, that extending the legislation to those private institutions competing with mainstream universities could be a better method of ensuring fairness.

Many universities responded to consultation on the government’s Green Paper on education by saying that they supported the exemption of Higher Education institutions, due mainly to the costs of implementing that Act.

Nicola Dandridge, of Universities UK, gave evidence to the commission, stating that universities are “subject to bureaucratic requirements that other players in that market are not,” and that the disclosure of salaries through FoI could discourage good candidates.

“I think our primary point is there should be a level playing field. There is not a desire to lack transparency.

“What we are proposing is that there should be a review as to the application of the act… which takes into account the circumstances of both the private providers and traditional providers.”

She claimed that the implementation of FoI costs institutions an estimated £10 million a year. Straw, on the other hand, put the cost at only £144.93 per request—in other words, “not backbreaking.”

The case for a “level playing field” universities want might be compelling, but there was nothing to convince the commission that exempting universities was necessary.

“I think there is no prospect of this happening.”

The other option would be to “look at whether the private institutions are standing in the shoes of public institutions and should be covered by the Act,” said Straw.

Student media has used the Freedom of Information Act to reveal certain less than honest activities of universities or their staff. Recently, Bristol’s Epigram paper won the Student Publication Association’s FoI award for revealing that the retiring Vice-Chancellor and his wife took a £20,000 two-week trip to Australia and Asia funded by the university.

The Mancunion covered news last year, uncovered by a request submitted by the Fossil Free Campaign, that the University of Manchester retained £40 million in investments in fossil fuel companies.

Manchester 53rd in top 100 LGBT*-friendly workplaces

Written by Merle Streck on . Posted in News.

The University of Manchester has been ranked 53rd in Stonewall’s top 100 employers for LGBT*-friendly workplaces.

A total of 12 universities were included in the list of Stonewall’s top 100 employers. The Stonewall group evaluates organisations across the country and provides a list compiled from submissions to the Workplace Equality Index in order to ascertain which institutions are the best workplaces for lesbian, gay or bisexual employees. About 400 organizations entered the 2016 Index. As part of the evaluation, employers are assessed on ten areas of employment practices in which 50,000 employees take part in a survey about gay-friendly policies in the workplace.

Ruth Hunt, Chief Executive at Stonewall, announced in the report that the Workplace Equality Index is taking significant steps in becoming more trans-inclusive: “Through consultation, feedback and gathering best practice, we’re developing a great sense of trans experiences in the workplace which will only continue to grow, and we’re fully committed to helping you drive trans-inclusion in your organisation.”

Responding to this recent development of the Work Place Equality Index becoming more trans-inclusive, Claudia Carvell, who currently works at the LGBT Foundation and finished her postgraduate studies at the University of Manchester in September 2015, says: “Whilst Stonewall’s 2016 report states that the ‘Top 100’ index has taken the ‘first steps to becoming trans inclusive,’ there’s inconsistency throughout the survey criteria as to whether it refers to inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT), or whether this is just about lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) inclusion.

“This is key because on a whole, trans and bisexual people tend to experience high levels of discrimination, both inside and outside of the LGBT community.”

The Security Service MI5 was awarded Employer of the Year 2016 and has moved from 134th place to first place within six years. Out of the 12 universities, Cardiff University was placed 20th on the list, followed by Swansea University on 36th place, Teeside (44th), Birmingham (50th) and Essex University a joint 53rd with the University of Manchester.

Carvell also comments on Manchester’s listing as a “gay-friendly” university: “It is definitely positive that attention is being paid to how inclusive workplaces are and that universities are being included in the ‘Top 100’.

“From my personal experience as an undergrad and postgrad student at the University of Manchester, I definitely believe that the University of Manchester deserves to be on the list—many of the staff I had the pleasure of being taught by were openly non-heterosexual and all of the staff—both academic and otherwise—that I ‘came out’ to in one way or another, were accepting.

“Throughout my degrees, I also worked as a University of Manchester member of staff in a bar on the Fallowfield campus: I was ‘out’ the entire time and felt completely supported by my colleagues.

“I think the work being done by the Equality and Diversity department and the LGBT staff network contribute significantly to the inclusive nature of the University of  Manchester for staff and, by extension, students. On top of that, Manchester is a more ‘gay-friendly’ city than many other places across the UK—largely due to the sense of community enabled by Canal Street and the volume of LGBT voluntary and community sector organisations we have to choose from.”

In her statement to The Mancunion, Natasha Brooks, the University of Manchester Students’ Union Diversity Officer, said: “It’s fantastic to learn that the university has been placed within the ‘Top 100 Employers’ again and that the score has increased this year.

“It is important that this acknowledgement is recognised and I hope that the university continues to take an active approach to address the ongoing issues that both LGB staff and students face as there is still a significant amount of work to be done. Furthermore, it is particularly promising to hear that Stonewall is working to include gender identity criteria.”

Nonetheless, according to Carvell, there is still progress to be made: “Anyone that works in this field knows there’s still a long way to go. Just tune in to the campaigns and debates happening across campus regarding the need to diversify our curriculum, our staff network and our student cohort—something that can only really occur if there is a genuine commitment towards equalising opportunities. Additionally, it’s important not to conflate the idea of being ‘gay-friendly’ with actually being inclusive of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people.”

The news of the university’s ranking within Stonewall’s top 100 employers comes conveniently in time for the LGBT history month in February, with events across the UK dedicated to challenging homophobia, biphobia and transphobia. The 2016 National Festival of LGBT History Conference will take place between the 25th and 28th of February and will take place on the campuses of both the University of Manchester and Manchester Metropolitan University.

A University of Manchester spokesperson said: “Each year it gets harder to get into the Stonewall Top 100, so for the University of Manchester to have again made the list is a tremendous testament to our welcoming environment and the hard work of our ALLOUT LGBT Staff Network Group in compiling the index submission and carrying out many other activities which contribute to equality and diversity on campus.”

Re-bunking the myths of veganism

Written by Jessica Chow-Lau on . Posted in Features.

1) Aren’t humans meant to eat meat?

We are omnivores by evolution. When the ancestors of modern humans began consuming meat 2.6 million years ago, the size of their brains increased. The evolving of the organ that differentiates humans from other organisms is closely associated with meat’s rich nourishment and the complicated act of hunting. Harvard biological anthropologist Richard Wrangham agrees that hunting and cooking food is what transformed ancient genes to current ones. Calorie-dense food made our brains grow and supplied the appropriate energy to spread our genes. Our ability to consume a wide variety of Earth’s bounty ensures that extinction is never a threat. Because hunting and cooking requires co-operation, eating meat socialised us and led to the origins of today’s societies. Humans’ omnivorous quality is one of our greatest survival advantages.

2) What is actually wrong with farming animals?

There is nothing wrong with farming animals as long as the animal does not suffer. I doubt that anyone would defend factory farming and agribusiness’s horrific way of raising livestock. But the proliferation of sustainable farms that treat animals with respect from birth to death make eating meat an ethical possibility. A free range cow that turns nutritionally insignificant grass and sunlight into condensed calories is a far cleaner option than fossil fuel powered tractors harvesting soy for heavily processed, soy based, vegan friendly products.

3) But what about health? Is it true that vegans are nutritionally deficient?

Human nutrition is a complicated thing. This is how companies can make so much money selling dubious health products to the public. A diet that will give one person continuous energy will give someone else a headache. What should be eaten for optimal living will vary from person to person. The one recommendation all physicians give is to have a balanced diet. Even pro-vegan Dr. Joel Fuhrman believes that running on a 100 per cent vegan diet can result in “suboptimal levels” of nutrients like omega-3 fatty acids DHA and EPA, iodine, and zinc.

The myth that red meat and animal fat cause cardiovascular diseases is based on the 1953 Keys study that actually shows no causation between the two and has led us defenceless against the true culprit: sugar.

Just like subsisting on meat alone is foolish, so is the belief that vegetables are unquestionably healthy. Like any living thing, plants have defense systems against predators. Plants naturally produce poisons without the aid of applied chemicals (pesticides). They are not sentient beings, but like animals, they are biologically inclined to stay alive and perpetuate their species. For this reason, raw cabbages like broccoli, cauliflower, and kale contain compounds that—if not counterbalanced with enough iodine—could lead to hypothyroidism, slowing hormone production. Eating spinach for the sake of attaining iron will only be possible after the vegetable is cooked. Spinach contains oxalic acid, and when eaten raw, will combine with the plant’s iron to form a molecule too big for humans to digest. The acid is denatured when the vegetable is cooked—which we can then eat in order to obtain iron.

Studies have not concluded whether the health difference between a whole foods based diet that includes a small amount of meat, or a vegan diet is significant enough to advocate one over the other.

4) Surely we can still eat meat if it can be done more humanely?

No food is completely free of death. While unintentional, the accidental killing of small animals in fields used for cultivated plants does occur. Oregon State agricultural scientist Steven L. Davis calculates that the number of small animals killed to grow crops is high enough to justify using more land to raise large ruminants rather than edible plants. If veganism is chosen on the basis of overall suffering, one has to consider that there would be less pain if large mammals were also eaten. Davis concludes: “Humans may be morally obligated to consume a diet from plant-based plus pasture-forage-ruminant systems.”

Whilst many of us are at least familiar with the word “halal”, its strict killing procedures should be mentioned. A small prayer is said as a reminder to give thanks before a sharp knife makes a deep incision into the trachea and jugular vein (front of the throat) for the quickest death possible. An animal must never watch the slaughtering of another animal and the sharpening of the knife must never be done within the animal’s sight. Halal meat does not exist in the same domain as a factory farm as the abhorrent conditions do not comply with the stress-free experience that animals must have before dying. Though difficult to stomach, knowing where our food comes from is crucial to fully appreciating our meal.

That being said, there is an option that does not involve any animal giving up its life. New Harvest is a non-profit organization spearheading the field of cellular agriculture. They are in the process of developing milk, egg white, and meat products in vitro (cell culture) rather than from an animal. Because cells are capable of multiplying in nutrient-rich environments, they can be taken from live farm animals without the act of killing. But not all mediums need to include animals. In biomedical research, most cell cultures have been made using animal blood. Taking it one step further, their researchers are now using sources like plants and micro-organisms to grow cells. Isolated cells are immersed in nutrients, allowing them to multiply and increase their protein content. Resulting cells will be used just like a boneless, skinless, chicken breast; or if you prefer, sausage, hamburger, or chicken nuggets. Cultured meat is analogous to how bread, cheese, yoghurt, and wine are made: they all involve processing ingredients derived from natural sources. Muufri milk and Clara Foods egg whites are estimated to be on the market within the next few years.

5) So what about plants that are living organisms too?

Plants are not sentient, and neither are sea molluscs (oysters and mussels). For some animals, what it means to feel pleasure and pain cannot be reduced to a yes or no answer. But sessile bivalves (organisms that are unable to move and simply open and close their shells) have such simple nervous systems that while pain might be registered, they are unable to differentiate good from bad stimuli. Since they filter out excess nitrogen, mollusk cultivation improves water quality and has a minimally negative (no) impact on their ecosystems. There exists a philosophical road for when any animal’s pain becomes our understanding of pain—it just does not involve oysters and mussels.

We bring these animals into existence. Without us they would have no life.

The suffering of animals is wrong, there is no debate about that. When animals die in the most ideal ways however, we have to consider that the farmers are helping them continue on their species, caring for their young, and giving them a life where they would not have to worry about predators. It involves more than just their death. There are a couple things we should reflect on before that final moment of killing. Do we agree that the moral choice of doing the greatest good for the greatest number of people is right in this situation? Are we willing to divide the world into what is worthy of being sparred the inevitable and what is not worthy? Each person needs to recognize that their meat came from an animal that had to be killed. Animals can willingly and knowingly walk into the slaughterhouse themselves, but it all comes down to those final moments. Death comes to all of us, it’s just a matter of how and when it comes.

6) How does veganism help the environment and humanity?

The idea that meat production is to blame for climate change is false. As the gold standard of global warming monitors, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said in 2006 that emissions from all of farming (tractors, agrochemical production, tillage, etc.) was 10 per cent to 12 per cent of global emissions. As of 2014, the UN Environmental Program asserts that the number for all of agriculture is 11 percent—with cattle being a small percentage of that. World agricultural carbon dioxide emissions result from clear cutting of woods, or deforestation. Brazil—the country experiencing the most deforestation—has their tropical forests cut to make way for soybean fields. These are then shipped for food products and animal feed. But since cattle are mostly raised on grass, farmers and ranchers buy no soy and cannot be blamed for these emissions. According to the Organic Consumers Association, soybeans from Brazil can be traced to tofu and soy milk sold in American supermarkets.

Zimbabwean ecologist and environmentalist Allan Savory’s Holistic Grazing theory suggests that ruminants (antelope, bison, cows) create healthy grasslands when they are kept in groups and are moved from place to place—by naturally digging up grass and leaving manure. According to Savory, this allows grasslands to thrive, preventing the erosion of topsoil. Their nutrient-rich manure promotes deeper root growth of grasses, absorbing and retaining water and carbon dioxide. Moving these herds would require cowboys, bringing jobs to the farm country.

As factory farming hurts the Earth, so does destructive agricultural practices that hurt the land. Irresponsible practices can be replaced with perennial polyculture. This means that plants wouldn’t need to be replanted every year (preventing erosion), and multiple crops would be planted in the same area. Benefits of polyculture include (but is not limited to) a reduced susceptibility to disease, leading to the decreased use of pesticides, and increased biodiversity in said area. When vegans simply blame the meat industry for environmental problems, they are drawing attention away from more pressing issues within their own community.

Livestock provide critical food and cash for the global poor, many of whom live in places where plant crops cannot be grown. And in terms of helping humanity, migrant workers picking vegans’ fruits and vegetables under harsh circumstances render their claims for having a lower carbon footprint fallacious.

7) How much difference can the actions of one person really make?

Each of us can make some difference. Our generation was raised on that belief and it’s especially pertinent now that we can make our own choices. If vegans (or anyone) are telling people to vote with pounds through consumption choices, people will think that is all that is required of them. The public will believe that by just switching brands or watering their lawn less, it will help our environmental situation. Just being a vegan—while nice—is not enough to change public policy. Vegans are not entitled to the claim that their lifestyle helps the environment, the economy, animals, humanity, or (unless prescribed) their own health. The only thing vegans can affirm is that they perceive death differently from us.

Vagina Monologues: Preview

Written by Jennifer Sterne on . Posted in News.

The Students’ Union Women’s Campaign are once again presenting a production of Eve Ensler’s The Vagina Monologues, every night a 7:30pm from the 8th – 10th February.  The production will take place in Academy 3 in the Students’ Union.

The Vagina Monologues is based on Eve Ensler’s ‘vagina interviews’ conducted with 200 women from across the world, gathering their tales and giving a voice to each of their individual experiences as women.

Each monologue aims to take on part of the feminine experience, covering subjects such as sex, love, rape, menstruation, female genital mutilation, masturbation, birth and the common names for the vagina. The running theme of the monologues is how the vagina can be a tool for female empowerment and how it embodies feminine individuality.

Jess Lishak, Women’s Officer of the Students’ Union, told The Mancunion that they decided to run another production this year due to the “huge success of last year’s production.”

Tickets are £5 each, with all proceeds going to help fund the student support worker set up at Manchester Rape Crisis to provide specialist counselling to women students who have experienced sexual violence.

Manchester Rape Crisis (MRC) is a confidential support service for women who have been raped or sexually abused.

Last year’s event sold out in hours, so they’ve added an extra night and increased capacity to ensure more people have the opportunity to see it this time around.

There will also be new monologues written by the cast members as well, so if you were able to see it last year, it is definitely still worth coming again.

Tickets can be bought at the Student Union reception or through their website. For any enquiries or specific access needs, email [email protected].

This play comes with trigger warnings for discussions of rape and transphobia

Review: The Danish Girl

Written by Leah Slater-Radway on . Posted in Film.

In the past year we’ve seen transgender issues feature prevalently in the news (Caitlyn Jenner’s Vanity Fair cover, just to name the most obvious), and The Danish Girl marks a more serious focus on one of the early pioneers of gender reassignment surgery, Lili Elbe.

We meet Einar (Eddie Redmayne) and Gerda Wegener (Alicia Vikander) living as husband and wife in a rather symbolically bare, grey apartment in Copenhagen. It’s his wife, Gerda, who in the film is seen to almost spark Einar’s desire to explore his inner femininity, when he willingly accepts her request to fill in as a life model in a portrait of a dancer. The ensuing scene showing Einar learning how to properly put on a pair of stockings and ballet shoes is acted gracefully by Redmayne, with the focus on his spectrum of facial expressions, and hands tracing the outline of the dancer’s dress, drawing you into the complexity of the character’s emotions.

A large part of the film from here focuses on the pair developing the character of ‘Lili’—finding her the right wig, makeup and clothes, and taking her out to various social events under the disguise of her being Einar’s cousin.

Gerda is portrayed through Vikander’s performance as a dominant, sexually-adventurous spouse who seems quite turned on by her husband’s desire to be Lili more and more, and charts her progression from accepting to helping Einar become who he believes he truly is. She goes on to paint a series of provocative (and sometimes nude) portraits of Lili, which sees her success as an artist climb, and the pair consequently move to the city of grace and femininity itself, 1920s Paris. It was testament to director Tom Hooper’s focus on imagery that the couple’s matrimonial home went from the dark, empty Copenhagen apartment, to a vibrant and open Parisian dwelling, where Lili lives more freely.

The experiences of both characters coming to terms with the fact that Lili is here to say is what presumably has set Vikander and Redmayne up with notability and nominations. Redmayne manages to tackle Einar’s struggle with embracing femininity in a controlled and soft manner. Particularly noteworthy is the scene seeing Einar strip down naked in front of a mirror, as he comes to terms with who he really is and what he thus needs to change of his appearance. Redmayne’s performance focused on Lili’s development of ‘feminine’ body language, with a lot of coy smiles, face-framing and hand-twisting. And whilst I think he tackled an obviously difficult role in a gracious manner, I found the incessant focus on Lili’s smile (etc.) a tad overdone.

One of the most poignant moments in the film is where the couple begins talks with an innovative surgeon on undergoing what was then experimental sex reassignment surgery. “I believe I am a woman,” Lili proclaims to the doctor. “I believe it too,” Gerda supports.

This begins to highlight the importance of Gerda in Lili’s transitioning, making Vikander’s role highly significant and in my view, more resonating than that of Redmayne’s.

Overall, The Danish Girl isn’t a film I’ll necessarily be eager to watch again (but then again no films where I can’t really connect with the characters will top my ‘must re-watch’ list)… Nonetheless, the acting and cinematography is beautiful; however, the film probably doesn’t do justice in its drama of the soul-searching to the struggles that I’m sure the real Gerda and Lili faced.

3/5

Pursuing a healthier version of yourself this year?

Written by Eva Katz on . Posted in Lifestyle.

Provided that you’ve been making the most of home cooking, free alcohol and a lengthy distance between you and your uni gym, you’ll probably be embarking second semester with a little poor cushion for the pushin’. But never fear, Student Shred is here. Set up by a student for students, the company’s founder Tom Burns understands the strains and struggles that student life puts on the body and caters this first-hand knowledge into amazing advice for his clients, and for you lucky readers.

Let’s not kid ourselves, a run in the freezing Manchester rain isn’t an overly appetizing thought. So you’ll be relishing at the news from Tom that cardio really isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be. Instead, he recommends weight and resistance training. For women, this may seem a little daunting, especially to those who’d rather not emerge from the gym resembling Arnold Schwarzenegger, but Tom asserts that muscle training is actually the key to achieving the curves and shape that so many strive to achieve. However, Tom is also a big advocate of the more unusual forms of cardiovascular exercise. Take sex, for example. Apart from feeling pretty darn good, Tom asserts that it will not only “lower stress” and “increase confidence”, but your sex drive will also increase and thus, your performance, too. Not to mention the increased flexibility…

For those who want to burn fat, Tom asserts that “nutrition accounts for 80% and training 20%”. No matter how much you train, if you’re eating badly you’re unlikely to achieve the chiselled body you desire. So if you’re a student who has chosen not to add cooking to your list of life skills, then this could be a bit of a wake up call. Tom is big on cooking and counts it as an essential part of achieving optimum fitness on a student budget. To those with untrained taste buds, many super foods may seem like tasteless, vile and expensive things unlikely to grace your store cupboard in the near future. But with the right knowledge, Tom asserts that eating healthy doesn’t have to break the bank and can taste good, too. There’s no need to completely sacrifice those post-exam booze binges and cheeky Chicken King meal deals. Tom admits that “your favourite wine or alcohol may not be the right choice” but advises spirits with non-carbonated drinks as a healthier alternative. For combating a hangover, he recommends consuming a nutritious meal prior to your night out and regularly drinking water in between drinks.

There is a popular belief that carbs are bad. But in reality, they’ve just been given a bad name by a select few. They’re essential to maintaining healthy energy levels, especially if you’re exercising regularly. But which carbs are good and which ones are not?! Well, that all depends on their glucose levels. The glycemic index categorises carbs in the order of how fast they release glucose into the blood. High glycemic foods such as bread, sugar, honey and chocolate (and basically every other food that’s too tasty to be good for you) are BAD. Not so bad for you are the foods belonging to the medium category: pasta, white rice, fruit and potatoes. The best of the bunch however are the low glycemic foods which include: nuts, brown rice, whole wheat pasta, sweet potatoes, vegetables and oats.

So now you know what to eat and how to train, but fat loss isn’t solely dependant on food and training—particularly if you’re female. Sleep, hormonal cycles, stretching and motivation are all major factors. So sleepless nights from either partying, last minute revision or essay prep could be more damaging than you thought. The trick is to get into a routine. But don’t be too hard on yourself— as with all things in life, it’s all about balance. A social life is also of great importance, but it’s not all about big nights out and sharing a Domino’s pizza. Try and integrate your new active lifestyle into your social life—go cycling, walking, or join a class with a friend. Ultimately, there’s no need for a triad of unattainable New Year’s resolutions, but instead, a single aim to pursue a healthier version of yourself this year.

If however, you’re in need of a little extra inspiration, then why not try out Student Shred? Tom offers nutrition and exercise programmes catered around student living’s needs and expectations, as well as budget!

For more information, contact Tom Burns on: [email protected], or visit his website: www.studentshred-co-uk.com

Interview: Jeffrey Lewis

Written by Henry Scanlan on . Posted in Music.

Since first hitting the so-called “anti-folk” circuit in 1997, Jeffrey Lewis has been staking his place as a fringe icon with a steady drip of lovingly crafted records and comics. The man described by Jarvis Cocker as “the best lyricist working in the US today” has always been honest and open as a songwriter, and equally so as an interviewee. But when we fired over a few questions via email to the New York folk hero recently, we could hardly have expected the brilliant 3,000-word manifesto he fired right back. What followed is essentially a Jeffrey Lewis guide to reconciling dignity and success as a modern musician.

 

You seem to have been able to attain and maintain a position of neither scary superstardom nor commercial failure. Is this the perfect level of success?

In many ways it seems to be a good place to be, much better than being overexposed and over-rated. I feel like I’ve still got a long way to go before everybody’s tired of me, because most people have never heard of me, that’s a very different position to be in than somebody who has already gotten a lot of press exposure, magazine covers, TV appearances, all of that stuff, I feel like once an artist gets that level of exposure it’s sort of like you’ve had your day, and everything you do after that can be viewed as some sort of decline. So you’re better off with a very slow climb, rather than a quicker climb, which could lead to a drop. Actually none of that stuff matters at all, the only thing that matters is touching something, reaching something, artistically, that generates the spark of excitement and discovery that makes something great. You have to constantly leave your comfort zone to get to that place; so if your comfort zone gets too comfortable it’s harder to challenge yourself to be great.

Have you ever had the option of ‘selling out’? And is that an unthinkable thing for you to do?

Depends what you mean, I do remember in 2001 when Rough Trade offered me that first album contract, just to put out The Last Time I Did Acid I Went Insane, to make a CD of songs from my tapes, and pay me a $1,000 advance, and have the CD come out in stores on the Rough Trade label, that seemed like a step into the “commercial” music world that I was unsure of taking. I considered not doing it, keeping my musical path completely separate from the world of labels and distribution, and just sticking with recording my songs on to cassettes and selling them for $3 at my gigs the way I always had, very cheap and very home-made, and then leave the rest of it to pure word-of-mouth, that seemed purer and more natural.

In retrospect, I think the decision to work with Rough Trade forced me to up my level of quality. The awareness that more people were listening forced me to stop messing around as much and start giving myself a higher standard of quality. Prior to that I was much more of a mess, the recordings were sometimes unlistenably low-fidelity, and the live concerts were more full of unrehearsed songs. I didn’t even have a tuning pedal for my guitar in those early years. I’d spend so much time on stage being out of tune or trying to re-tune my guitar, stuff like that. So that first “sell out” of putting stuff out on Rough Trade was probably a good thing for me. Artistically, it made me place higher value on what I was doing, and try not to mess up as much. But other than that, I have no interest in commercializing my material.

So I’m guessing you wouldn’t let your songs be used in adverts?

I don’t need the money! I’m able to pay rent and eat and buy some records, so why would I want to let my songs be used to sell somebody else’s ideas other than my own? I’ve turned down various offers from commercial interests, stuff for car commercials or jeans, I try to avoid that stuff in any way that I can. It’s crazy that even at my tiny level you get pounced on as a potential billboard.

When you play some little festival you get an email like “Every performer playing at this festival gets a free pair of this particular brand of jeans! All you have to do is tell us your size, and wear the jeans on stage during your set, and you can keep them!” And I’m like, what is this? Am I a homeless naked person walking around wearing a barrel? Do I have to go through the humiliation of being somebody’s sandwich board just for the sake of me getting a pair of pants? First of all, I already have pants, and if I want another pair of pants I can just buy them. Second of all, you want me to advertise your stuff for you and you’re not even offering to pay me? You expect me to be so grateful just for the chance to own a free pair of of pants that I’ll pimp your product for you?

It’s crazy how people just take for granted that you are supposed to be excited about advertising any random product they throw at you. Even when it’s some higher-budget car commercial thing, I just don’t need it. Of course, if I really needed the money, or if somebody I loved was sick and I needed to money to pay for their treatment or something, then it would be a different discussion, there might actually BE a discussion. But without actually needing it, there’s no reason to even enter into a discussion about it. I don’t hold it against artists to do this stuff—The Fall is one of my favourite bands and there have been commercials that use their music, but they probably needed the money, or whatever, I don’t know, it’s not any of my business really. It doesn’t affect my love for the band. It’s a personal decision. I’m lucky that I’ve been in a position where I can afford to just stand on a high-horse and spout off about this, maybe later in my life things might change and I won’t feel so casual about pointing fingers and yapping.

How has Manhattan changed over the years that you’ve been there, and how do you feel about it?

All cities change over time, and when you’re 20 and you realize your city is a lot different from how it was when you were 10, you feel indignant about it, and you complain a lot. But by the time you’re 30, and you realize it isn’t even the same as it was when you were 20 or 25, you start to realize this is just the constant process of change that happens everywhere, all the time. You could talk to somebody in San Francisco, Berlin, Dublin, Beijing, Tel Aviv, Manchester—everybody would have similar complaints.  There is basically zero chance that you could ever find a city anywhere on earth where people wouldn’t have similar complaints, over a similar period of time.

I don’t mean to suggest a pure fatalism, because there are things that are worth organizing and fighting to preserve. I don’t believe in the “invisible corrective hand of capitalism” or the “democracy of the free market” or self-serving rich-person ideological crap like that. There is definitely a tremendous value in having tenant’s organizations and historical preservations and zoning laws and rent regulations and a whole lot of other protections for people and neighbourhoods and families and small businesses. I would much rather see strong regulations for all of that stuff, and fight for better laws and protections for that, rather than just throw up my hands and say “oh well, things change, don’t complain about it.”

How’s the music scene in Manhattan these days? And more generally what are you listening to?

I don’t listen to much modern stuff, in general. I can’t hear most modern performers as artists, I just hear them as business people. It doesn’t matter how good the band is. I know too much about the machinations behind the music, and I know how over-thought their recording process is, how much they are second-guessing what they think would be successful. I know how much their stage-show is a pre-scripted theatrical piece based on a set-list that they play basically exactly the same way every night, with a sound engineer who knows what song is coming next and what levels to adjust the sound to in order to have it sound the way it does on the album.

Isn’t that a little pessimistic?

I can’t help it! I can just picture them in negotiations about what kind of commercials their music needs to sound good for, or how to master their album so that the sound quality is good enough to potentially be included in a movie soundtrack or a video game. I don’t look around me and see anybody I can believe in as an artist.

The motives are so petty to me. In fact, the motives look petty to me even if it’s a band of hedonists, who don’t care about business but just care about getting drunk and getting laid. It’s very rare that I get a sense that somebody is aiming at some kind of higher creative star in the sky, something that I can emotionally feel like devoting myself to. If somebody is successful it basically already rules them out as somebody I can believe in.

I know that’s a pathetic standard because it makes me sound like a curmudgeon. But the best concerts I’ve seen are usually the small ones, the act playing at an open mic who blows my mind because she’s playing her song live for the third time and not the three-hundredth time, the band recording made by a band who has no idea what mastering is, etc., etc.

This is not to say that there’s no such thing as a well-crafted piece of brilliant art, made by a brilliant visionary artist, who is also able to be smart and successful and aware of how to conduct themselves in the world of business. But it’s not the norm. That was a very long answer and not even quite on topic! You’ve caught me in a ranting mood. I’m probably just ranting on and on because I’m procrastinating on other work I need to do today so I’m stretching out this interview.

Was Manhattan a quick record to write and produce or was it a long time in the making? Do you prefer your albums to be spontaneous and imperfect, or careful and laboured over?

Manhattan was about 15 days of work to record, but stretched out over about 6 months, and that was a very good process, allowing me to think quite a bit about what I was doing. But the previous album Jeffrey Lewis & the Jrams was done in one single day, and in general I think too many albums are thought about too much nowadays, it’s much harder to do an album without thinking.  Everybody has too much opportunity to re-think and over-think.

I think an album should be perfect either way—either perfectly off-the-cuff and carelessly constructed, or perfectly thought-out and carefully constructed. It’s that vast middle-ground where it’s not enough of one side or the other, that’s when you end up with a mediocre album, and that’s what too much stuff ends up as.

Are you a better musician now than you’ve ever been before?

I’ve gone up and down. I’m definitely way way better now than I was when my first albums were coming out, but I’m probably not at my peak now because I think I was better during times when I was touring more relentlessly. There are finger-picking patterns and guitar solo stuff that I can’t do now as well as I know I could do them at certain points in the past, but it seems to come and go.

It’s the same with my art: when I’m drawing a lot I’ve got sharper skills, and then if I don’t draw as much I have to fight my way back up to the higher levels I was at before. In general I think you keep getting better at stuff the more you do it.

Over 15 or so years in the ‘biz, have you seen a lot of other musicians/artists around you give up and find new jobs? Were you ever close to doing the same?

Every time I make an album I feel like it’s the last one, because I don’t have any good stuff left over, and I can’t imagine how I could ever write another song, and I despair, then I write ten stupid songs over the next year and nothing is worth holding on to and I despair more and feel convinced that I’m cooked.

Then somehow I end up on the other side eventually, with new material that I feel great about, and excited about, and I feel better than ever. Maybe one day that will stop happening, and then I’ll just rot away and come to a halt when I’m tired of the old songs and not excited about the new songs. I hope not.

Kudos to Nudo

Written by Eva Katz on . Posted in Food & Drink.

Nudo greets its punters (largely made up of suited and booted professionals, looking for a bite on-the-go) with a front resembling pre-assembled food giant, Pret A Manger. The wall is adorned with lines of soup tubs and a colourful assortment of sushi boxes; so enticing that they would leave a sushi lover feeling like a child in a sweet shop. The queue snakes almost to the door; Oxford Road’s Nudo is clearly a popular lunchtime haunt for many.

Astonishingly reasonable prices are the wasabi on the California roll here. But there’s a catch; the usual Japanese adornments one would expect to find within reach on their table come at a price. You do of course, get a small sample of soy and wasabi in your Nudo box, but for those who enjoy the Airwaves-like sensation of wasabi to be mellowed by the sweet and sour tang of pickled ginger, there will be a charge for the privilege. In consideration of the deliciously low price tag on the sushi boxes themselves, one really cannot complain; after all, good sushi is not the cheapest lunchtime treat.

Fast food is the game in this restaurant and, as such, the setting is a little cold and oddly unwelcoming to those who might wish to eat in. For those who wish to grab and go, the service is quick and efficient and the place has the air of sophistication and cleanliness that instils a sense of confidence into the quality of your meal; though the cool blue interior is not the place you want to stay in for a leisurely green tea for hours on end.

That’s not to say, however, that the sushi is anything less than flavourful morsels of seafood and rice combos. Cool, fresh fish on a base of sticky white rice, the nigiri hit the spot. What’s more, their combinations are endless, ranging from vegetarian to swordfish for the more experienced. Alternatives such as the King Prawn Miso Soup Ramen are plentiful, and considerably filling for their rather unobtrusive price.

For food on the go, Nudo is a fresh Eastern alternative, good enough to tear you away from that dull sandwich lingering in your lunchbox. But for those who wish to enjoy their sushi at leisure, take out is recommended to allow you ample opportunity to appreciate good sushi in comfort.