Skip to main content

Day: 11 October 2016

Feature: Monsters and the Femme fatale

Written by Rosa Simonet on . Posted in Film, Uncategorised.

The chilling new Netflix documentary, Amanda Knox, aims to challenge the public’s obsession with real life crime, but ends up exhibiting the blatant persecution of women who have sex. The documentary–directed by Rod Blackhurst and Brian McGinn—details the investigation of the murder of Meredith Kercher, while exposing the cruel and chaotic nature of our culture of obsession.

The harrowing footage at the beginning of the film is a somber reminder of the murder of Meredith, often completely overshadowed by the speculation regarding Amanda Knox. We see a red hand print on the wall, a blood-stained bra, and dark, deep pools of blood coming from underneath the sheets covering Meredith’s body; the work of what one could only assume was a monster. Over this chilling reveal of the original crime scene, Amanda begins to speak. She begins to explain the lack of ‘in-between,’ when it comes to her judgement and why perhaps she became a symbol of both fear and vulnerability. In this explanation emerges the film’s tagline ‘either I’m a psychopath in sheep’s clothing, or I am you,’ an introduction to key elements of the investigation that enabled and, in fact, contributed to the demonisation of Knox.

The opening sequence points at the media. ‘Were you into deviant sex? …experimental activities?’ are the words of one reporter interrogating Knox. Obsession with Knox’s sex life became a crucial aspect of the media frenzy and trial, despite it having little to do with the investigation. Headlines and statements eager to depict Knox as a sex-crazed murderer are key to the documentary’s scrutiny of the press.

At the heart of this portrayal is Nick Pisa, Daily Mail Reporter. It would be too easy to mock his contribution to the speculation; working for a newspaper which applauds unethical journalism and malicious gossip. Throughout the documentary Pisa reminds himself of the success of the story, often becoming giddy and at one point compares getting the world exclusive front cover story of Kercher’s autopsy report to ‘having sex’. He frames Knox as a ‘nutter,’ an assumption made from a picture of Knox from her Myspace page. Knox, in an attractive yellow dress, sits behind a machine gun pulling a funny face. The picture is quite clearly posed and intended to be viewed as humorous, but Pisa among other journalists used this as evidence of both Knox’s sexual deviance and mental instability.

Makers of the documentary highlight the extent of Pisa’s stupidity following the declaration of Knox’s and Raffaele Sollecito’s innocence. Pisa says, completely ignorant of his own guilt, there was ‘no one else to blame but the police,’ and their ‘wild theories.’ (Nod to the composer for the simultaneous hiccup in the melody.)

Also, at the centre of these conspiracies is Prosecutor and Sherlock Home’s fan Giuliano Mignini.  Though amusing, Mignini’s attachment to his pipe only works to parody his ‘traditional’ outlook. Mignini’s accusations are considerably driven by Knox’s sex life. At one point he creates his own script of the night of the murder; saying Amanda is ‘inhibited’, and ‘Meredith must have scolded Amanda for having no morals’. Mignini portrayal consists of not only footage from the investigation but also of original, almost caricature, clips of him parading through the streets with pride or hanging his head in shame. The film chooses to highlight Mignini’s religious beliefs in his departure, capturing him walking through a grand church whilst he reminds the guilty of the final trial we all must face.

Perhaps most daunting are the young and fresh-faced images of Amanda compared to the Amanda before us, who appears drawn and humourless. Amanda lost her youth and innocence to a case that constantly heralded her as a sex-crazed maniac who killed her ‘prudent’ flat mate, whilst Meredith was lost amidst a monster hunt.

The Status-Faux

Written by Sophie Billington on . Posted in Fashion & Beauty.

The seventies could be seen to have infiltrated the fashion industry over the last few years. A decade of loosening social and sexual bounds has resonated well with our modern outlook today. Not only is a flair for flares apparent, but also an itching for the shaggy coat to appease our pleasure in stroking full frontal fluff.

During the decade of the baby-boom, fur was massive both in literal physicality and in its worldwide presence. However, that same decade also saw the creation of the Endangered Species Act, outlawing the practice of poaching endangered animals. Two currents in the fashion industry occurred in the face of this social change: first, an increase in the use of faux-fur; secondly, a decrease in poaching for clothing purposes.

By the nineties anti-cruelty outrage was industry wide. The prominent organisation PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) launched a series of far-reaching campaigns featuring some of the biggest names in the fashion industry—the most notorious of which involved supermodel Naomi Campbell.

Campbell posed nude alongside the statement ‘I would rather go naked than wear fur’. Through opposing fur by posing in the naked form, the campaign also carried the powerful torch of sexual freedom, which carried through from the seventies to the nineties. Most poignantly, we were told loud and clear: animal skin isn’t sexy.

However, the fun of the fluffy has continued to be a presence. In light of technology that makes faux fur more colourful and soft to the touch, it has taken off and fashionistas refuse to take it off. The rapid growth of up and coming brands such as Shrimps and Jakke, or even just a quick scope of any leading high street powerhouse like Zara, Urban Outfitters and Topshop, will show you that fictional fur has become fashion fact. Bright, beautiful colours and incredible textures are now frequently married.

Unfortunately however, real fur in fashion is not yet fiction. Only in 2009 did the once disdaining Naomi Campbell step out of her car in a real fur coat. Mirroring how faux fur has taken a new technicoloured turn, Dolce and Gabbana’s AW16 campaign prominently featured an awe-inspiring fuschia mass on its adverts this summer. Furthermore, with fashion-leading celebrity couples such as Kim Kardashian and Kanye West walking round in animal hides, how is the world going to leave them behind? Concerning high fashion, one might say old habits die hard.

As a faux-fur lover myself, I want to say Shrimps is leading the way to a fur free alternative, but I simultaneously wonder: If faux fluff wasn’t around to keep the style of fur in fashion, would real fur remain as relevant as it is today? Who knows! It’s debatable whether our latest technological developments are reinstating a nasty status-quo, or simply offering a status-faux.

 

Opinion: Music is genuinely exciting again

Written by Frank Hillman on . Posted in Music.

Since the turn of the century, a common theme in mainstream music has been its tendency to imitate music styles from earlier times. A plethora of guitar-based rock bands dominated the UK music scene for much of the early 2000s, with bands as uninspiring as The Fratellis and Razorlight doing their best to define the times. This wave of bands owed everything, from the guitar-based rock songs to the not-arsed too-cool-for-school facade, to the heroes of the ’60s and ’70s; the deified likes of Jagger, Lennon, and Page.

Other than the quality of the music, the obvious difference between these acts of the 2000s and those so rightly glorified from earlier times was their attitude and approach. The refusal to play safe, genuine charisma, and justified self-confidence that embodied the golden age was totally lost on the plagiarisers of the 2000s. A willingness to innovate, take gambles and push the envelope was scarcely seen in mainstream music at the turn of the millennium.

However, as the political world enters the most turbulent period of our lifetimes, there are signs to suggest, that in the music world too, to quote the greatest musical innovator of all, ‘the times are a-changing’. For 2016 has been a hugely inventive and exciting year for the mainstream, with both established acts and relative newcomers proving that the previous era of dreary music is a thing of the past.

Kanye West and Radiohead, two rare artists to have made their name in pioneering surprising new sounds and musical gambles since the turn of the century, have both put their stamp on the year. The Life Of Pablo symbolised not only further musical endeavour from West, but a new way of delivering music in the album format; debuting the songs at a live event in New York, and making continuous retrospective amendments to numerous tracks even after the album had premiered. A Moon Shaped Pool, Radiohead’s first release in five years, was released in a similar vein; launched with a 6Music ‘listening party’ on a Sunday evening, not the industry’s preferred Friday. These landmark works combined a visionary way of launching the album with sublime, interesting music, further establishing these artists at the cutting edge of their genres. Nick Cave’s heart-achingly brilliant Skeleton Tree, made in the aftermath of his teenage son’s death and released alongside a painfully beautiful film, adds to this list in its own idiosyncratic way.

But alongside those acts already perceived as constant pace-setters in musical originality, 2016 has seen the further materialisation of many others, firmly establishing themselves at the top of their game.

Bon Iver’s third album 22, A Million, displayed bandleader Justin Vernon ditching the high-pitched vocals and acoustic guitar methods that made him so worshipped in the first place, replacing them with 34 minutes of gloriously auto-tuned, emotionally piercing and unconventionally structured songs. This album’s significance goes far beyond its sonic qualities; it is indicative of an artist that has successfully changed his sound and refused to play safe, risking alienating a huge fan-base in order to create new and intriguing forms of music.

Frank Ocean’s long awaited album Blonde, a stripped-back, ballsy record that Ocean cunningly circumvented his record label to release independently, firmly established him as an artist capable of innovating and making wonderous, brave statements with his music. Beyonce’s intense, politically charged video album Lemonade added to the list of established artists releasing bold, daring albums that challenged the format, and indicated that the creative nature of 2016’s music found its way to even the most popular artists. And it would be impossible to compile a list of innovative contemporary albums without giving due mention to Kendrick Lamar’s To Pimp a Butterfly.

Perhaps the most important thing about all these albums, and artists, is that even at their most forward-looking and avant-garde they continue to make stunningly brilliant music. Observing the release and reaction of these albums, it appears that music has become genuinely exciting again. Artists have embraced change, resisted the urge to play safe, and have been rewarded with a broadly positive response. It seems ironic that in order for artists to distance themselves musically from the golden age of the 60s and 70s, all they had to do was embrace the same fearless attitude. The sound and style of the music may be worlds apart, but the gutsy, courageous approach is the same—and music in 2016 is all the better for it.

Reading at university: Why it is a good idea

Written by Rachel Adams on . Posted in Books.

Strange as it may sound, you do not actually get that much free time at university. As soon as you get five minutes to sit down and open a book, something else pops up; it might be academic reading you forgot to do for tomorrow’s seminar, your society’s social, a friend wanting to go out. There always seems to be something else that is more important than reading for pleasure—this should not be the case.

As an English Literature student, the days of me being able to sit down for an hour or two and read a book that is not on a syllabus, background reading, useful for my dissertation, or in any way related to my degree are long gone. Despite this, I still try to find some time each day to read something purely for myself and my own enjoyment. I think it is so important to take some time out of your busy day to just sit and enjoy a good book; otherwise, your degree ends up taking over your life. Even if you are not studying an English degree, reading for pleasure is still important. It can help keep your mind relaxed, removing stress or worries. There is no better cure for stress than escaping for a while in the depths of your favourite book.

Although it may seem like you are wasting precious time that could be spent studying—or drinking—spending some time unwinding from a long day by reading can actually put you in a better mood to then go out and socialise. You don not have to choose between the two; there is enough hours in the day for you to work hard, relax, and socialise. If there’s not, then you’re either working too hard or not hard enough.

Many people who I have spoken to have said that they used to love reading when they were younger, but as they became busier they gave it up. Maybe I am showing my English bias here, but I don not get why anyone would give up reading as a hobby. It is the best way to take your mind off everything and is a great way to procrastinate whilst still feeling productive.

Of course, the books you read do not always have to be completely unrelated to your degree. Doing wider reading around books on your syllabus can still be productive, whilst feeling like you are not actually doing work. It is a great way to relax yet still impress everyone in your seminar with your extra knowledge.

At the end of the day, if you enjoyed reading for pleasure before you came to university, there is no reason why you cannot still enjoy it now that you are here. People would not expect you to give up doing sport or playing an instrument at university, so why would you want to give up reading as a hobby? It is something that can be done anywhere and everywhere; on the bus, in between lectures, or when you get home after a long day. The benefits of a little escapism every now and then cannot be stated enough. Happy reading!

The Graffiti Project

Written by Emily Driscoll on . Posted in Arts.

The ‘Journeys Festival’ showcases and fosters creativity in Manchester’s refugee and asylum seeking communities in spectacular style, from theatre and music to stunning art pieces displayed around the city until the 12th October.

The art side of the festival was kicked off on the 5th October with the Container Project, the first part presenting the Graffiti Project; the complete transformation of a shipping container in St Ann’s Square by the art duo ‘Nomad Clan’.

The featured image does not show the finished product but marks only the beginning. The message it sends is a strong one, and makes it incredibly clear that the journey to find a home in Manchester has not been an easy one.

This image alone takes me back to hearing the news of the young Syrian boy becoming a victim of the struggle to find a different life, which lays heavy on my heart despite being half a world away.

The poppies—more of which, I am told, will be added to the final image—evoke the idea of the casualties of war. Poppies are inherently tied to many peoples’ notion of patriotism in Britain, as a symbol for the ones that are lost in conflict and those irreparably affected by it.

I think it is a fitting tribute or an interesting reminder that the people making these horrendously dangerous journeys are doing so due to conflict, due to wars which they did not start.

I have only seen the beginnings of the project but I will be returning to the square later in the festival to see the final piece, and explore all of the different parts of the journeys portrayed. I would thoroughly recommend a trip before the end of the festival, whether you have a few minutes or a few hours to sit and look at the amazing detail that I never thought possible to achieve with spray paint.

This is the kind of art that the soul yearns for, demands to be lost in, and find its own connection with the piece. I find it to be food for the mind and the heart, and I will be keeping my eye on ‘Nomad Clan’ in future.

Fashion Zeitgeist

Written by Tarun Daryanani on . Posted in Fashion & Beauty.

As the fashion calendar commences every February and September, an excitement and a childlike curiosity crosses the minds of the fashion elite and the modern day fashionista. What to expect this season? What outre pieces can shock us? These are the questions amongst the FROW, as designers send their creations to grace the catwalks of New York, London, Milan and Paris.

Androgyny has played a huge role in the fashion world ; being able to break out of the stereotypes of an ideal man and woman, and experimenting with both genders. Gender neutral pieces were publicly born when Yves Saint Laurent spawned the “Le Smoking “ tuxedo in the late 1960s.

No curved silhouette but rather a straight masculine body form broke gender stereotypes. Fashion is such a world where evolution is key; being able to adapt with the current climate of ever changing trends and social issues. Social media has provided a platform for social acceptance of individuals exploring the opposite side of their assigned genders (Jaden Smith being one of them). This has inspired and influenced creative fashion teams to plunge into a risky creative process that would shock.
Givenchy, Vetements and Gucci (during Alessandro Micheles’ tenure) have clearly embraced the femininity of the man and have brought it to the forefront through the introduction of pussybow blouses and flowy formal wear.

Since Gucci took a risk by implementing Alessandro Michele as their creative director, the Italian brand have since channelled 70s disco punk with a risky exploration into gender swapping. Menswear comprised of bright pink hues and studded sandals, whilst womenswear included grandpa jumpers worn over loose skirts. This exhibited the idea of a new gender being introduced; an unknown one. Yes, the clothes make men lust to boogie to 70s disco and the brand has reinvented itself with glitz and plenty of spangle.
Givenchy experiment with peoples’ sexualities, making their audience lust for dramatic, theatrical dressing. Givenchy recently sent their female models down the runway wearing long lined black jackets with combat zip pockets, giving die hard female fans that masculine edge.

Even the menswear explored a side of innocence and vulnerability channelled through feminine swaying skirts emblazoned with embellishment as part of tailored masculine suiting. With a brand such as Vetements, the youth fashion rebels feel like they can channel their inner tomboy. The tailoring of the super  high shoulders was impeccable and resembled a businessman lounging around in his oversized work suit.

Oversized shirts paired with enlarged parkas and tight skirts allowed the Vetements girl to play as a boy and the brands’ signatures are gender neutral and to be able to exhibit an edge which is usually innate from a rebellious male.

Revisiting: Beware of a Holy Whore

Written by Mritunjay Sharma on . Posted in Film.

Rainer Werner Fassbinder belongs to the most prolific of the European directors. He made 40 feature films in the time period of around 13 years, which is a statement that suggests the kind of genius he was. In a list assembled by Fassbinder, Beware of a Holy Whore was listed at the top.

Beware of a Holy Whore is a film about film-making. It is a docu-drama style self-critiques of Fassbinder on his behind the scenes techniques, based on the experiences of his film Whity, which was shot in Spain. Lou Castel played the role of self-contained, bisexual and alcoholic director, wearing a leather jacket, the traits of none other than Fassbinder himself.

Although, the same area was touched upon by Godard in Contempt which is about the agony of making a film, Truffaut in Day for night about the joy of making film. But Beware of a Holy Whore is a film about the agony of not making a film.

Filmmaking is a tedious process and to make a film from conception to screening, takes lots of time and patience. The whole process is depicted in an extremely monotonous way with the constant grilling of characters in various scenarios. The monotony is also set by the wait of the director to arrive to the set, then the wait for the film material, then the wait of the inspirations and then just waiting for something to happen.

This film is a reminder of the fact that film is nothing but a synthetic representation of life. We try to mimic life through this process, sometimes we pass and sometimes we fail. We fail because the people who are tools to mimic this life i.e. the actors and the technicians are not in sync with each other. Throughout the film the whole cast and crew are going through a psychosexual duel, creative blocks and impatience. They keep on hopping from one identity to another, like they do before and after the shout of action on the film set.

The first shot of the film is an intriguing one as in the whole shot the camera is placed at a waist level and a monologue is delivered by Deiter about Goofy the cartoon, who teaches kindergarten, gets beaten up by his students, meets Wee Willy, a gangster who is a dwarf, takes the crook home, and feeds him.

Though the police arrest Wee Willy, Goofy refuses to accept that his new friend is less than perfect.  Deiter does not have a significant role in the film, but his presence and absence again shows the continuous nature of life, how people come and go from the life. How we feel connected to them in the beginning but with the progression we move on and finds another adventure.

The film ends with the quote from Thomas Mann:“And I say to you that I am weary to death of depicting humanity without partaking of humanity”. The statement appropriate the life of Fassbinder, the life where he continuously churned out cinema of great meaning, of complex relations and desperate characters and the life with a leather jacket, drugs and Cuba Libre.

Cruelty free beauty

Written by Bailey Petts on . Posted in Fashion & Beauty.

As awareness of animal treatment and cruelty grows, people have started altering their lifestyle choices—such as what make-up they choose to buy.

People are beginning to pay attention to how their choices affect the world around them, avoiding products with palm oil as ‘their part’ in controlling the destruction of the rainforests. In the same way that the increased popularity of vegan leather and faux fur has occurred, cruelty free beauty products are becoming more of an interest to women and men.

Many animals are burned, poisoned and killed as a consequence of animal testing. Ever increasingly it is the expected norm that it should be everyone’s objective to help stop animal testing completely.

Consider these popular brands that do test on animals: Avon, Bobbi Brown, Covergirl, Estée Lauder, Head & Shoulders, L’Oréal, M.A.C. Cosmetics, Mary Kay, Maybelline, Pantene, Revlon, stila, TRESemmé.

If you use any of the above products, is there a chance that the list below could offer alternatives? Here are some popular brands that do not test on animals: Anastasia beverly hills, Becca, By terry, Cargo, Charlotte tilbury, Chantecaille, Duwop, Elf, Eyeko, Gosh, Illamasqua, Kat Von D, Korres, Lush, Pixi, Prestige, Rouge Bunny Rouge, Sugar Venom, Tarte Too Faced, Urban Decay.

These brands that do not test on animals ultimately bring forth the question, is it really necessary to test on animals? Why do some brands still, in today’s society, need to use this unethical practice?

It is possible that in the future, all brands will eradicate the use of animal testing and only use ‘safe’ ingredients and find new means of testing such as in-vitro testing. As individuals, we should understand and know which brands are ethical and make a conscious effort to buy from cruelty-free brands.

What do Teach First ambassadors actually promote?

Written by Elrica Degirmen on . Posted in Opinion.

You may have seen students around campus wearing Teach First hoodies, perhaps promoting this supposed charity at stalls in your individual departments. You may have seen society events sponsored by Teach First. You may have heard about their involvement in education, but are unsure as to what exactly it is that they do.

Do not believe the propaganda. The organisation may be the largest graduate recruiter in the country, but that is as far as it goes for their provision of accurate information to unsuspecting students. This company aims to address educational disadvantage by taking some of the country’s top graduates and placing them in the worst schools in Britain—after only six weeks of training.

What would inspire anyone to take part in such a scheme? Perhaps people missed their chance of having a ‘gap yah’ abroad before starting university and now wish to be paid to undertake charity work closer to home. Or, more likely, the reason why many students are encouraged to undertake two years of stressful work is the possible opportunity of ‘exiting the teaching profession’, instead taking up a finance role in one of Teach First’s many banking partners.

Educational disadvantage is a real issue. Teach First is increasing the already-high teacher turnover rates at these schools— changing teachers every two years or three years. Perhaps, if a school is really lucky, one person might decide to remain for five-or-so years.

It is disgraceful to use students in some of the most deprived regions of the country as a step-up for graduates having a career in finance. I believe there is nothing wrong in changing careers, and I personally do not blame the graduates themselves. I blame Teach First, in deliberately emphasising the possible exit opportunities. Even before someone steps into a classroom, they know there is a near-enough guaranteed place for them to work at a bank if they get through two years of teaching.

This is not fair to pupils. The pupils that they are supposedly trying to help, require experienced and dedicated teachers that are able to cultivate relationships with students that last throughout their school lives. Schools are all too happy to take on Teach First graduates because someone first starting on the job will inevitably be cheaper than someone with years and years of experience. This is disgraceful behaviour on the schools’ part.

Not to mention that some of these schools may have problems with discipline and tackling students’ behaviour. I do not believe for one second that those with only six weeks of training are able to deal with such challenging issues. But, of course, in the minds of the banks, graduates who are able to merely survive these tricky situations will inevitably have the skills and personality traits to tackle a high-pressured environment when they transition careers. Under no circumstances should secondary-school children be used to help graduates whom are lacking these skills. This is all at the expense of pupils. I am highly sceptical as to whether the pupils are actually learning in the first place, let alone reaching their full potential.

I am sick of seeing Teach First being promoted aggressively around university campuses when the reality of the situation is so different. They do not address educational disadvantage in the slightest; in fact, they make the problems worse.

I am also sceptical as to what support Teach First teachers receive when they are thrown into the deep end. I advocate other pathways such as a Postgraduate Certificat in education (PGCEs), which combine practical training on the job with the study of pedagogy—learning how to teach. Schools Direct is another route where from the very start they learn on the job, but are fully supported by the school in the first place, rather than being placed across the country at random.

I want the new teachers placed in schools to actively want to be there because they have a true passion for the profession. These alternative pathways are examples of commitment to the profession, as they take a significant amount of time and thus give room for people to think about whether it is the profession for them. This is far better than Teach First’s encouragement of people to leave the profession.

I am not impressed by the way Teach First is seen as the main pathway to teaching. It should not be, and if I had it my way I would cut its funding by one hundred per cent. Unfortunately, I do not run education policy in this country. I do find it a shame though that PGCEs and Schools Direct are not as promoted as much as Teach First.

If you see Teach First ambassadors on campus, ask them about these issues and listen carefully to their responses. Make up your own mind about whether you would want someone straight out of university with only six weeks training, teaching students at any school, let alone ones that need the best teachers the most. Teach First? More like Teach First, Leave Later.

Dear fresher females studying STEM

Written by Elrica Degirmen on . Posted in Opinion.

Unless you have attended a girls’ school during sixth form, you might have noticed that you were one of the few females in your A-Level science classes—with the possible exception of biology. That will be the same at university. In fact, males will so overwhelmingly dominate your year group and department that you will be a rarity when studying subjects such engineering, computer science, and physics. But this does not make you special, princess.

You will most likely be bombarded with many gasps and shocked reactions about how you are a girl studying what is seen as a ‘man’s subject’. It may be tempting to fall into the trap of feeling good about yourself for being ‘the unique one’. But the reality is that most people could not care less that you are a woman studying STEM.

It is not ‘brave’ or ‘daring’ to study a subject which is more mathematically inclined. Some people would prefer to write essays, whereas you have chosen to study a subject that consists more of solving equations. You might be lauded by on-campus feminists for beating the societal and ‘patriarchal’ standards of doing a man’s subject. It is not a man’s subject; it isn’t a woman’s subject. It is just another degree course. Get over it.

If you think you are doing a great service for other women by being one of the few to study STEM, you can think again. You should want to be judged by your own abilities and your own merits, rather than doing something that girls are more unlikely to take up. This is not an achievement in itself. You should feel no sense of pride for doing so, because you have not actually achieved anything yet.

However, when you come to university you will be made to feel rewarded just by sheer virtue of achieving a few A grades in science subjects and then enrolling onto a specific course. All this for the sole fact that you are a girl. Surely, this is patronising. Men on your course will not be treated in this way. I cannot help but think that many undergraduate girls in science almost appreciate the special attention that they are receiving. I would imagine that many of you will hear the rhetoric about identity politics, particularly from your students’ union and feminist societies, and information of all the injustice and the discrimination that you will face.

There is no discrimination in science. Full stop. Being a girl studying these subjects is seen as being good enough. This will most likely come from those who vocally come out in support of more women in science; they are the ones treating you differently. You should demand to be treated in the same way as a man, and that includes dismissing fake compliments from feminists about how you are tackling the ‘patriarchy’, by having a presence in the physical sciences department.

At university, you have a wealth of opportunities available to you if you make the most of your time here. However, please do not expect such opportunities to be given to you automatically because you are a girl. If you truly do want to be treated equally, you should compete in the same way as your male peers. That means expecting no special privileges on the basis of your gender. A female studying a STEM subject is not a political statement. It should not matter that you are female. Ideally, you should never make a big deal out of the fact that you are.

You will most likely be prioritised to do access work in schools or work as ambassadors for your subject, simply because you are a girl. You are seen as someone who is there to challenge the supposed stereotype. The reality is that you will be used to give an impression of diversity. Diversity comes from your interests, your personality, and the parts of you that make you an individual. Your identity should not come from being a female student studying STEM. Do not let other people use you for their own political agenda, such as those that are pushed and peddled by pro-‘diversity’ student unions.

The reality is that there is no sexism within science towards females. There are no pressures from other male students acting as if they are better than you. Those teaching in science faculties have better things to do than to prevent females from studying science. Science departments are virtually a safe space for women these days, as no department wants to be embroiled in a ‘sexism’ scandal. For example, by being thought to treat male students more favourably than female students.

There is a lot of claptrap these days about the so-called problem of the under-representation of women in science. One could argue that science is one of the more meritocratic endeavours to pursue in life and that you should reject the myth that there is sexism within science because it is just simply not true. What I am saying is not popular but I do not pretend to peddle things that seem to be true for the sake of public acceptance. Never define yourself as a female studying science throughout your university career. I certainly do not. You should refuse to be used as a tool by identity politicians.

Review: The Privileged

Written by Elete Nelson-Fearon on . Posted in Theatre.

The programme description does not reveal much; one walks into the theatre anticipating a polar bear and a discussion on race and privilege in our society—is not that enough to draw anyone in? I was not sure how the two would link, but after having watched a musical theatre production about cancer (A Pacifist’s Guide to the War on Cancer) I was open to anything.

The play is unique from the start—we are to queue outside, and enter the polar bear’s ‘enclosure’ at the same time; this particular enclosure took the shape of a circle onstage. It follows a sequence of numbered envelopes, each providing instructions on how to make the most of your visit to the enclosure. The exact meaning of ‘the most’ is subjective of course, as we found out: when visiting an animal in its home will you disturb its sleep, and personal space so that you might see as much as possible, or will you respect its state of contentment at the cost of a ‘lively’ experience?

That is the question that divided the audience. By watching The Privileged you will think deeply about how important it is to follow instructions and respect others’ wishes without their explicit consent, because after all, we are dealing with a polar bear—it cannot stand up and say ‘don’t touch me.’

“I would normally provide more information but previous encounters informed me that people don’t care.” This powerful line calls to mind various real-life portrayals and stories, bearing in mind the title of the play and the fact that you can see the polar bear’s black skin underneath the white fur. At that moment I thought of the misrepresentation of people of colour in the news in order to paint a picture that is less accurate yet more palatable to certain audiences, and the stereotyping and judgement that people of colour face on a day-to-day basis.

While some of the symbols and imagery are more indirect, the juxtaposition of the facts and the context in which they were provided sets up a strong undertone that creeps to the surface as time goes on. We are told early on in the play that “this polar bear is a teenage male” and that the polar bear has “white fur and black skin,” information that can be seen as purely factual but which also proves to be useful in shaping an interpretation of the play and the messages it is successful in transmitting.

We are instructed to assert our dominance over the polar bear by feeding it only to restrict its eating; however, we collectively decided to ignore the later, upsetting instructions. I found this freedom of choice very interesting; while some of the more outspoken enclosure members were willing to speak out against aggravating and disturbing the polar bear, others were dead set on following the rules for the sake of order—interestingly, the presence of instructions seems to negate the fact that we are, at the end of the day, creating art on stage.

The Privileged is a production that I would experience again and again; it would be a completely different experience every time as you simply cannot predict the reactions of the public. We were faced with a choice that reflects the way you think about power, dynamics, and inherent rights to something else’s personal space. One of the most interesting observations was the fact that the polar bear was seen as ‘aggressive’ by some members once we had woken it up, removed its feet and encircled it. Is the bear ‘aggressive’ or provoked?

The relationship between the polar bear and the enclosure members that Harewood cleverly fosters through the instructions in the envelope is increasingly demonstrative of the objectification and demonisation of ‘polar bears’ in our society—make of that what you will.

Top 5: Films about film

Written by Dominic Bennett on . Posted in Film.

5. Life Itself

This documentary charts the life of possibly the greatest film critic and popular proponent of film as an art form, Roger Ebert. It occasionally veers too close to the bog standard talking head doc style but its protagonist’s charisma keeps it engaging. Ebert once said “art is the closest we can come to understanding how a stranger really feels”. Any cinephile would be wise to watch Life Itself, so they can feel and be inspired by his undying passion for film.

4. Holy Motors

In Leo Carax’s Holy Motors, Denis Lavant uses his unique physical skills to play a man travelling round Paris to performing various roles at mysterious appointments. It might be difficult to say with any confidence that Holy Motors is about anything at all, but there is much thought to be found amongst its series of surreal vignettes.  It enigmatically examines the role of film in the increasingly disparate digital age, as well as how performance and art can reflect our lives.

3. Man With A Movie Camera

When originally released in 1929, Dziga Vertov accompanied his film with a statement to warn viewers that it “represents an experimentation in the cinematic communication of visual phenomena”, and this still serves as a good brief of what to expect. Man With A Movie Camera is a totally mesmerising yet narrative-less film that places the cameraman at the heart of the action, as he films everyday life in various Soviet cities. Using a range of innovative shots and techniques, it is a unique work that lays bare the powerful language of film.

2. Cinema Paradiso

Cinema Paradiso focuses on Salvatore Di Vita, a melancholic filmmaker who is provoked into remembering his youth by the death of the man who made him fall in love with film in the first place. The film showcases the unifying joy of cinema for all those who watch it, as well as the way films seep into our memories and fill us with nostalgia for the times we watched them. All this is topped off by a stirring score from Ennio Morricone, and one of the greatest finales you’ll find in any film.

1. 8½

The previous entry about a disillusioned Italian film director is only surpassed by this iconic film about the same thing. In Federico Fellini’s semi-autobiographical journey we follow Guido Anselmi as he struggles to find inspiration for a new feature and retreats into his childhood memories, before finding redemption in those around him. 8½’s greatness lies in way it moves beyond an exemplary look at film’s role in life, to become an affirming and fantastical masterpiece about how one should live.