Skip to main content

Month: April 2013

I’m sorry but…apocalyptic movies are getting boring!

Written by Jack Crutcher on . Posted in Film.

It  must have been at least a year since we had a high-profile end of humanity/end of the world movie to enjoy. But ‘thankfully’ now we have four on their way!  Oblivion, World War Z, Elysium and the comedy This is The End are all set to hit cinema screens this year and despite all of these movies looking and sounding pretty good, I can’t help but get the feeling we’ve seen all this before.

Normally a director can throw a few zombies, a Tom Cruise or a Brad Pitt and even a Morgan Freeman into a film and people will come to watch it in their millions.  However movie lovers continue to act a bit like zombies themselves by watching and hence creating a market for these flicks. Undoubtedly, if there has been one genre of film that has been grossly over-exposed in the past 20 years it has to be those that play out a society-destroying disaster scenario. In the space this article has it would be impossible to list the amount of films that play to this theme, but blockbusters like War of the Worlds, 2012, The Day After Tomorrow, Dawn of the Dead and Falling Skies are perhaps some of the more conformist examples. Even the British film industry has got involved with Danny Boyle’s largely successful 28 days and 28 weeks later.

It’s not that some of these films aren’t good, it’s just that they have become so predictable! It’s not fun or exciting to see a post-apocalyptic wasteland anymore, and it certainly isn’t new to walk into a cinema and watch a group of people fight off infected zombies whilst, inevitably, one of the group gets bitten or goes crazy (as I imagine most people would at the end of all things!).

One of this summers’ new apocalyptic blockbusters might just turn out to be awesome, but before you go and think that makes this article pointless, I can guarantee they will all tell a story we’ve heard a million times before!

Must See: 29th April–5th May

Written by Hannah Lawrence on . Posted in Theatre.

This week:

Abigail’s Party

 Most people probably know Mike Leigh for his films, but his trip to the Lowry this week is as a theatre director, for Abigail’s Party, a satire on 1970’s suburbia. The production, dubbed ‘Brilliant, vintage Leigh’ by The Observer, follows Beverley Moss who invites her neighbours over for drinks. Satirising a newly emerging social class in 1970’s Britain this classic production is worth seeing for its insight into a Britain’s social history.

Runs 29th April – 4th May at The Lowry. Tickets £19.

 

This month:

A Doll’s House

Ibsen’s classic comes to the Royal Exchange stage in May under a new adaptation by Bryony Lavery. A play which caused huge controversy when it was first premiered and published back in 1879 it still remains relevant as its continued popularity on the modern stage has proved. Running during the lead up to exams this play, which deals with the longing for freedom, will no doubt strike a cord, even if only with those longing for the freedom away from John Rylands and the pressure of exams!

Runs 1st May – 1 June at The Royal Exchange. Tickets £10.

Brontë

Polly Teale’s play first staged in 2005 looks at the life and work of the Brontë sisters and their characters as they come back to haunt them. Directed by Gabriel Gawin and part of The Capitol’s Summer Season, a production worth catching.

Runs 15th – 18th May at The Capitol. Tickets £5.

 

Next month:

A Bright Room Called Day

Part of The Capitol’s Summer Season this play by Tony Krushner, famous for his Pulitzer Prize winning drama ‘Angels in America’ this production, set in 1930’s Berlin focuses on a group of struggling artists and political activists caught up in the fall of the Weimar Republic and the assent to power of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. Praised by the Chicago Tribune as ‘thought-provoking’ its not one to be missed.

Runs 5th – 8th June at The Capitol Theatre. Tickets £5.

 

 

 

 

 

Apply to join The Mancunion in 2013/14

Written by The Mancunion on . Posted in Features.

You can now apply to join The Mancunion team next year.

Whether you to want be a section Editor, Sub-Editor, Reporter or Photographer; you can apply now by filling in this application form.

Details about how to apply for positions in our Marketing or Web teams will be posted shortly.

APPLICATIONS CLOSE ON WEDNESDAY MAY 15th at 11.59pm

Why get involved?

As one of the most respected student publications in the country, joining the newspaper can transform your CV.

Whether you want to work in the media or in other creative industries, The Mancunion can give you tremendous experience in number of areas: from working in a team and leading a group of contributors; to editing content and writing articles.

Previous editors have gone to work in the national press, postgraduate study, PR jobs, and broadcast media.

It’s also a great opportunity to meet people, be part of a team and learn valuable skills.

What we’re looking for

We’re looking for creative students who can demonstrate a keen involvement in campus life, an interest in journalism and original ideas.

Succesful candidates will have a good knowledge of the paper’s brand and identity, and a desire to be a part of improving it.

Prior journalism experience is not essential, but candidates should demonstrate an understanding of the modern print media and some relevant experience. Whether writing for The Mancunion, blogs, magazines, or the local or national press.

What does a section Editor do?

A section Editor works with the Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editor to decide on the creative direction of their section.

They come up with ideas and submit articles.

They manage a team of contributors and ensure that content is submitted on time.

They are also responsible for the design of their page/s. All editors are trained to use Adobe InDesign.

Positions available

News Editor

News Reporter

Features Editor

Comment Editor

Sports Editor

Sports Reporter

Photography Editor

ALL NEW: VIDEO EDITOR

Sub-Editor

Film Editor

Fashion Editor

Music Editor

Books Editor

Food & Drink Editor

Games Editor

Arts Editor

Theatre Editor

Lifestyle Editor

Societies Editor

Best of luck to all candidates.

– Jonathan Breen, Editor

– Harriet Hill-Payne, Deputy Editor

 

 

 

The Mancunion needs a paid editor and a ring-fenced number of issues if it is to surivive

Written by Richard Crook on . Posted in Opinion.

The Mancunion is an easy target for cuts.

It’s expensive to maintain and its budget is decided by an elected student executive, who we spend the majority of our time scrutinising. But this week, I’ll be arguing that the newspaper should be ring-fenced from further cuts – and be maintained at its 32 page, 20 issue size – and that we return to a paid editor to safeguard the paper’s long-term future.

The Mancunion is an enormous operation. On top of the 35 section editors we have photo editors, web developers, marketing officers and sub-editors. Then of course there are the contributors, which by the end of the year total well into the hundreds.

It takes all of these groups to come together to make this newspaper work week in, week out.

As for my motion for a paid editor, it’s not a sly way of sticking around for another year. I’m off to City University at the end of the year, with a CV and portfolio that I’ve spent the year building up. I have no desire to carry on dealing with union politics for any longer than I have to.

The paid editor motion is about more than that. The vast majority of section editors, an experience essential for any Editor, are third year students. So the pool of talent for the Editor position is small. The editor was removed as a paid position last year because there were complications with having them as a trustee of the Union. I can see the argument to that, but there must be a way around that.

It’s partly because so many people are involved that the newspaper cannot be compromised. The Students’ Union often talks about graduate prospects, but there are few groups they fund that can support a career as much as involvement with us.

Working for the paper is what you make of it. Some contributors come along simply because they love theatre, music or the arts. And that’s great. It involves them in Manchester life, encourages discussion and debate and they can see their name in print and views read across campus. For others, the skills acquired here stay with writers and editors for the rest of their lives. Learning about media law, using advanced design software, conducting interviews and gaining contacts are incredibly useful for those wanting to get into journalism.

That’s not just hot air designed to get you signing up next term. Last year’s editor is writing front pages for the Manchester Evening News, while our News Editor (and NUS award winner) works for a national financial magazine and spends his weekends working for The Independent. Jennie Agg, 2009/10 editor, now works for the Daily Mail. Her News Editor Girish Gupta, interviewed in this week’s edition, has written for New York Times and Reuters.

Of course, most students at Manchester won’t get involved, though you’d be hard pressed to find another single society with that much regular commitment.

This year we’ve exposed extremism on campus. We reported on a former Exec who campaigned on broken promises and then took two and a half months holiday. We covered dodgy exams and told you the reality of DEMO2012 against the endless propaganda churned out by the Students’ Union Facebook page.

If our budget remains beholden to each year’s student executive, these stories will be fewer and farther between. There will always be the fear that your stories may be doing permanent damage to the long-term future of the paper if a vengeful exec comes around.

I’m not being alarmist. The President of a Russell Group Students’ Union visited in October and couldn’t believe I was a student. I asked why, and they told me how the budget would be dangled over the Editor by certain exec members if they started writing stories that criticised them.

Nationally we already have a big problem with censorship. The Students’ Union at Edinburgh invoked some pitiful excuses to ban a story on an Exec member, whilst the curret situation at the London Student looks like an unmitigated disaster.

You may not have agreed with everything we’ve written. But it would be a crying shame if, as the biggest University in the country, our award-winning newspaper was allowed to be cut away bit by bit.

I’ve sat in meetings in which the idea of digital copies has been put forward as “that’s the way the industry is going.” Rubbish. Our newspaper is free and is spread around campus. In any case, we have so many contributors because they see their name in print. Take that away and we could become a glorified blog. No student would take my job and devote their final year to managing something available only online.

The Students’ Union must be careful how it spends its money. I accept that I’ve seen waste. But this is not an irresponsible motion and I sincerely hope you are behind us.

MMU cancel radical speaker event

Written by Jonathan Breen on . Posted in News.

MMU cancelled a talk with a controversial Islamic speaker after they were tipped off by an online pressure group last week.

Self-described “human rights” group Cageprisoners were scheduled to send speakers – including a former Guantanamo Bay inmate – to an event in the University’s Business School on April 18.

After extremism-awareness group Student Rights contacted the University to inform them of one of the speakers past views, staff cancelled the talk because it had not been booked properly.

“The event was cancelled because an internal booking system had been used inappropriately to bypass University procedure,” said MMU in a statement. “Hence this was not an official event and organisers had not allowed for a proper risk assessment to take place as is the norm for all such events.

“Lacking the necessary information or preparation, the University was unable to support this event and it had to be cancelled.”

After the event was brought to the attention of the staff, they discovered students from the business school, who booked the event, had not gone through the necessary department.

“When Student Rights told us that this event had been booked by students in the Business School, it turned out that Conference and Events knew nothing of it, so the necessary checks had not been carried out,” added MMU spokesman Gareth Hollyman.

Jahangir Mohammed, one of the speakers scheduled, is known to have radical views on ‘the West’ and in an article for the Islamic news-website Ummah News discussed “Nazi Israelis” and a “Muslim holocaust”.

Hollyman acknowledged that the views of the speakers scheduled for last Thursday’s event were a concern for the University.

“It’s fair to say the Student Rights warning about the external speakers did concern us,” he said, adding, “There is a fine line between allowing free speech and allowing antisocial views to be heard publicly.

“While we would encourage student protest and student questioning of issues concerning politics and justice, we have a policy of zero tolerance of any speech or acts which could incite discrimination, hatred or worse.”

Cageprisoners responded to the cancellation saying they were not involved in organising the event, but disapproved of how MMU had handled it.

“We do…wonder why, given the event was booked and advertised some time ago, it took the University the day before the talk to flag up irregularities and cancel it.

“This caused maximum disruption to the speakers and around 250 people who had planned to attend. It also gave organisers the shortest notice possible and virtually no chance to correct any procedural irregularities or move to an alternative venue.”

Messages about the event appeared on Twitter soon after the cancellation, including from MMU Criminology lecturer Waqas Tufail, who tweeted, “Cageprisoners event cancelled due to pressure from [Student Rights] (who have dodgy views to say the least).”

Manchester student Iskandaranya Awy tweeted, “The irony. An event about justice has been cancelled because justice was absent.

Cageprisoners held an event at University of Manchester on April 17, which included a work-shop outside the University’s student’s union.

 

*Article amended on 22 April, paragraph starting “Messages supporting…” changed to “Messages about…”

 

Darfur whistleblower calls for action on Syria

Written by Joe Sandler Clarke on . Posted in News.

A former United Nations chief and Manchester University Profes­sor, who was the first person to draw attention to the genocide in Dar­fur, says that more needs to be done to help Syria.

Speaking to The Mancunion, Mukesh Kapila, Professor of Global Health and Humanitarian Affairs at the University, said human rights abuses in­cluding rape and gender violence had become widespread in Syria since the civil war broke out in 2011, and drew similarities between the conflict there and the war in Sudan.

“In Syria terrible atrocities have taken place. There has been targeting of civil­ians and shortages of basic amenities like food and water, as there was in Darfur,” explained Prof Kapila in a phone interview.

“What’s different about the cases is that in Darfur the violence was of an ethnic nature. Black African tribes were attacked by Arab supremacists from Khartoum in a genocide or ethnic cleansing. In Syria there have been war crimes, and crimes against humanity have taken place; but I wouldn’t say they amount to genocide. Violence has been targeted against those who disagree with President, not against people based on ethnic, racial, or religious grounds. The other big difference is that President Omar Al-Ba­shir has been end cited for war crimes by the international criminal court”

With a background in public health, Prof Kapila was formerly head of the UN in Sudan and is a veteran of humanitarian crises and ethnic cleansing in Iraq, Rwanda, Srebrenica, Afghanistan, and Sierra Leone.

The UN estimates that as many as 70,000 thousand Syrians have been killed since the conflict erupted there in 2011; with Secretary Ban Ki Moon warning that as the international community stands idly by, the country is “tearing itself apart.”

“There have been efforts to take Assad to the international criminal court, but the Security Council is hopelessly divided,” explains Prof Kapila. “There is plenty of intervention in Syria, but it is of the wrong sort, and has led to further conflict. The Arab World: Saudi Arabia and Qatar, along with Western powers are intervening for the rebels, while Iran and Russia are intervening for the government.”

I ask if there is a danger of Syria becoming a failed state if the violence continues.

He says: “Syria is already a failed state. Where four million people are liv­ing as refugees and there are bombings every day, it must be a failed state.”

Prof Kapila argues that the interventions in Iraq and Libya, as well as short-term foreign policy goals from major government have served to spread mistrust on the Security Council leading to its current inaction.

His new book ‘Against a Tide of Evil: How One Man Became the Whistle­blower to the First Mass Murder of the Twenty-First Century’ aims to tell future generations of his experiences covering the mass murders and hu­manitarian crises in Sudan, Rwanda, Srebrenica and elsewhere.

I ask him if the current inaction over Syria shows that the international community have learnt little from those events?

“My intention writing the book was that we might learn the lesson of what happens when we don’t intervene early enough, and when what hap­pens when we fail to intervene. Perhaps two years ago a more purposeful intervention by the Security Council might have led to a situation where we could have found an answer. But now with 1 million people displaced, and 70,0000 plus killed, we are in a very different state of the world. I feel that as an International community our ability to learn lessons is very lim­ited, or we learn the wrong lessons.”

‘Sankeys was the Haçienda of its day’

Written by Andrew Williams on . Posted in Features.

Oh, Sankeys. We knew you so well, and yet, we barely knew you.

Ask just about any Manchester student who has passed through the club’s hallowed doors – be it for the Thursday night juggernaut Full Moon, or to revel under bright lights in the presence of a world famous DJ – and they will recall one classic, emotionally-charged night at the legendary venue just as easily as they will all-but-forget a further three; those alcohol-imbued nights reduced to a smattering of barely intelligible photos on Facebook. It is no coincidence that few students could point in you direction of Jersey Street, the home of Sankeys, but could instinctively direct you towards the bar.

Alas, Sankeys is moving house (pun intended), to a new home. A marathon, 12-hour party on Bank Holiday Monday will see the club voted the world’s best just three years ago open and close its doors for a final time. The announcement that Sankeys Manchester will close to enable the organisation to concentrate on its Ibiza counterpart provoked an outpouring of grief on social media. Speculation that the closure may be a short-lived publicity stunt, only for the club to rise from the ashes in September, was generated more in hope than expectation.

Here, we talk to owner and ‘creative visionary’ Dave Vincent about the club’s legacy, the reasons behind the move, and why “no-one can fill Sankeys’ shoes.”

Why do you think there has been such a tremendous and emotional reaction to the closure of Sankeys?

Because quite simply Sankeys is one of the world’s most respected club names, and the club has contributed massively to Manchester’s music scene, its culture and heritage. I really have been overwhelmed really by the reactions from people from the four corners of the world – huge amounts of support and love from everyone. It’s been very humbling to feel the impact the club has had.

To what extent have students played an integral part in Sankeys’ success?

Students have always been a huge part of the club’s success, especially during the more traditional student times but also throughout the summer. We have always had a very loyal crowd and the students have helped underpin this. Plus Sankeys attracts people from all over the city and beyond – it’s a vibrant and mixed crowd.

What sets Sankeys apart from any other club in Manchester?

We have always striven to be different, left of centre, and do what everyone expects us not to. There’s a unique spirit that the club has which I don’t think you can find anywhere else. The Haçienda was a legendary club and so is Sankeys. And of course this was recognised by DJ Mag in 2010, when we won the World’s Best Club award. We retain an intimacy in the venue which everyone loves; the basement is such a brilliant space which has seen pretty much all the world’s best house and techno DJs play over the years.

What are you strongest memories of your thirteen years in charge of Sankeys?

For me, one of my best memories is the Danny Tenaglia 12-hour session from 2002. Everyone who was there knows how it defined Manchester’s club scene. It took us to the next level.

What is your ultimate goal? Where do you hope to take Sankeys in the future?

The idea of having seven Sankeys’ – seven wonders of the world, seven Sankeys’ – is something we are determined to achieve. We are also opening in Miami and New York City this year, as well as our third season in Ibiza, so there’s lots coming up.

What should people expect from the closing party next month – the biggest party Manchester has seen in…?

It’s going to be a really epic weekend as the club closes. We are knocking the wall between the Basement and the Bar down to make one room so everyone can enjoy the closing night more freely. We are going to be giving away pieces of the wall to people as souvenirs to take a little piece of history home with them, and also we are throwing in a free ticket to some shows so you can go to Sankeys Ibiza too.

We have got a special eight-hour show from Sasha on Saturday 4 May, who at the moment has his album going to number one in nearly every dance chart around the world, and the Haçienda are having a BBQ party on Sunday afternoon with New Order’s Peter Hook, and possibly Shaun Rider from the Happy Mondays. Of course, expect the unexpected – we have got some surprise guests too playing on the final day.

Is there any chance of Sankeys returning to Manchester in the future?

In all honestly who knows at the moment. It is closing indefinitely, but if Sankeys does return it won’t be with me as its owner. I have done my time here in Manchester; I love this city dearly and always will, but for me this is the end and I want to finish on a high.

£200,000 bid for Oxford Road cycle safety

Written by Michael Williams on . Posted in News.

Wilmslow Road is set to receive £200,000 worth of changes in an attempt to improve safety for cyclists.

The plans, funded by the Department of Transport, will see a parallel cycle route developed between Owens Park and Whitworth Park halls of residence.

A new traffic light system – allowing cyclists to set off and turn before cars – and a “new road design” are also to be implemented by March 2014, it is hoped.

It is estimated that the Wilmslow Road cycle route is more than ten times busier than any other cycling route in Manchester.

The Wilbraham Road/ Moseley Road junction, near Baa Bar, is a notorious accident blackspot. It is estimated that up to 2,000 cyclists a day cross it.

Speaking to the Manchester Evening News, Councillor Nigel Murphy said that the town hall planned to make Manchester a “world-class cycling city”.

“These changes, making one of the region’s busiest cycle routes much safer, will be a major step towards that aim”, he continued.

““More confident cyclists can continue to use Wilmslow Road and will benefit from this innovative new junction design, while those who prefer not to use major roads will be able to make the same journey using a well signposted quiet route.”

Earlier this year, a Freedom of Information request by The Mancunion revealed that there were 43 reported accidents involving cyclists along Oxford Road and Wilmslow Road from January 2011 to August 2012.

“This road has the highest rate of accidents a year involving cyclists in Manchester”, PC Andy Speed told The Mancunion.

The plans for a new traffic light system come after The Mancunion reported that police were issuing £30 on-the-spot fines for cyclists riding through red lights.

“I often go through red lights,” final year medical student Charlotte Hickson told The Mancunion, “because there are so many of them.”

“I think it is safer to maintain a constant speed with traffic, I feel like I am in more control”, she continued.

University Challenge team set for semi-final

Written by Andrew Williams on . Posted in News.

The University of Manchester go head-to-head with Bangor University tonight for a place in their fifth University Challenge final in eight years.

Team members David Brice, Adam Barr, Richard Gilbert and Debbie Brown will face Jeremy Paxman – and some of the toughest quiz questions on television – as they seek to defend Manchester’s title, won at the expense of Pembroke College, Cambridge in a topsy-turvy final in 2012.

This year’s quartet narrowly beat Lincoln College, Oxford in the first round before overcoming a second Oxford college, Magdalen, in round two. They then saw off Imperial College, London in the first of their quarter-final matches before suffering a setback to lose to University College, London. However, the team eventually made it through to the semi-finals with a comprehensive victory over St George’s College, London.

“Let’s just say, it’s pretty exciting!” team captain Richard Gilbert told The Mancunion ahead of tonight’s contest. “It’s a real relief that we’ve got to the semis, since no Manchester team has gone out before this stage since 2005.”

“It would have been awful to have been that team, but frankly, after our calamitous first round match, everything has been a bonus.”

Gilbert continued: “Hopefully, our run will do some good towards maintaining the uni’s reputation – some prospective students see University Challenge as something of a gauge, so maybe we’ve inspired some applications!”

As reigning University Challenge champions, the trophy sits proudly on display in a glass cabinet in the University of Manchester library – for the time being, at least. A win this year would see Manchester become only the second institution to win back-to-back championships in the show’s 51-year history.

The semi-final will be shown on BBC Two tonight at 8pm.

Has Chavismo died with Chavez?

Written by Andrew Williams on . Posted in Features.

Seven weeks ago, Venezuelans awoke to a bright Tuesday morning without an inkling that the day millions had been dreading was finally upon them. That afternoon, the announcement many believed would never come: Hugo Chavez, the revolutionary president who promised to preside over “the resurrection of Venezuela” when he came to power fifteen years ago, had lost his battle with cancer at the age of 58.

Chavez’s legacy, hotly disputed amongst Venezuelans who variously deify and detest him, is at least in part a country riven by in-fighting between his most fervent supporters and fiercest critics; between the Chavistas and the Chav-nots. Given the strength and depth of feeling on both sides towards his regime – indifference is off the menu here – it was somewhat inevitable that the vacuum left by his passing would be filled, at least in the short-term, by violence on the streets of Caracas.

Last week, seven people were killed and more than sixty injured during post-election clashes in what has become one of the world’s deadliest capital cities; the rate of homicide having quadrupled since 1998, today Caracas has a murder rate comparable with Baghdad. Now, with Chavez’s anointed successor Nicolas Maduro sworn in as president despite allegations of electoral irregularity by a furious opposition, the immediate future of Venezuela looks decidedly uncertain.

Girish Gupta, a former Mancunion news editor now based in Caracas, has found himself in the thick of a tumultuous period for Latin American politics. At just 26, he has reported from four continents, covering the notorious Mexican drug wars before moving over 2,000 miles south in 2011. The young freelance journalist paints a picture of a truly dichotomous nation; a country of outstanding natural beauty pockmarked by crumbling, slum-ridden cities, where the struggling middle classes rub awkwardly against a newly-enfranchised poor.

“There are many people who would very, very fervently argue that Chavez completely destroyed this country,” Girish explains. “People used to call Caracas ‘the New York of South America’ – they don’t any more. Venezuelans were known for just buying everything because they had so much money.”

On the other hand, he says, “roughly the same number of people here regard Chavez as having saved the poor in this country. Poor people who were completely ignored have been given a voice – they now have a stake in politics, which never happened before – and they will tell you that this guy is their God, literally. They use quasi-religious language when they talk about him. So the ‘Chavez: good or bad’ question is incredibly polarising. There are people who will argue absolutely adamantly both ways.”

El Comandante, as he was known, was perhaps the most charismatic political figure of his era – “an absolutely fantastic personality,” according to Girish Gupta. “Chavez was great at populism. He was absolutely superb at connecting with people. For that reason it’s very difficult trying to get across to people just how powerful the love for Chavez is. It’s Christ-like, it’s ridiculous. Aside from North Korea, which is of course a very different situation, there is nothing remotely comparable. It’s just not something we ever see in western politics.”

One anecdote is particularly indicative of the Chavez phenomenon. “I spoke to ordinary Venezuelans when it was first revealed he had cancer and I said to them, what’s going to happen to this country when Chavez goes? And they would say, quite seriously, ‘he’s never going to die’,” Girish recalls. “So I said, alright, in twenty years when he’s not in power… ‘he will be in power,’ they would say. That sort of language was quite common.”

Yet this reverence is almost entirely at odds with the economic reality of present-day Venezuela. The country is, to all intents and purpose, an economic basketcase. “The economy is absolutely screwed,” Girish tells The Mancunion. “You’ve got one of the highest rates on inflation in Latin America [an eye-watering 25 percent]. You’ve got a shortage of basic products here because exporters have to contend with a collapse in the currency; you can’t exchange for dollars. For me, that’s amazing – I can fly to New York for 200 bucks – but Venezuelans are really suffering economically.”

Have Chavez’s ever-loyal supporters simply ignored these facts? “People never associated Chavez with these failings because, you know, it was Chavez. ‘He’s cool,’ they would say. ‘Look at what he’s done for us.’ They blamed all of the problems on government ministers,” Girish says.

Nicolas Maduro, who won last week’s general election by just 235,000 votes – a hair’s breadth – cannot rely on stonking rhetoric or a finely tuned cult of personality to power his presidency. On Thursday, a leading opposition newspaper splashed a picture of the bus driver-turned-president on their front page, complete with Hitler moustache. The defeated candidate of the right, Henrique Capriles, has cried foul play and looks set to dig in his heels, whilst the United States have refused to recognise the result of the election.

Put simply, the great challenge of Maduro’s presidency will be the fact that “he doesn’t have the same hold that Chavez did. I don’t think even he would be audacious enough to say that. I spoke to several people who said, ‘I’m a Chavista, I’ve always been a Chavista and I always will be a Chavista, but I’m going to vote for Capriles this time.’”

And yet, Maduro has much to do beyond holding his own party together. The eruption of violence which followed the election result was horribly apt, unfolding as it did in a city suffering from a criminal epidemic. “You speak to any person in Venezuela and they tell you the key here is crime. There’s no confidence in the police, and the prison services are incompetent,” Girish says.

“You don’t feel safe or secure. When I go back to London I pull my phone out of my pocket and I’m surprised that I can do that. I don’t like walking around at night, even in the nicer areas of town, and the danger isn’t about getting mugged, it’s about the guns that they’ve got, and the fact that they don’t care about using them.”

He continues: “It makes no difference to them whether they kill you or not, and that’s the scary thing for me. Forget about your new iPhone, forget about your computer, you don’t want to be in a position where these guys get pissed off with you and decide to shoot you, because no one is ever going to catch them. So no, I don’t feel safe here at all.”

Fortunately, Girish tells me, he is yet to fall victim to crime in Caracas, but he fully expects to at some point. “Pretty much everyone I know has been,” he laments. “Before I lived in Mexico, everyone told me how dangerous it was, but you can walk around Mexico City at night, and it’s fine. But in Caracas you can’t. You genuinely cannot. A colleague of mine recently saw a guy killed coming out of a bank one day, so it does manifest itself even in places where you should feel quite secure.”

Despite the lack of personal security, Girish has no desire to turn his back on Venezuela for the comfort of a Fleet Street newsroom. “Politically it’s very, very interesting here, and it’s so much more valuable [than regular journalism] in every single sense. It’s not like I have a small patch to myself – I have a whole country to myself, a whole region to myself. The money you can earn from freelancing is absolutely ludicrous, so there’s absolutely nothing now that would attract me to a desk-based job in London.”

Though Girish met Hugo Chavez on several occasions – “I usually had a couple of words with him, though nothing of substance” – he never had the opportunity to interview him. His view on the legacy of Chavez is of a mixed picture.

“Caracas is crumbling a little bit – it’s not a nice city, it’s not been taken care of – which is sad because otherwise it’s such an incredible country. It’s got the world’s tallest waterfall, it’s got this great Amazon jungle, it has everything, not to mention all of the oil wealth that hasn’t been taken care of. Venezuela could and should be very nice, because they’ve got all of this money.”

The long shadow of Chavez will doubtless extend for decades into the future, but now the fate of one of Latin America’s great powers lies in the hands of a divisive President Maduro.

Girish Gupta will be a judge at the University of Manchester’s inaugural Student Media Awards on 26 April.

Astro girl reaches for the stars in deodorant competition

Written by Michael Williams on . Posted in News.

A student at the University of Manchester is attempting to be sent into space as part of a Lynx advertising campaign.

However, this isn’t a ‘lad’ looking to get “the ultimate lead in the dating game”, as the Lynx adverts suggest.  Indeed, this isn’t a “lad” at all.

Danielle Hawarden, a pre-medical student at the University of Manchester, has been interested in space from a young age.

After having flying lessons at school, Dani attended the University of Sheffield to study Physics and Philosophy. While there, she was a member of the RAF Volunteer Reserves, and completed a solo flight in a Grob Tutor T1 aircraft.

“The combination of flying and physics got me into it, really”, Dani said.

“I’ve got an interest in aerospace so it all adds up to astronaut!”

Dani is currently placed 136th in the competition out of thousands of applicants. The first round of the competition is decided entirely on votes from the public, with the top 200 when the poll closes on April 30th advancing to the mysterious next stage.

“Not many details have been released,” she explains, “but it’s basically going to be mental and physical challenges, as if it were a real astronaut selection.”

“I’m on the Uni rowing team, and I’ve done triathalons before, so I’ve got the fitness side down hopefully”, Dani continued.

“I’m hoping that this, combined with my degree, [means] I’ll do quite well. I’m in with a decent chance!”

Was Dani weary of applying, given the company running the promotion?

“A lot of their advertising is obviously geared towards men, and I think that put people off”, Dani said.

“People weren’t even sure if women could apply, but I saw it on TV and [said] oh my god, this is amazing! This sounds right up my street”, she continued.

“I [said to myself] ‘this is definitely for me. I’m doing it regardless.’”

This isn’t Dani’s first brush with space celebrity, however. At 16, she managed to score a work placement with NASA, at the Johnson Space Centre in Houston, Texas.

“I basically rang around NASA to see if I could do work experience there, obviously thinking ‘no way’”, Dani explained.

“Amazingly, I managed to get a week at the Johnson Space Centre in Houston, and that’s where Mission Control is so it was a pretty good place to go!”

Whilst there, Dani rubbed shoulders with some astronauts who managed to get to space without the help of a deodorant company.

“When I was there, the Discovery shuttle landed, and I got to meet some of the astronauts that had just came down from space,” Dani said.

“That reaffirmed that this is what I want to do. It was amazing!”

Given the advert’s promise to give “one man the ultimate lead in the dating game”, would Dani use her newfound space celebrity to pull, if she won?

“I don’t think my boyfriend would be very happy with that”, she stated. “But I would try and use it to get some free stuff!”

“I’d definitely use it to my advantage. Maybe if I apply to NASA later in my career it would be good on my CV to say ‘well, I’ve already been to space!’”.

The link to vote for Dani is http://www.lynxapollo.com/en_GB/45629/dani-hawarden/. Voting closes on April 30.

Thatcher the Libertarian?

Written by James Jackson on . Posted in Opinion.

When discussing the death of Lady Thatcher, there are a number of journalistic clichés that need be avoided. The usage of “divisive,” “controversial” and “polarizing” to describe her is the primary one, true though it may be. There is also a perceived need to note her humble origins, and her gender. It is taken as read that she is the darling of the political right and of the “aspirational” middle class while she is hated by socialists, trade unionists, and Scousers. But where do libertarians stand in relation to the Iron Lady? A number of articles have been penned in support of her by the right wing libertarian press, most notably in the Spectator.

The Spectator’s Alex Massie notes the tension between the social conservatism and the economic liberalism which Thatcher championed. But Thatcher was not just a social conservative in the sense of Flag & Family (more on that later); she was also an authoritarian statist. She mobilized the full force of the state, usually in the form of the police, against near anything that she disagreed with: raves, gays, and miners. But before I get onto the obvious fights against liberty during her rule, I wish to critique the near-consensus view that all her economics were libertarian.

Influential libertarian blogger Sam Wells writes: “Real libertarians take individual rights seriously- seriously enough to consistently uphold them against the initiation of the use of force by anyone (including government) for any reason. This means that government […] has no business coercively interfering with the lives of peaceful (non-coercive) citizens in their private affairs and voluntary (market) relations.” Thatcher’s most popular policy among the Tories, breaking the influence of the unions, was a betrayal of libertarian values. A Libertarian perspective is that the trade unions (the democratic ones at least) represent a collective bargaining tool for the workers, who have the freedom over their own labour, and therefore the freedom to strike. I would add that if libertarianism is to be anything other than the ideology of the rich, then it must respect worker’s freedoms.

Did Thatcher respect this freedom? She respected it by sending in the long, brutal arm of the state, the police, to assault those workers whose freedom interfered with her politics. Though many British libertarians feel instinctively closer to the Tory party than Labour or the Lib Dems (I am not one of them), I feel that at least some of the praise for her is down to this tribalism, and the polarization she engendered. Her actions were not libertarian, as Alex Massie claims, but authoritarian and populist. She was not pushing through reforms out of a principled defence of freedom, nor did she commit to rolling back the state- indeed today’s Coalition has cut far more than she did. She instead represented a populist reaction against the post-war social democratic consensus; a consensus which gave trade unions a huge amount of power, and during which the philosophy of Marxism became popular among the British left. The British people were, largely, against the elitist unionists and their policies of industrial action, as well as opposing the radical communists, who appeared as Eastward-looking outsiders in their midst.

Alex Nunns argues that she was not even a true monetarist: the privatized national industries, like Network Rail, is not a competitive free-market, but a state sanctioned monopoly, closer to Mussolini’s corporatism than Friedmanite monetarism.

Nevertheless, times have changed in the “Conservative” party, which is currently dominated by a liberal wing. Gay marriage would have been inconceivable under Thatcher’s government; indeed the infamous Section 28 made it illegal to even talk about homosexuality in schools. That infringement of a person’s freedom of expression goes beyond mere social conservatism, and leans closer to fascism than many dare admit. Centralized interventions in schools were widespread during her governments, and the national curriculum was developed for the first time. Stuart Hall describes her as an “authoritarian populist” who reacted against the miners with strike-breaking violence, the AIDs panic with Section 28, and the Acid House/rave movement with tear gas and rubber bullets.

Rave culture began during Thatcher’s reign, and was reportedly responsible for a reduction in violence on the streets (who wants to fight when you’re that high?), as well as introducing a generation to dance music.  A free marketer would have seized the opportunity to legalise and capitalise on the rave experience, including its fuel of choice, Ecstasy, as well as Cannabis and other drugs. Instead Thatcher demonised and criminalized the party goers and drug users, showing her true colours as an authoritarian conservative reacting to moral panics. The tactics of the police were brutal, and infringed on fundamental freedoms like the freedom of association.

What about her foreign policy? Well, she propped up the racist South African apartheid regime by refusing to boycott, famously referring to Nelson Mandela as a “terrorist,” yet she pled for mercy towards the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, robbing his victims of their justice. She even worked with the genocidal Khmer Rouge, preferring to deal with them over the Vietnamese. You can call this real politik, but whatever its name it is incompatible with a political philosophy like libertarianism, which strongly opposes violent, authoritarian, and anti-democratic regimes like those above.

Thatcher may have criticised the social democratic model, opened up the markets and improved Britain’s standing on the world stage. But it is not just her successes that she should be measured for, but her failings as well. To view her as a proto-libertarian or even a neo-liberal is narrow, to say the least. Authoritarianism is intrinsically opposed to libertarianism, whether the authoritarian believes in markets or not.

The Sussex occupation

Written by Khalil Secker on . Posted in Opinion.

‘Why protest?’ I ask one guy.

‘The first people you meet when you come to uni are the porters. They sort your post, fix your boiler and generally just help you out. The staff have worked here for years and they’re a part of the campus community.  If they all get replaced by staff working from private companies who are underpaid, overworked and moved around all the time – that sense of community will be broken up.’

The protest began on 7th February, when a number of students occupied a building in protest at the university’s decision to privatise campus services – including caterers, porters, security guards and kitchen staff – putting the jobs of 235 staff under threat.

By the time I arrived, they had been in occupation for over six weeks, costing the university over £300,000. This was partially because they occupied a conference centre which the university normal hires out, but also because of the round the clock private security keeping guard outside the door.

Everyone in the occupation had a small yellow square cut from felt pinned to their tshirts or jackets. This was copied from the red square symbol of student activists in Canada who successfully campaigned against the rise in tuition fees through a sustained series of occupations and student strikes.

A recent poll found that 70% of students oppose the plans and I saw lots of students wandering round campus wearing yellow squares, including staff in the union shop. Yellow sheets of A4 paper were stuck up in windows all over campus, both in academic buildings and in halls of residence. The yellow square had gone viral.

They’d also employed the tactic of targeting open days, making their own ‘Ask me’ signs to emulate the campus tour guides and explaining to prospective students and parents what was going on. Many accepted invitations of coming upstairs for tea, with one 6th former even staying overnight.

Meetings were run in the horizontal decision making style of the Occupy camps, with one person chairing the meeting to make sure people don’t talk over each other and that everyone gets to have their say. After six weeks of confined proximity, people who had barely spoken before the occupation had now become like family.

‘We haven’t just decided to have this occupation on a whim, this is a last resort.’ says one campaigner, Michael Segalov. ‘Plans to outsource staff were announced in May of 2012 and since then we’ve had ongoing demonstrations and multiple requests to meet with the university through either trade unions or the students’ union, but we’ve been consistently ignored.’

He is also critical of the unions themselves. “It was two weeks before our own students’ union came out and said they supported us. Initially, there was resentment towards NUS within the occupation over how little they supported us until Liam Burns signed an open letter to MPs urging them to sign out Early Day Motion. Vicki Barrs (Vice President for Union Development) also came down to show support. UNISON (the main trade union for campus staff) has been terrible. They didn’t want any form of strike or protest, they just wanted to negotiate the redundancy package.”

As a response, the staff and students set up their own Pop-Up Union with the aim of building for strike action.

Michael deals with most of the external communications for the occupation and has built links with the BBC, Guardian, Huffingdon Post, Times, Times Higher Education ( “very influential but often overlooked” ) SkyNews and the local papers. ‘I’ve been woken up every morning at 9am by a different journalist’ he says ‘To be honest it just becomes normal after a while. I think it’s important not to feel out of your depth and not made to feel like “an activist” or someone less important than the institutions you are fighting against.’

He explains his attitude to campaigning ‘It’s about always being one step ahead and setting the agenda. Always being able to provide references and evidence for everything, exposing their wrongs but also displaying that you’re right.’

‘We’ve been getting around ten emails a day of support from students and university not just at Sussex but internationally.

They tell me that one of the happiest and most unexpected moments of the occupation was when the comedian Frankie Boyle (a Sussex alumnus) rang up to express support and promptly ordered them all pizza.

 

They’ve also had messages of support from Noam Chomsky, Ken Loach, Owen Jones, ‘The Thick of It’ actor Peter Capaldi, Billy Bragg, comedienne Josie Long and Will Self.

 

Michael also persuaded his local Green party MP Caroline Lucas to table Early Day Motion 1216 in Parliament criticising the privatisation of Sussex campus services. An EDM is a petition exclusively for MPs that can occasionally pressure the government into changing their stance) and this one has so far been signed by twenty five MPs from various parties (though none Conservative) – including the Manchester Lib Dem MP John Leech.

In the space of just a few weeks, they built for a national demo on the 25th March that drew over a thousand people. Campaigners peacefully occupied all five cafes on campus (all of which are due to be privatised) with the aim of shutting down business for the day in order to put extra pressure on the university.

The demo passed by the main administrative building, Sussex House – symbolic because it houses the offices of the senior university staff behind the decision to privatise campus services. Campaigners scrambled up a signpost and onto the roof as well as hopping onto the balcony to raise the a red and yellow flag up the flagpole. Police were pushed aside from the main doors as protestors streamed into the building. They held it for only half an hour before returning to the main occupation at the conference centre. There, around three hundred people held a general meeting, shared similar stories of privatisation on other campuses and finally agreed to hold a national week of action in April.

Following the national demo, university management took out a court injunction preventing anyone from ‘entering or remaining on the campus and buildings of the University of Sussex for the purpose of protest action (without the consent of the University of Sussex)” until September 2013.

This essentially means that any protest whatsoever is banned unless permitted by the university. In yet another display of resourcefulness, the campaigners linked up with unnamed barristers happy to do pro bono work in an attempt to challenge the injunction in the European Court of Human Rights. Protests have continued both against the privatisation and against the injunction itself, together with 10,000 signing a petition against both.

The occupation was evicted on Tuesday 2nd April after eight weeks. Hordes of riot police evicted the twenty five peaceful protestors in the conference centre. Four arrests were made.

One was man arrested on suspicion of violent disorder and criminal damage, relating to an incident at the university on Monday 25 March. Two women and one other man were arrested for obstructing police as they tried to arrest the former.

With the occupation over, campaigners are looking at other means of resisting privatisation and are spreading the Pop-Up Union membership not just amongst the original 235 staff affected, but amongst all campus staff. For the time being, momentum seems to still be on their side, with strike action by campus staff looming round the corner.

 

The Executive Team doesn’t need a Men’s Officer

Written by Helen Stevenson on . Posted in Opinion.

This week sees University, Union and Community assemblies taking place to debate a range of issues. The most contentious one is whether the “Union should introduce equal representation for men and women through the introduction of a full-time Men’s Officer” in which to “direct the Union’s work on men’s inclusion, representation and welfare.”

 

Where to start with this one? First of all, we don’t need to work on men’s inclusion and representation. At our university, as well as in greater society, men are already vastly over represented. The amount of buildings around university named in honour of male figures is testament to this; Steve Biko, Mansfield Cooper, John Rylands, Samuel Alexander, John Owens…do I need to go on? And then we have the Ellen Wilkinson building. There are glaring and measurable inequalities in society with the top positions in politics, law, business and sport dominated by men. We have a Minister for Women and Equalities in Parliament to recognise and address these structural imbalances. We also have a Women’s Officer at our university to work on the structural imbalances caused by a patriarchal system which disproportionately favours men at the expense of women. Unfortunately men do experience incidents of sexism at an individual level, but it is not a systemic problem that leads to the mass disenfranchisement of men. A Men’s Officer is unnecessary.

 

There have been seemingly legitimate arguments made as to why a men’s officer should be introduced, the most salient being those surrounding mental health issues and the rate of suicides amongst men. Men are half as likely as women to be diagnosed with depression, but twice as likely to abuse alcohol and drugs. Society plays a huge role prescribing and teaching men how to be “men”, with self-reliance and stoicism prized as positive masculine attributes. As a result, men generally are more reluctant to talk about mental health issues. I agree these are HUGE problems that need addressing, as soon as possible. It’s a good thing the Wellbeing Campaign this year has worked to try and remove the stigma attached to such issues, by providing safe spaces and encouraging men to talk about their mental health issues. Men’s wellbeing is catered for with the existence of the Wellbeing Officer, the Community Officer and Diversity Officer. The Women’s Campaign also directly tackles the misrepresentation of men by challenging and combating gender stereotypes. Men’s officer would have no remit, as men’s issues are already addressed by our Union. However, women’s issues cannot be subsumed into general issues the way men’s can, because women’s oppression is routinely side lined in a way that men’s aren’t.

 

A better use of an executive officer salary and the masses of energy and debate surrounding the need for this role would surely be better spent actually trying to improve mental health services within the union. It’s great that so many people are so passionate about mental health issues, more dialogue=less stigma yay! But maybe channel those energies into helping the Wellbeing Campaign instead of asking what about the menz?

The motion proposes equal representation for men and women through the introduction of a Men’s Officer. The motion is proposing we should have a Men’s Officer because we have a Women’s Officer. It seems very similar to the sentiments expressed by many people on International Women’s Day. Annually on 8th March, thousands of events are held around the world to inspire women and celebrate achievements of women. I was met with a barrage of questions as to why there isn’t an International Men’s Day to celebrate the achievements of men. Guess what? There is. It’s been on the 19th November every year since it started in 1999. It only seems like it’s every day. Why are people asking when this is and not celebrating it? Because much like the position of a Men’s Officer, it’s pointless and unnecessary.

 

Confronting and accepting your privilege is a difficult thing, and it can be hard to accept thatsociety is structured in a way that favours certain groups over others, especially if in being a member of a privileged group you see no discernible benefit to your life. But accept that privilege, instead of being defensive and having knee jerk reactions asking for a Men’s Officer just because we have a Women’s Officer. Equal representation in the Union will only be achieved if inequalities are tackled and removed. The introduction of a Men’s Officer represents a power grab, defensive reaction to the presence of a Women’s Officer. Inequalities in a system that structurally disenfranchise women do not disappear with the introduction of the Women’s Officer; the Women’s Officer is there to begin to address those imbalances. The physical manifestation of ‘equal representation’ – having a Men’s and a Women’s officer- will not address the inequalities in our society as current (mis)representation is not equal. The problem is that equality isn’t justice. Once gender inequalities are corrected, in a utopian world we won’t need a Women’s Officer. We will have fair representation because we don’t need gender specific Executive positions. But until that time, support the Women’s Campaign instead of constantly undermining it. Who knows? We may get there a bit quicker.

Margaret Thatcher 1925-2013

Written by Michael Howe on . Posted in Opinion.

I could open this piece by quoting one of the many words uttered by the iron lady over her many years. I could state my own ardent admiration for a divisive woman – indeed if you wish for a piece of vitriol, I recommend turning away now. This is not the piece you are looking for, though I will attempt some degree of balance. Instead, I will begin with a personal anecdote from a year or so ago whilst walking with a former friend. She had grown up in a council house and been consistently poor most of her life, and informed me that I could not reasonably say what Thatcher did was fair, how could I know what it was like to be affected so directly by her policy, having always come from relative wealth?

A fair comment, so rather than argue the obvious case that money does not make one blind, I asked her what should would recommend needs to be ‘done’ about the state of the poor? Having been raised to loathe Thatcher, her answer surprised me. She told me they needed a ‘kick up the rear’ and to be made more ‘self-reliant’ rather than ‘state-reliant’. I should not need to state my amusement upon informing her she had just almost quoted the loathed wicked witch of Grantham.

This is, for me perhaps, one of the most enduring parts of the Thatcherite legacy. A change in attitude, she shifted the debate and in doing so changed the country. The question becomes for better or worse, and in the words I have, I doubt I can answer this. But I shall attempt this herculean task.

Students perhaps have most to say with regard to unions, specifically coal. Having been born in 1991, and like most readers of this publication certainly post-Thatcher, I cannot say I recall the winter of discontent nor the strikes. But history teaches, and though it is through revisionism I say this, I must admit that I find the unions’ actions in the 70s reprehensible, and the acts such as the illegal (unconstitutional within the mandate given by the union) strike called by Scargill lead me to question how much of a choice the politicians of the day had. Collective bargaining is a wonderful idea, collective ransoming is not. Nottingham miners who wished to continue working had not even been consulted were made not to work by those ‘protecting’ the pits. This is not the act of a force standing up for the worker. Neither is the policy of only allowing workers in industry to join one union. The closed-shop was no less harmful than the pit closures, if for differing reasons. No, I must find that I admire Thatcher’s steadfast action in dark times.

I admit her actions broke communities, and find this problematic. Her faith in the market stretched too far – it is not enough to simply remove industry that fails and assume markets will fill the gap. This was part of the naiveté on her part. Thatcher’s name, the iron lady, though not meant as such, is close to the mark – wrought in iron, a warrior, not a thinker. No politician is perfect, no policy perfect, but in Thatcher’s case the damage caused is difficult to justify. Sadly, it is harder still to justify the situation the postwar consensus created where reliance on failing industry was all that could keep communities together. I cannot say the results of Thatcher were perfect, and to those negatively effected, I am sorry, and sorry I will continue to be, meaningless as it may be.

 

Live: Frank Turner

Written by Rachel Connolly on . Posted in Music.

Manchester Academy 1

19/04/2013

Turner started his career in 2001 as one fifth of the punk outfit Million Dead, and his hardcore origins lace his brand of folk with an edgy flavour that sets him apart from folk peers Mumford and Sons and Ben Howard. This punk influence is out in full force on Friday night, carrying the rest of the show with an impressive momentum. It brands Turner’s performance from roaring opening number ‘4 simple words’ and crashes through the rest of his set. Punk even rears its head in the audience, peppering the stereotypical teenage and middle aged Mumford lover crowd with grungy pierced types who would look more at home at a Black Sabbath tribute act. And this punk spirit is no bad thing, it’s a lot of fun, it’s playful and while Turner has not experienced the mega fame of Mumford and the likes, his style is fresher and a whole lot more exciting.

Manchester is Turner’s first English tour date, fresh from a string of American shows, and the crowd is itching with the excitement of it. 2008 hits ‘Substitute’ and ‘Photosynthesis’ and ‘The Real Damage’ send his fans into a frenzy. But, ‘Four Simple Words’ aside, numbers from new release Tape Deck Heart (out 22 April) prove to be lot less punk, a lot more folk. The crowd notably quiet and the jumping stops for more mellow new album numbers, ‘The Way I Tend to Be’ and ‘Good and Gone’.

Tape Deck Heart is less coarse, less catchy and more reflective than past albums and this may be attributed to the input of new record label, Polydor, and a bid to crack America following his performance at the Olympics opening ceremony and last year’s sell out Wembley show. But despite a more mainstream album approach, Turner is still the fame outcast his fans love, joking about recent interviews, ‘you speak to a guy who thinks this is your debut album, and you think fuck you man’.

The punk influence has mellowed and gap between Turner and Mumford has definitely narrowed with this latest album but he still puts on a brilliantly charismatic performance and his impressive vocals live make me finally understand Springsteen comparisons. If you like Turner, you’ll love him live.

7/10

Interview: Kenny “Dope” Gonzalez

Written by Daniel Jones on . Posted in Music.

Back in the 80s, a teenage Kenny Dope kept himself busy by digging deep for forgotten funk and soul cuts, throwing block parties in Brooklyn and borrowing drum machines from Todd Terry. Thirty years down the line and Kenny’s relentless work ethic has guaranteed his status as one of the most fabled figures in the history of NY house. We managed to catch up with the man himself from his home in New Jersey, where he was more than happy to dive straight into the thinking behind his reissue-focused imprint, Kay Dee Records.

“The Kay Dee thing is poppin’ off, man,” Dope drawls in a broad Nuyorican accent, “It’s pretty much an outlet for the years I’ve spent collecting records. The label is coming up on ten years now, but I’m still finding old 45s that I’ve never heard of. It just continues, y’know? There’s always another new groove to find. We’ve got a new mix of ‘The Professor Is Here’ [Gary Davis] coming this summer. Also, a couple of tracks with Simon Hill [Tru Thoughts’ own, Beta Hector] – one called ‘The Kraken’ which you’ve gotta look out for. I’m just trying to push the sound to the next generation, some kids these days have probably never seen a 45. You’ve gotta realise, I’ve been through three generations in my time. The kids who were coming out to see us in the 90s have got kids now, in the 00s there was another set and now, we’re playing to a whole new set again. We try to teach whoever is willing to listen.”

It’s clear that reintroducing, even reinventing, himself is a challenge that Kenny is more than willing to accept. “My thing is, coming from the way we started out recording to where things are now, it’s just amazing to me. I’m still trying to grasp the technology, I mean you can do something now in a couple of hours that used to take three days to do! Back then you had to make all the parts, record all the parts to tape, then mix them one by one. Now, you can do all of that on Ableton or ProTools. But there are consequences too. There’s a certain sound you can get out of the digital world that you’ll never be able to get with analog, and vice versa. A lot of it depends on what style of music you’re trying to produce. I have no problem with technology but you’ve gotta try to be different. Make the best thing you can make. There are a lot of records out there now that are just the same loop for 32 bars and all they’re doing is filtering in and out and I’m like, ‘Really?”

For Kenny, mixing things up has always been the name of the game. Aside from his role alongside Louie Vega as one half of pioneering duo Masters At Work, he has produced and remixed under countless aliases – The Bucketheads, Hardrive, KenLou and Liquid Dope to name but a few. But of his many, many brainchildren, Nuyorican Soul stands out as his most esteemed side-project. With a line-up including George Benson, Roy Ayers, Tito Puente and the Salsoul Orchestra, the amount of class acts on board that record is just plain silly.

“The whole thing was just ground-breaking for us, man. It really hits me when I’m looking back at photos and you’ve got Tito on one table, Jocelyn [Brown] on another. It was crazy. These are the guys I grew up listening to. But that’s also why we couldn’t tour the record back then. Think about it, you had the A-list of A-list of stars and all these guys come in with really high prices to perform, so you’re not gonna go and ask them for favours, like for a gang of shows, y’know? Moving forward, we said when we do Nuyorican Soul II we need to base it around one artist, so we can tour it. That’s the main reason it didn’t happen. We never found a person who could do Latin, who could sing, who hold their own on the urban side and on the RnB and soul side. We’d love to do another record, but we’re still looking for that person.”

Fingers crossed, that special somebody will rear their worthy head sooner rather than later. Talking of prospects, Kenny is quick to point out that there is by no means a dearth of talent out there today. “Right now, I’m feeling Monophonics and Adrian Younge. They’re both West Coast. Then, of course, you’ve got The Dap-Kings, Lee Fields, most of the guys on Daptone and Truth & Soul. Oh yeah and Shawn Lee, he’s doing some real interesting stuff at the moment with AM. He’s actually working out of England too.”

When quizzed about his upcoming summer slot at Eastern Electrics, Kenny sounds genuinely excited at the thought of coming back to Blighty. “Believe or not, I feel like England is a part of me. We were always there because a lot of the English labels embraced us; in fact, probably 50% of everything we did came from there. It’s like a second home. Any time there are gigs that can happen, Southport, Hard Times, anything with Gilles Peterson, we do it. It’s our first time at Eastern Electrics so I can’t wait to check that out.”

After half an hour on the blower, I have to admit I’m a little bit daunted by Kenny’s capacity for work. It’s no wonder that such a non-stop attitude to production has led him to amass a back catalogue of unassailable quality and unthinkable quantity. And it’s still growing. As Mr. Dope himself notes, with one eye firmly fixed on the future, “Some of these young guys seem to think they know it all already, but I’m still learning about music every day, man. And if I’m still learning, there’s definitely room for everybody else to learn.”

You can catch Kenny @ The Rainbow, Digbeth – 18th May  &  Eastern Electrics – 4th June, see website for ticket info.

Healthcare students protest against ‘NHS privatisation’

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in News.

Members of the Save Our NHS campaign – including medics and nursing students in white coats and scrubs – gathered outside Manchester Royal Infirmary last Wednesday in protest against what they say are government attempts to privatise the NHS.

The government has proposed Section 75, an amendment to the Health Act (2012) that would force all NHS services to compete with private companies to win government healthcare contracts.

Under the Health Act (2012), the bulk of the NHS budget is controlled by local groups of doctors called Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) who buy services for their local area from either NHS providers or private companies. Currently, CCGs have the freedom to stick with the NHS and rule out the private sector. If the House of Lords pass the new Section 75 regulations however on April 24th, CCGs will be forced to open all NHS services up to competition. ‘Anti-competitive behaviour’ would risk law suits from private health firms and penalties from the watchdog Monitor.

The government was forced to rephrase their initial Section 75 plans after an outcry from Labour and Lib Dem MPs together with the Royal College of GPs and health trade unions including Unison, Unite and the BMA. Despite this, Lords scrutinising the redrafted proposals have judged that they were “substantially the same” as the original version.

Chair of the Save Our NHS campaign Charlotte Cook said “Under EU Competition law, private companies will out-compete NHS services on price alone. This is what happened with Manchester’s ambulance services. The bus company Arriva put in a bid that was of lower quality and safety than the NHS provider, but won the contract because they promised to do it cheaper. We urge everyone who uses the NHS to lobby a Lord through the website www.goingtowork.org.uk“

A scary business

Written by Rosie Panter on . Posted in Theatre.

Rutherford and Son follows the trials and tribulations a family who try, with varying degrees of success, to escape the rule of their tyrannical father who rules both the family and the glass business he owns with an iron fist.

What makes the play so convincing is its presentation of the flaws of each individual character, making it impossible to consider any of them as wholly good, or wholly evil.

The plot follows his loss of power in the family home: his son Dick leaves to join a parish in Southport, his favourite John steals his money and runs away, and most importantly Janet begins a secret relationship with the man whom the governor trusts most in the world, his worker Martin.

Northern Broadside’s adaptation of this stifling family drama focuses solely on one room in the house, the dining room. The play was written by Githa Sowerby in 1912, and there are notably huge points of comparison between her own family life and the Rutherford family.

The lack of scene change heightens the sense of claustrophobia within the domestic sphere, particularly for women, who like the audience, cannot leave. This sense of domesticity is strengthened by moments of silence within the novel, the relationships within this home never feel forced.

Funnily enough, whilst this stagnation made me feel increasingly anxious about what could happen between those four walls, it never left me feeling bored.

A special mention must be made to Barrie Rutter’s performance as John Rutherford: he perfectly conveyed the frustrations and anger of a man who had given his life in toil in the belief that he was creating a life for his children.

Whilst he is truly terrifying in the scenes in which he shouts at, first John, and then later Janet, it is hard not to feel some level of sympathy for this failing father.

Despite the dark nature of this family drama comic respite was given in the scenes in which John is proven to be an absolute fool, and through Wendi Peter’s portrayal of the snivelling Mrs Henderson. These moments of humour are much needed not only to provide some respite, but also to increase the credibility of the family tale.

This is one family drama that perfectly portrays the tensions in a community or home that has no hope for change. The resonance of the play still rings true today; power, and power alone cannot bring happiness.

Five Stars out of Five.

Preview: Grillstock

Written by Jessica Hardiman on . Posted in News.

Manchester is truly embracing the era of the so-filthy-it’s-fashionable junk food of America, evident from the queue snaking its way daily from the doors of Almost Famous. Along with SoLita’s bacon jam and pulled pork Scotch egg, it would appear that all things carnivorous are going nowhere other than the depths of our stomachs. But beyond the overpriced hotdog, there is an art to this meaty fodder.

Welcome Grillstock Festival, a two-day meat feast taking place June 8th-9th in Albert Square (that place where you were chomping on a Bratwurst and sipping mulled wine at the Christmas markets a few months ago), celebrating the smoky pit of the barbeque.

For the barbeque aficionados amongst you, there is the King of the ‘Q’ competition, which is the heart of the festival and invites contestants to showcase their low ‘n’ slow barbequing magic with chicken, ribs, brisket and pulled pork. Along with a £1000 cash prize, winners are given the opportunity to compete at the American Royal World Series of BBQ in Kansas City. The only downside is the pretty steep entry cost of £150 per team.

For those whose budgets don’t stretch that far, alongside this are smaller contests of a slightly more light-hearted nature. These include a chilli eating competition and, for those who can’t handle such heat, a rib eating competition.

And for those without a competitive bone in their body, demos and live entertainment provide an easier pace to the weekend, allowing you to stuff your face and soak up the atmosphere.

There will be British and American beers on offer with Brewstock, and Brooklyn Brewery will also commandeering the pumps.  Along with music from headliners Kitty Daisy & Lewis, the line-up features local favourites, Riot Jazz.

There may well be no guarantee of sunshine, but at least we can revel in the Great British tradition of the barbeque without having to struggle with soggy coals on the patio. Put down the tongs and instead let some real meat lovers do it for you.

www.grillstock.co.uk