CoppaFeel is a breast cancer charity whose main aim is to raise awareness in young people of the signs and symptoms of breast cancer. In the UK, one in eight women will be affected by breast cancer in their lifetime with around 400 men being diagnosed every year. Breast cancer is still the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women under 40, and our founder Kris started the charity 10 years ago to raise awareness in young people about how to be boob savvy and get to know your body!
Here at UoM’s UniBoob team we have hosted blind dating shows and club nights to raise awareness. We organised a naked calendar of the university’s sports teams, which we are still selling via our Facebook page CoppaFeel Manchester for £5. On the 20th February we are having an afterparty for the Reclaim the Night march at Ziggy Sixx in Fallowfield. This will be DJ’d by the all-female DJ collective Not Bad for a Girl with bassline/drum and bass playing all night.
You can check your boobs in any way that feels comfortable for you. In the shower, when you’re lying down in bed, or in the mirror before you get dressed. However you want to check, we have some handy pointers to help.
Check regularly — we recommend once a month so that you will notice any changes. Get to know what is normal for you; being breast aware simply means knowing what is normal for your boobs or pecs. If you have periods, it’s likely you’ll find that your boobs will naturally change as part of your cycle each month. Check by looking and feeling for anything unusual and don’t forget to check in armpits and collarbones as well.
If in doubt — get it checked out! Go to your local GP, as your doctor is the only person who can refer you for further examination.
When checking, look for changes in skin texture and swelling in either collarbones or armpits. Be aware of constant, unusual pain in and around the breast area, and keep an eye out for lumps, thickening of tissue, or unusual discharge from the nipple. Nipple inversion, rash, crusting, or sudden unusual changes in size or shape may also be signs and symptoms.
With the money raised from charity events, CoppaFeel goes into schools and universities educating young people about the signs and symptoms of breast cancer. They provide a completely free monthly texting service, which anyone can sign up to and which reminds you once a month to check your breasts. All you have to do is text ‘UBT UOM’ to 70500, and you will receive a text which could save your life.
Having worked part-time in Spinningfields restaurants for a few years now, I’d always seen Tapeo and Wine on Deansgate and wanted to go. As well as my curiosity of seeing it across the street, having Spanish family and growing up around lots of Spanish food gives you an investigative urge to try a restaurant’s tapas. Let’s be honest, most of the UK’s introductions to tapas are patatas bravas, frozen squid rings or chicken in paprika, which, as a somewhat Spanish person can say, is completely unrepresentative of Spanish cuisine.
But, from Tapeo’s menu, they looked surprisingly authentic and somewhat innovative for UK tapas; four different kinds of bread (obviously including pan con tomate, but also toasted bread with alioli), seven different kinds of embotidos (cured meats) and 6 different kinds of fish-based tapas, with the most exciting for me being buñuelos de bacalao (salt-cod fritters), mejilliones a la crema (mussels in a cream sauce) and calamares a la plancha con setas (fried squid with wild mushrooms). The buñuelos were delicious; think salty, crispy savoury doughnuts with crispy cod skin. Though I was disappointed that the squid came with mushrooms (I’m sorry — I just don’t like them), nothing beats freshly fried squid, which was perfectly seasoned.
The vegetable-based tapas also looked delicious, with quite a few being innovative takes on classic Spanish combinations. The berenjena asada con salsa holandesa, queso feta y piñones (roasted aubergine with hollandaise, feta and pine nuts) sounded delicious. When it arrived, it looked beautiful as well. However, I’d say with this dish, the aubergine needed to be seasoned more, as the feta, hollandaise and softness of the roasted aubergine flesh all combined to make a homogeneous creamy flavour and texture. More crunchy pine nuts were needed and perhaps something acidic like a balsamic vinegar roasted with the aubergine to give some variety from the creaminess. But, aside from this, the dish was wholly enjoyable and very different from the usual vegetable tapas provisions from stereotypical Spanish restaurants.
Now, I wouldn’t usually order paella at a Spanish restaurant just on principle because I’m a what? — FOOD SNOB and paellas are never as good as the ones my mum makes. But, on this occasion, I really wanted to give Tapeo a chance. The reason paellas are never that exciting to English people is because they’re always served wrong. Paellas are more than just yellow rice with chorizo (which rarely actually comes in authentic paellas). Paellas are a Spanish masterpiece, varying with region and influence. But, from any good, authentic paella you’re looking for a creamy, rich rice flavoured with it’s respective base, for example, meat or fish.
Admirably, Tapeo offer the option to have their Paella de marisco (seafood paella) dry or wet. And please, never ask for dry. It just won’t give you what you deserve from a paella. Unfortunately, my other diner was allergic to seafood and s,o as we were sharing this dish, asked if we could go for the Paella Valenciana (chicken and rabbit paella). For those of you squeamish about rabbit, it’s just like a gamier chicken, though is really hard to cook as it goes dry very quick. In lots of regions of Spain, rabbits are grilled up and served with heaping mounds of alioli (a garlic emulsion traditionally made with just garlic, salt and olive oil – no eggs!)
But I digress — back to the paella. For £22 (£29/£32 for the seafood paella), it’s pricey for two. But, it is the centrepiece and occasion of the meal. Now, I won’t drag out the suspense; I was disappointed. The rice was dry and lacking flavour and was very very yellow, indicating not much more had been done to it than just steeping in saffron i.e no rich chicken stock or rabbit base. The chicken and rabbit were sadly, very dry. That’s unfortunately all I can say on that matter.
Overall, Tapeo’s menu is beautifully crafted and very authentically Spanish. It’s expensive, with each tapa averaging £8. I wouldn’t necessarily say what I had was worth the price it was being sold for honestly, but I would be willing to try more dishes and see whether I just had a one-off bad experience, as so many people adore Tapeo.
Like lamenting over my intolerance to dairy and gluten while shoving my mouth full of cheese and bread; a hypocritical martyrdom.
Going off social media for the year. My brother had suggested the idea on New Year’s Eve, when the arbitrary passage of time has human optimism at an all time high.
Yet dread and envy, as always, managed to slip into my thoughts when I saw a photo of someone from high school posting about their study abroad in Paris, obviously underneath La tour Eiffel with a baguette, so “why not?” I thought. I naively assumed people would immediately miss me and that I would come out the other side enlightened, standing on high moral ground next to the Dalai Lama.
Within the first few months, no one noticed. Okay… but surely people from back home will wonder what I’ve been up to? When I saw my extended family and friends back home for the first time, everyone asked the same robotic questions, not really listening to the answers, and it dawned on me – really no one had noticed.
What I did notice was my need for validation and for people to recognize the arduous task that I had taken on. Tell me you could never do what I’m doing! Tell me I have self-discipline! No one but my immediate family would indulge me, and one of them had suggested I do this in the first place. I kept repeatedly saying my lack of social media presence to anyone who could hear it, always unprompted. Hearing myself need validation was a crippling low.
I kept thinking about why I was doing this. I like mindlessly scrolling, so why did I feel the need to hide it from myself and tell others I didn’t enjoy it? Once I met a TV critic and asked him what his favorite guilty pleasure was. He sat with the thought for a second and then looked at my directly in the eyes: “Nothing is a guilty pleasure. If it brings you pleasure it can never be guilty. Have you ever watched Love Island?”
Social media has vices, and the discussion of its toxicity is everywhere with everyone involved: the plethora of university students writing dissertations on the subject, grandparents I have met at random holiday parties and, once, a very opinionated Customs Officer at Heathrow International airport.
This year gave me clarity with my own understanding of honesty. Does our toxic environment of social piranhas need a lesson in honesty? I believe so. If it brings someone pleasure, let’s not act as if it doesn’t. Let’s not edit our feeds to only show the best aspects of our lives. Let’s be honest. Instagram ads are honest! I do want more wool for knitting and a new pair of overalls, so keep the honesty coming!
If you are taking yourself too seriously, then it becomes a hassle. Social media was made to see other’s lives, to be fun and, of course, for Mark Zuckerberg to steal our crypto-data for big bucks.
As an already insecure girl, I refuse to become more crippled by anyone’s photo. For now, it’s nice to see you and I wish you happiness, I will not feel anything but those things while I scroll. So yes, I now have achieved enlightenment. I finally achieved a New Year’s resolution.
Last week saw the conclusion of the first-ever Netball Nations Cup. Four teams pushed it to the limit but, in the end, it was New Zealand who came out on top.
The competition followed on from the successes of the previous Quad Series, which began in 2016. This tournament was one which Australia dominated, winning 5 of only 6 possible trophies.
However, the past three tournaments have seen England claiming second position, which left many wondering how they would fare following the Aussies’ election to not compete this year.
The extremely talented Australian team were replaced by the Jamaican Sunshine Girls for the first competition of the new decade. The other three sides: the English Roses, the New Zealand Silver Ferns and South Africa SPAR Proteas, remained the same.
Sponsored by Vitality, the tournament took place over the course of four days, in three different locations. Nottingham’s Motorpoint Arena hosted the opening day, which saw England fall short of New Zealand, and Jamaica begin with a tightly-fought victory over South Africa.
They then travelled to Birmingham, where the Roses were able to squeeze past a demoralised South African team. However, the fairytale story was not to last for the Sunshine Girls, as New Zealand soared past them by a stunning 26 points.
London awaited the four sides, with the Copper Box Arena playing host to both round three and the finals. New Zealand were able to defeat South Africa, though perhaps less easily than many would have expected. Jamaica found their feet with a 70-66 victory over the hosts, needing a victory over New Zealand on the final day.
England just about sealed what proved to be a tournament to forget for the South Africans, with the latter now seeing narrow defeats in all four of their games to come bottom of the table.
The Jamaicans put up a better fight than they did in Birmingham, though they were still simply not a match for the New Zealanders – worthy winners in the end.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) have reiterated their commitment to keeping politics out of the Games ahead of Tokyo this summer, with an update to their rule banning political activism and demonstrations.
There has been a longstanding rule in the Olympic Charter, Rule 50, which forbids demonstrations and “political, religious or racial propaganda” in any of the Olympic arenas and/or venues. The IOC has now, however, added some precision to this ruling by referencing specific actions that will not be tolerated by the committee, such as political hand gestures, kneeling and the disruption of medal ceremonies.
The specificity of these rules has likely been influenced by a flurry of activism that took place last summer and the turbulent political landscape in America and across Europe.
The 2019 Pan American Games last saw U.S fencer Race Imboden take a knee to raise awareness of racial inequality in America, mirroring the controversial act of athletes like Colin Kaepernick. The Games also saw fellow American and hammer-thrower Gwen Berry raise her fist to protest injustice in America and for “a president who’s making it worse.”
IOC President, Thomas Bach, defended the new rule saying the Olympics “are not and must never be a platform to advance political or any other divisive ends.
“Our political neutrality is undermined whenever organisations or individuals attempt to use the Olympic Games as a stage for their own agendas, as legitimate as they may be.”
Bach’s words, however, feel hollow in the face of a long history of high profile and celebrated moments of activism.
The most iconic act came at the 1968 summer games in Mexico City. America’s John Carlos and Tommie Smith made the Black Power sign during the national anthem on the podium after finishing first and third, respectively, in the 200m. Australian Peter Norman finished second in the event and supported Carlos and Smith by wearing an Olympic Project for Human Rights badge.
The three men suffered tremendously following their protest.
The IOC said Smith and Carlos’ actions were “a deliberate and violent breach of the fundamental principles or the Olympic spirit” and consequently meant both were expelled from the Olympic village and suspended from the US team.
All three were heavily criticised by their respective media and were largely sidelined from participating in athletics on the world stage going forward.
Retrospectively, however, the Olympic Channel channel called Smith and Carlos’ act “one of the most iconic moments in the history of modern Olympic Games.” Both men were inducted into the US Olympic and Paralympic Hall of Fame and were later honoured by President Barack Obama.
The legacy of the 1968 Games has largely lived in memory because of the actions of Smith, Carlos and Norman and, in consequence, the sporting world has had no choice but to recognise that the athletes were treated unfairly.
External pressure may have forced the IOC and the sporting world to celebrate the activism of yesteryear but the IOC want that activism to remain firmly in the past, pursuing a future with a more ‘neutral’ outlook.
Even if athletes do abstain from political demonstrations in Tokyo, it seems impossible in an ever-growing divided world to keep global politics out of a global competition.
The boycotting of the Games has been a well-used tactic over the years by countries to make a political point and has been done so on a large scale. The back to back Games in Moscow and Los Angeles, 1980 and 1984, respectively, saw the Olympics become the backdrop for the ongoing Cold War, for example.
The impossibility of keeping the Olympics neutral is compounded by the fact the IOC themselves are implicated in politically dubious decisions over the years.
The IOC chose Berlin as the host for the 1936 Summer Games despite knowing how Adolf Hilter was attempting to exclude non-Aryans from sports organisations. Years later, the committee also allowed an all-white team to compete for an apartheid South Africa.
Even if we are to look past the ironies of the IOC’s decision-making and the naive expectations they have about hosting a neutral event full of countries whose relationships with one another can be described as anything but neutral, the IOC’s close relationship with the United Nations poses some questions about the IOC’s ban on activism.
Article 19 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights says: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
It seems hard for athletes to have ‘freedom of opinion and expression’ if the IOC restricts when they are allowed to act on this freedom.
If the countless instances of politics and sport becoming entwined through activism were not enough, sport can never be separated from politics when every athlete has a different solo-economic background that impacts how they are funded, where they train and what equipment or resources they have access to.
It is not a level playing field for athletes, no matter how much we pretend it to be, and this is only magnified on the Olympic stage. Politics and sport have always walked hand in hand and not only are the IOC attempting to ignore this fact, but they are themselves proving to be hypocritical.
The world of sport entered a state of mourning on the 26th January 2020, as the news broke that NBA legend Kobe Bryant (41) had been tragically killed in a helicopter crash, alongside his daughter, Gianna (12).
Bryant’s entourage was traveling to Gianna’s match at the Mamba Sports Academy — a facility spearheaded through Bryant’s investment — when the helicopter crashed, leaving no survivors. The victims included baseball coach, John Altobelli, his wife, Keri, and their daughter, Alyssa.
NBA commissioner, Adam Silver, released a statement later that day.
It read: ‘The NBA family is devastated by the tragic passing of Kobe Bryant and his daughter Gianna.
For 20 seasons, Kobe showed us what is possible when remarkable talent blends with an absolute devotion to winning. He was one of the most extraordinary players in the history of our game with accomplishments that are legendary: five NBA championships, an NBA MVP award, 18 NBA All-Star selections, and two Olympic gold medals.’
But he will be remembered most for inspiring people around the world to pick up a basketball and compete to the very best of their ability. He was generous with the wisdom he acquired and saw it as his mission to share it with future generations of players, taking special delight in passing down his love of the game to Gianna.
Bryant’s career is best defined by his time for the LA Lakers, a team where he sported the No. 24 and No. 8 jerseys. Such was his influence, that both numbers were consequently retired by the Lakers following the quietus of his career; ascending an iconic and symbolic plateau in the world of sport.
When Bryant joined the Lakers at the age of 17, in 1996, the squad was built around Shaquille O’Neal, and patience and determination were key to earning his place as a member of the core rotation. Over the next two decades, he helped the team to three consecutive NBA titles from 2000 to 2002 as well as earning 18 All-Star accolades and two Olympic gold medals.
Bryant retired from the Lakers in 2016 as the NBA’s third-all time scorer, with a total of 33,643 points. However, this was surpassed by LeBron James on the Sunday prior to Bryant’s tragic death.
James took to Instagram to express his inability to come to terms with the events, his caption reading: ‘I’m Not Ready but here I go. Man I sitting here trying to write something for this post but every time I try I begin crying again just thinking about you, niece Gigi and the friendship/bond/brotherhood we had! I literally just heard your voice Sunday morning before I left Philly to head back to LA. Didn’t think for one bit in a million years that would be the last conversation we’d have.’
Bryant is survived by his wife Vanessa, his daughters, and by the sporting legacy that his successes with the LA Lakers solidified; his plosive thud of the basketball against the court, a sound that will ring true in the ears of both his disciples and his fan base.
Having written my final essay for the third year, English-Literature course of Ulysses, I was left wondering much much more about what this formative piece of work means for English Literature. I realised that the course was only the beginning explorations of this formative, arguably monstrous work. As such, an underrated angle is explored at the event, of how Ulysses has influenced works after him.
In the event, Words and Music – James Joyce and Anthony Burgess at the International Antony Burgess Foundation, there will be an exploration of how Burgess was influenced by James Joyce. The talk is about contemporary intertextuality in literature, as Burgess himself was greatly influenced by Joyce’s style of modernism and neologisms and how this influence manifested in Burgess’ own work.
This event will explore the findings of the leading Italian academic on Joyce: Enrico Terrinoni. The event itself concludes Terrinoni’s research trip which was a week of working in the literary archives of the International Anthony Burgess Foundation, and Terrinoni will talk about his findings to the public at the Foundation.
A captivating enthusiast of Joyce, I attended Terrinoni’s seminar at the University of Manchester on Joyce’s other work, Finnegans Wake, in 2018. This final piece of literature by Joyce holds linguists and translators captivated, and Terrinoni spoke to a diverse audience about the joys of translating this polygoted, elusive piece of writing.
Alongside the talk, there will be a musical performance by Manchester ensemble No Dice Collective, performing music from Blooms of Dublin, Anthony Burgess’s musical version of Joyce’s Ulysses. This makes for an exciting evening of Joyce and Burgess’ collaborative spirit captured in this event.
The talk will be at the International Anthony Burgess Foundation on the 13th of February. With a wine reception from 6:30pm and the talk beginning at 7:00pm, the event promises to open up more layers of Joyce’s literary oeuvre in collaboration with Burgess’ literary legacy.
Support and Love via Education (SALVE) is an organisation based in Manchester that supports children in Uganda by providing education, housing and valuable life skills to help vulnerable children escape a dangerous cycle of poverty.
In 2008, a group of teachers and a counsellor working in Jinja noticed children were missing out on their education and were living on the streets trying to make money to support themselves or families. There are currently more than 600 children living on the streets of Jinja. SALVE’s main aim is to support these children through resettlement processes, including halfway homes, reuniting families, funding education and inspiring hope for the future.
SALVE’s resettlement process involves three steps. First, they build positive relationships and trust with children on the streets through their outreach programmes. Once the children are ready to move away from the streets, SALVE accommodates them in a halfway home, one for girls and one for boys, where they provide counselling and therapy through play, as well as brief education in basic skills like farming techniques.
They also work with the children to identify how they came to be separated from their families and what the most appropriate solution is, before beginning to work on reuniting the children with their families, by tracing where they families are. SALVE also run a Family Skills, Business Empowerment and Permaculture programme to help families set up their own businesses and reduce risks of them returning to the streets due to poverty. The Business Empowerment schemes work to educate individuals on how they can use assets such as land for farming to then sell their produce onwards, making the process sustainable and economical.
SALVE also involve the children in their care in understanding moral and ethical issues such as bullying and discrimination; but also, more complex concepts such as ‘whether uniforms create solidarity or divide communities’ and, ‘how can we ensure leaders have good values and are against corruption?’ all debated on inequalityquestion.com. The site allows the children to interact with people across the globe and see different perspectives. If you’d like to get involved, debates take place on the last Thursday of every month, between 12 pm and 2 pm GMT.
SALVE is always looking for passionate volunteers in both Manchester and Uganda to offer their time and skills as part of UoM’s Team Uganda Programme, giving more opportunities for children to leave the street. SALVE is a small organisation with big ambitions to make a brighter future for the next generation. Alternatively, SALVE runs fundraising events on campus and in the local area – details of these can be found on their website and social media, which can be found under @SALVEinternational on all social networks.
Andre Davis (Chadwick Boseman) is the NYPD’s best cop-killer-killer so he is the natural choice when an interrupted cocaine robbery in Brooklyn goes south, leaving several cops killed.
When red light cameras reveal the escaped robbers have gone to Manhattan, Davis calls in the full force of a beleaguered and unpopular police force to trap everyone in Manhattan and brutalize their way through the island in search of the cop killers.
The remainder of the film follows Davis as he dives deeper into the twisted criminal underworld of New York City and begins to unravel a web of corruption, potentially involving some of his own trusted colleagues, prompting serious internal conflicts as he realises that his upbringing, which led him to see police work and the police as unequivocally moral, may have clouded his perspective of justice.
21 Bridges is a watchable film. It’s a fairly entertaining subversion of expectations wrapped in stock packaging. Spacious, unadorned industrial interiors and dark, rainy cityscapes form the background of almost every scene.
Our cast of formulaic characters includes PTSD stricken veterans on the margins of society, flamboyant criminal hangers-on, and of course the conflict between the naively idealistic cop and the corrupt police force he works for.
It is the classic tale of class and power in New York City, with a little bit of modern(ish) technology involved. The first half of the film proceeds with a straightforward fascist message about the rights of cops to arbitrate justice and foreclose on freedom.
The second half of the film abandons this messaging, but doesn’t ever criticize or oppose it. What’s left is a thrilling, but not particularly interesting, self-contained high stakes chase through the centre of New York.
The role of cars is one thematic element that sticks out to me. The title and portions of the action of the film focus on cars and car infrastructure. When Davis closes Manhattan he orders the police to “flood the island with blue”, which of course means cops in cars. This is despite most New Yorkers, particularly in Manhattan, relying primarily on public transit to get around, not cars.
In reality, cops do patrol New York from behind windshields and 21 Bridges‘ thuggish police invasion of Manhattan in the film mirrors the recent colonization of New York’s subways by police and the havoc wreaked by having the same insular, scandal-ridden armed force depicted in this film arbitrating justice and safety in the transit system New Yorkers rely on.
Overall, 21 Bridges is a thrilling and easy-to-watch film with just enough complexity to keep you interested without needing to challenge you. A great film for lovers of New York City and a solid entry into the 21st-century noir cannon.
Water polo saw the 2020s kick off in style in January as both the men’s and women’s European Championships took place in Budapest.
It was Serbia who looked to retain their 2018 victory in the men’s tournament, which consisted of the continent’s top 16 countries.
After easing through as top of their group, a feat also attained by Hungary, Croatia, and Italy, the holders were put straight through to the quarter-finals, avoiding the playoff round.
However, it was in this round that a repeat of the last tournament’s final took place, ending in a 10-9 victory for Spain.
The Spaniards would then edge past Croatia, booking their spot in two successive finals and proving why they are one of the world’s best.
In the other side of the knockout tree, the hosts were proving to be thriving off the home advantage, easing past Russia and Montenegro to reach their first final since 2014.
The final was a truly gripping affair with the match finishing all square at 9-9, meaning that it was down to who could hold their nerve in the penalty shootout. Rather than crumbling under the pressure, the Hungarians stood up to the challenge and lifted the trophy after an excruciatingly close 5-4 shootout score.
As for the women, it was the Netherlands who were looking to hold onto their crown. The Dutch women were amongst the favourites and glided through to the semi-finals without a hitch.
However, a rare slip up allowed a strong Russian outfit to take their place in the final. The other semi-final offered a paradox to the men’s final, with the hosts Hungary losing out to their Spanish counterparts.
Another tense final was displayed, with the match swinging 13-12 in the favour of Spain, who came from behind to win the tournament.
The tournament migrates to Croatia for the 2022 edition, where Hungary’s men will hope to add to their now 13 European Championship titles, and Spain’s women will aim to expand their period of dominance by making it three wins out of four.
A strange little film called Eyes Wide Shut turned twenty in 2019—as did I, incidentally. It is safe to say that a lot has changed since 1999: I am no longer an infant, the earth is a bit warmer, Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman aren’t together anymore. What hasn’t changed in that time is Eyes Wide Shut’s ability to raise eyebrows and baffle viewers, for better or worse.
In a nutshell, Eyes Wide Shut is a tale about marital difficulties. It tells the story of a wealthy Manhattan businessman (Tom Cruise), who embarks on a surreal, sexual odyssey after his wife (Nicole Kidman) admits to erotic fantasies about another man.
As Stanley Kubrick’s final film before his death, the end of a twelve-year hiatus following Full Metal Jacket, there was a cloud of expectation and reputation surrounding Eyes Wide Shut. Billed as a dreamy, three-hour erotic opus from the master filmmaker and starring two of Hollywood’s biggest actors at the time, the finished product inevitably failed to live up to the hype.
First, the positives. The ritual sex party in the middle of the film is exquisite—surreal, uncomfortable, somewhat Lynchian. The eerie tones of Jocelyn Pook’s ‘Masked Ball’ pair with Larry Smith’s lush cinematography like aged cheese with fine wine (a spooky cheese, and a perverted wine). This stunning sequence is the film’s visual and thematic climax, but sadly it does not reach this level again for the rest of its runtime.
Indeed, the second half falls quite flat. As I mentioned earlier, Eyes Wide Shut runs for nearly three hours—it drags, to put it plainly, and doesn’t fulfil its potential. Too detached for a psychological horror; too cold for a marriage drama; and for an erotic thriller, strangely sexless. There is virtually no chemistry between Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman throughout the entire film, even though they were married when it was shot.
It is worth noting that Eyes Wide Shut’s plotis not entirely original, but loosely based on a 1926 German novella called Dream Story, written by Arthur Schnitzler. I must admit that I haven’t read Schnitzler’s novella, so I can’t comment on the effectiveness of Kubrick’s film as an adaptation.
Perhaps reading it would make Eyes Wide Shut a more rewarding experience, since it feels lacking as a standalone film. Yet previous Kubrick adaptations like A Clockwork Orange andThe Shining work perfectly by themselves, even if the viewer hasn’t read the books. It is only fair to hold Eyes Wide Shut to the same standard.
All in all, Stanley Kubrick’s last film certainly wasn’t his worst, but neither was it his best. Alas, twenty years on, Eyes Wide Shut seems destined to remain a curious footnote in the varied and shining filmography of one of cinema’s greatest auteurs.
Why Women Kill is a new anthology series from Marc Cherry, creator of the hit show Desperate Housewives, and the lesser-known Devious Maids. It focuses on a single, opulent house where three women, in different decades (60s, 80s, today) and very different marriages, each take a life.
Devious Maids sounds like your typical ‘Hell hath no fury‘ sexist bullcrap, but Cherry really gets women (as the Desperate Housewives themselves have stated). The main cast rolled their eyes at the prospect of a show about five Latina maids (yawn), but when they read the script, they saw that Cherry was playing with stereotypes and convention. His new show does the same.
Ginnifer Goodwin (Once Upon A Time, Zootopia) stars as Beth Ann Stanton, the quintessential 60s housewife, whose businessman husband happens to be seeing a young, blonde waitress. Very ordinary—until it’s not. Cherry shakes up this classic adultery, making it hard to believe the same woman played Snow White.
Lucy Liu (Charlie’s Angels, Elementary) plays Simone Grove, an Asian-American socialite and gallery owner. Her husband/business partner cheats on her … with a man! Most of the show’s comedy comes from her subsequent affair with a best friend’s teenage son.
They are joined, finally, by Kirby Howell-Baptiste (Killing Eve) as black, bisexual lawyer Taylor Harding. Her and her drug-addicted Jewish husband’s open marriage is going fine, until they both fall in love with the same woman. Worse— this woman is not all that she seems. But then, as Cherry asks in all of his shows, who is? Behind closed doors, even the most pristine of us have a little dirty laundry…
Immediately noticeable is how each relationship is more progressive than the last. The show brilliantly reflects social change, from simple things like decor, to the serious business of sexuality. Even the affairs are radically different.
Whilst, in classic Cherry style, the mystery and intrigue are masterful, the series isn’t so much ‘Who gets popped?’ as an exploration of relationships and what leads these women to commit unspeakable acts. Until the final episode, it appears as though each story will end in a stereotypical (scorned wife kills cheating husband) way, but Cherry defies convention.
The show’s tone is whimsical, with a colourful palette and witty, sardonic writing. Its aesthetics are quintessential Cherry. The opening credits, for example, are a comic cartoon (recalling the opening to Desperate Housewives) in which we see various women off their male partners.
Each episode concludes by revisiting its opening scenes, which focus on the lovers of the men and the friends of the murderers. Season 2 of The Purge just did something similar: whilst these scenes add little to the main story, they offer incredible insight into the fictional worlds.
One of my favourite parts of the show is how it links the decades. This is often simple: setting scenes in the same room, with transitions focused on a single part, or drawing the whole into a magical past/future transformation. The final episode even treats us to a crossover of sorts. But I’ll say no more.
In each of his shows, Cherry establishes archetypes in order to destroy them. Every character is 3-dimensional, every portrayal is nuanced. Why Women Kill does not end the way it started, which not only makes for good, shocking television, but also turns convention on its head.
Months before its release, the trailers for Hollywood’s latest musical theatre adaptation had already caused a storm on social media, with people tweeting that the CGI cat faces would haunt their nightmares, and memes spreading the rumour that the whole thing is just a thinly-veiled cat orgy. The child-friendly rating disproves this theory, but I can see where people are coming from, since the film consists of almost two hours of humanoid cats piling on top of each other in elaborate choreographies.
There is an attempt at a plot but it’s not a very good one. Andrew Lloyd Webber’s musical is based on a collection of whimsical poems written by T.S. Eliot for his godchildren, featuring a series of feline characters with human-like personality quirks. In 1981, the legendary Broadway composer decided that the poems would provide the lyrics for his new brainchild, so he strung them together in a bizarre story about a tribe of stray cats gathering in an annual ball/talent show, whose winner gets to fly away to cat Heaven on a chandelier. Oh, and a couple of them have magical powers. Almost forty years later, Cats mysteriously endures as one of Broadway’s most popular musicals.
Unsurprisingly, the film is a confusing mess. Webber’s score oscillates between whimsical, creepy, and pompous, and drags the film with it in all its mood swings. The trademark weirdness of Webber intertwines with the fatal flaw of Broadway adaptations: trying to be film, theatre and pop culture sensation all at once. The casting choices expose this ambiguous mindset, with pop stars Taylor Swift and Jason Derulo starring alongside stage veterans Ian McKellen and Judi Dench, not to mention a gaggle of Broadway dancers who stalk their every move.
The result is far from the triple threat that musical theatre excels at because each performance exposes the others’ flaws: the Shakespearean actors highlight the blandness of other performances, the dancers put everyone’s moves to shame, and the singing is just meh. Even Francesca Hayward, the closest thing we have to a leading lady, appears to struggle with the high notes. She is, after all, a ballet dancer and not a singer. Her casting was likely an attempt to enhance the film’s physicality, since an elaborate choreography has always been one of Cats’ strengths.
However, this feature does not translate well in a picture saturated with CGI. The casts’ acrobatics are enhanced with superhuman leaps and lunges, which detract from their impressiveness. At the theatre I would marvel at their skill, but here I was left to unpack how much of it was computer-generated. Other than this, and despite Twitter, I think the garish special effects were a great addition to Webber’s baroque creation. Hayward’s twitching cat ears deserve their own acting credit, and for all its faults, the world of the Jellicle cats is spectacularly crafted.
At the heart of neo-noir Motherless Brooklyn are the great performances of a stellar ensemble cast, including Edward Norton, Alec Baldwin, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, and Willem Dafoe. Each displays the subtleties of their character, and their various positions within 1950s New York. The nuanced performances are typical of the film’s considered sense of theme and tone.
In addition to his starring role as detective Lionel Essrog, Norton has produced, written and directed the film, based on a 1999 novel by Jonathan Lethem. When Lionel’s mentor and friend Frank Minna (Bruce Willis) is murdered, he sets out to discover the truth, leading him into a maze of corporate and government corruption. Lionel’s mission is further complicated by his struggle with Tourette syndrome, which causes problems throughout the film.
Norton’s cinematic adaptation varies significantly from the book, most obviously in his decision to change the period from the present day to the early 1950s. Ironically, this makes the film more relevant than it might have been otherwise. In his desire to shape New York in his own image, city planner Moses Randolph (Baldwin) obviously evokes Noah Cross (played by John Huston) from the neo-noir classic Chinatown. The film also engages with contemporary politics through its references to gentrification and its portrayal of an entitlement common in many political leaders today.
Although the story is compelling, it isn’t the twists and turns of the plot that make Motherless Brooklyn such a winning film. Rather, its beautiful night-shots of New York’s mid-century skyline explain why the central characters will fight for the city’s soul, despite the challenges they face.
There is also a Golden Globe-nominated soundtrack composed by Daniel Pemberton, with involvement from trumpeter Wynton Marsalis. The film’s music, rooted in the 50s jazz scene that provides part of its setting, is central to the story and even to Lionel himself. In particular, the original song ‘Daily Battles’ reflects his struggles with loneliness and isolation. It is written and performed by Radiohead frontman Thom Yorke, and another example of the film’s utilising a full range of audio-visual tools.
Motherless Brooklyn seems to have been Edward Norton’s pet project for a long time. Having acquired the rights to a cinematic adaption in 1999, when the novel was first published, he reportedly finished the script in 2012. Norton then sought another director, before taking on the role himself. Perhaps this is why the film has such a clear sense of its story, and the way it wants to tell it.
This is a review of a double bill of the Drama Society’s Autumn Fringe Season with Hope Leslie’s original play Mother Tongue (directed by Kate Ireland) and Alexis Gregory’s verbatim piece Riot Act (directed by Lily Gray and Eleanor Potter).
Kicking off the night, Mother Tongue explored the relationship between Lola (Savannah Acquah-Storey) and her mother, Theresa (Eliza Downes). A comical two-hander that managed to delicately unfold issues surrounding motherhood, race and sex work through a mixture of dialogue and spoken word poetry.
Leslie’s writing is seamless, the characters feel relatable whilst exploring a topic that is imaginably beyond most of the audiences’ experience. Ireland’s direction was innovative, and the use of projected graphics helped to plant the narrative firmly in its context.
The simplistic set was effective at bringing the audience into Lola’s world and helped to highlight the generation gap between her and her mother. However, the transitions between the spoken word sections and naturalistic scene could have been slicker and perhaps used more effectively.
Downes and Acquah-Storey played off each other well, with Downes’ comic timing really giving the piece energy; although, I must admit, I found it hard to fully invest in the pair’s mother-daughter relationship. Ultimately, for me, the writing was the strongest element of this short and I hope to see more from Leslie in the future.
Riot Act. Photo: Raphael Bez-Cryer.
Up next was Riot Act, a verbatim hour made from interviews Alexis Gregory conducted with three gay men. Originally written as a one-man-show, Gray and Potter decided to divide the text between three actors, a decision I’m not sure paid off.
Split into three monologues, covering two continents and decades of LGBTQI+ history, Riot Act is undoubtedly an important insight into The Stonewall Riots, the AIDS crisis and ACT UP movement, and the underground drag scene of the 1970s.
First up was George Clark playing Judy Garland-obsessed Michael, one of the last remaining survivors of the Stonewall riots. Clark’s performance was understated and felt really genuine, he really drew the audience into his story and the nuances of his gesturing gave life to the character.
This was followed by Peter Silver as radical drag artist Lavinia. Giving a measured and conversational performance, it felt very much as if he was talking to a friend which effectively kept my interest.
Finally, Adam Tutt inhabited Paul, an activist in the London ACT UP movement. Tutt brought a new level of energy to the stage after the more reserved and understated portrayals from Clark and Silver, bringing a more rounded, if slightly less genuine feel to his character.
All three gave engaging performances, however, I feel they were let down by the simplistic direction.
The transitions between monologues consisted of the boys putting up posters which had some relevance to the monologue that was about to follow, which felt clumsy and distracting. Projections played whilst this took place, however; the screen was obscured by whichever performer was due to start their monologue, a factor that had perhaps been overlooked.
Considering the simplicity of the concept; monologue after monologue, in the same spot on the stage, I felt the piece as a whole could have been a lot slicker and did unfortunately become repetitive. It is a testament to the text and the actors that it remained so engaging, and it is perhaps the repetitive nature of the play that sees it work best as a one-man play.
The Slightly Annoying Elephant is a wholesome musical performance about the hilarious consequences of adopting an elephant at the zoo. It is based on the children’s book of the same name by David Walliams and illustrated by Tony Ross. London’s award winning Little Angel Theatre has adapted this eccentric story into a play with the help of puppetry at HOME theatre, Manchester. This absurd and funny play will bring enjoyment to both the old and the young.
Heidi Goldsmith plays the role of the young protagonist Sam and skilfully displays the nativity of a young child through her innocent facial expressions and body movements. In addition, she convincingly switches between multiple diverse side characters by changing her vocal quality, accent and body language. Her voice is like honey, and she sings with a clear voice.
Alex Bloomer expertly controls the impressively structured elephant puppet and stays in character throughout the performance. His face becomes visibly covered with sweat during the performance, as he carries the large puppet and performs many physically strenuous dancing numbers. He must also often rapidly enter and exit the scene, while Goldsmith almost never leaves the stage. However, Bloomer competently sings and speaks with a calm, composed voice throughout the play and does not reveal his fatigue.
The acting is whimsical and exaggerated, which suits the play’s childlike and naïve atmosphere. The performance never attempts to be believable, but rather to transport the audience to a fantastical alternate reality where the common and the impossible coexist. Goldsmith and Bloomer have great chemistry with each other; they both execute many delightful singing and dancing numbers smoothly without errors. The two performers display good teamwork as Goldsmith often helps Bloomer to control his puppet by helping to move its long trunk or its feet.
The prop and set design were colourful and complemented the cheerful atmosphere of the play. Both the set and costumes closely resembled the illustrations in the original book. The stage was designed like a simple common room and kitchen. Most of the props onstage were actively used by the performers and contributed to the development of the plot. Bloomer often entered and exited the stage and he helped to discreetly bring new props on to the stage. Due to the rapid and vigorous movements of the performers, some props were fixed onstage out of necessity.
The star of this production was the beautifully constructed elephant puppet. It was both spectacular and practical. There were accessible handholds behind the large ears for easy manoeuvring, and the ears were magnetically fastened on the head, making them easy to remove and reattach when the need arises.
A person at the back of the theatre controlled the lighting and sound effects in the play. Lighting was used subtly to draw attention to certain parts of the stage. The musical was playful and simple and suitably comical sound effects accompanied the performance.
The Slightly Annoying Elephant is a well-produced family show and ran at the HOME Theatre from the 5th of December to the 29th of December.
Starring Kevin Costner and Whitney Houston, The Bodyguard is a musical film loved and applauded by all kinds of people: people who like glitzy musicals, people who like camp musicals, people who like classic musicals, and even the weird people who do not (usually) like musicals at all.
The stage adaptation of The Bodyguard makes several changes – the most notable one being the inclusion of Whitney songs that were not featured in the original film, resulting in the show being not just a stage adaptation of the film, but also a Whitney Houston jukebox musical. What more could you want?!
Alexandra Burke (winner of The X Factor 2008, hit singer-songwriter, and daughter of the late lead singer of Soul 2 Soul) takes on the lead role of Rachel Marron, a role she previously played a few years ago. I have always regretted not seeing The Bodyguard but I was determined that I would see it the next time it toured. Frankly, I knew I would feel bitter over not seeing Burke in the role, so you can imagine my happiness and excitement when it was announced that she would be back!
When playing Rachel Marron, you are not only playing an iconic character from a classic film, but you are also reviving, and honouring, a legendary artist: the late and the great Whitney Houston. I laud anyone brave enough to take on such a role, irrespective of their success in it, but Alexandra Burke really did kill it. She made the role her own and was not trying to be Whitney, although her speaking voice did seem to be a little inspired by Whitney’s distinctive vocal register.
Whilst it was clear that her background is not in acting, she evoked a sympathetic, likeable portrayal in Rachel, with a good combination of wit, charm and grace. Her singing voice was, of course, impeccable – Beyoncé agreed to sing with this woman when she was on The X Factor, so everyone knew she’d be incredible. However, her voice is deep and low, so she did not hit manage to hit Whitney’s high notes. But instead of trying to, she chose to showcase her heavy vocals and show us that she is Alexandra Burke playing Rachel Marron, not Alexandra Burke as an imitation of Whitney Houston playing Rachel Marron.
The titular bodyguard, Frank Farmer, was played by veteran theatre actor Ben Lewis. He most recently played Broadway Queen Patti Lupone’s husband in Company in the West End, and is known for playing the titular Phantom (he must have a thing for title characters) in The Phantom of the Opera, and its sequel, Love Never Dies. He also starred in the film version of the latter. I saw him in both Phantom and Company last year, so I was looking forward to seeing him again in The Bodyguard.
Whilst he was fantastic in the role, I was incredibly disappointed to discover that the only time his character sung was when he sung the (original) Dolly Parton version of I Will Always Love You in a karaoke bar and showed Rachel just how bad he is at singing. Even in the finale, when “the Stalker” finally got to sing, Lewis was not given the chance to show off his amazing voice. Surely, it is a little frustrating for him, with audiences leaving the theatre thinking he cannot sing, when he is the Goddamn Phantom of the Opera!
The musical opened with a concert performance, complete with fab costumes, top dancers, and fire! The costumes were definitely a highlight of the musical, whilst the set was good but not exactly memorable. The ensemble were all very talented. Daniil Shmidt in particular stood out, not just because of his great dancing, but also his sheer enthusiasm. It really is great when an ensemble member catches the audience’s attention and is noticed throughout the piece.
The show is also pretty cheesy, and not just nostalgic cheesy, but “omg. cringe.” cheesy, too. Lily and I looked at each other and laughed a few times. In particular, the iconic scene where Frank saves Rachel from an onstage encounter with “the Stalker” ended with the stage being engulfed in an excess of smoke and a silhouette of Frank holding Rachel in his arms (you know the scene!) being projected onto it, with loud, heavy music deafening the theatre. It was supposed to be serious… We laughed!
The moment we were all waiting for, though, was, of course, I Will Always Love You – and to see if Burke could do it justice.
She did! The audience were a little dry for most of the show, with Burke even struggling to get them going during her fantastic rendition of I’m Every Woman. Still, she gave it her all, and was not deterred by their dullness. Fortunately, though, they all clapped passionately after her performance of the film’s theme song.
The show closed with I Wanna Dance with Somebody, and the audience not only got to their feet and clapped, but danced with each other. It was a fabulous end to a fun, feel-good musical.
The Bodyguard finished at the Palace Theatre, Manchester on the 4th of January and is now continuing its UK tour.
These four lines in the sixth stanza of Maya Angelou’s stirring poem ‘Still I Rise’ have been a quintessential part of my life. When I felt defeated, when it seemed like the world was working against me, when I was powerless, I always remembered these words and repeated them like a mantra. I discovered Angelou when I was just a young girl looking for reassurance in poetry and novels. To this day, like many women, I still turn to this poem for empowerment, hope and to take back my power.
When I heard that Tribe// was going to take on this poem I immediately asked to review it. Even though I have never really been a contemporary dance type of gal I went with the hopes that the interpretation was powerful enough for me to see Angelou’s infamous words solidified in front of us.
Tribe// Still I Rise was inspired by Maya Angelou’s timeless poem. The sixty-five-minute single act was conceptualised by Victoria Fox, who created an intricate choreography that was divided into a series of sequences, marked by quick costumes changes and a score that ranged from intense strings and classical arias to pounding beats.
The piece was brought to life by five female performers. They danced in formation,exploring the full range of their strengths and weaknesses, both physical and emotional. They dwelled upon the subtle and extreme, the powerful and the weak. They used intricate, daring and defiant movements, attempting to reflect the duality of the poem. At times the atmosphere was energy-packed, defiant and aggressive. Then it simmered down, giving the audience a feeling of surrender and exhaustion.
The women then paired up, catching each other as they jumped in the air. There was a sense of trust, support and understanding as they mimicked and complemented oneanother. The connection and sheer strength shared between the dancers was palpable. It was a beautiful imagery of female intuition, kinship and empowerment. And for many in the audience, one of the highlights.
Overall, the piece was very straightforward and simple, which is both good and bad. On one hand, as an audience member, whether you were familiar with the poem or not, you could understand and interpret the story the dancers were telling. Tribe// did an amazing job at capturing the narrative of overcoming struggle. They showed the process of falling, failing, being defeated and powerless, yet despite it all, rising up. However, I was left wondering the purpose of using the source material at all. Was it used to attach itself to a more popular piece? Was it really necessary? Was the piece making sense because I knew the poem by heart? Or would I have still gotten it if I didn’t know the poem? Probably. I think the message they conveyed was common enough that with or without the poem it would’ve made sense.
Ifelt that it was a very holistic and literal interpretation of the poem. Yes, we as women ‘still rise’ in the face of subjugation. But the poem is so much more than that. So, for me, the choreography, while very complex and visually impactful, did not fully translate the complexity and depth that Angelou so clearly captured in her stanzas.
Still I Rise is not just a poem but a hymn to the oppressed and downtrodden. It’s a rallying call.A beacon for emancipation. And while this message of hope is indeed universal in its appeal, particularly for women and minorities, the poem has some stronger undertones that call back to times of slavery and civil rights. It’s transcendental that we remember that Angelou not only writes as a woman, but as a black woman. This ties togetherthe significance of the verses, clarifying that it’s not just an anthem of hope, but a psalm that breaks the chains put by masters and racist laws. Thousands of art products convey the global idea of standing up 8 times, after falling 7 times. What distinguishes Angelou’s masterpiece is the historical meaning emanated by her verses. I feel that this is what Tribe// forgot.
Regardless, I think Tribe// rendered an intrinsic imagery of thriving despite adversity. They gave a message of women enabling and supporting each other in an era that this visual is needed.
Following the deeply unsettling case of Reynhard Sinaga, who was convicted in Manchester Crown Court earlier this month of 136 counts of rape, I sat down with SU Women’s Officer Ayla Huseyinoglu to discuss the annual Reclaim the Night campaign and male inclusion in the wider conversation about sexual assault.
In the face of atrocities such as those committed by Sinaga, events like Reclaim the Night are a powerful and moving declaration of defiance by both survivors and allies.
As Women’s Officer, Ayla is key in the planning and implementation of Reclaim the Night 2020, which she describes as, “a campaign against sexual assault and gender-based violence,” which has at its heart a march from Owens Park to the Students’ Union, taking place on the 20th of February.
It must be noted that the conversation surrounding sexual assault is quite often set up in a binary of cis female victims and cis male perpetrators. This could be said to disclude not only trans and nonbinary people from the conversation, but also male victims.
Ayla acknowledged that Reclaim the Night has historically been women-focused and expressed a belief that it is “important that we keep the focus on women and non-binary people, who are more likely to experience sexual violence.” However, she then raised the point that it is “also important that we recognise that sometimes sexual assaults can and do happen to men as well.”
Photo: Hawwa Alam
In order to make the march as inclusive as possible, Ayla explained that this year’s planning committee have opted for a block “for each of the liberation groups”. These include designated blocks in the march women, BAME people, trans people, and members of the LGBTQI+ community. The final block of the march is mixed meaning people of all genders, backgrounds and sexualities are welcome to march together in this section, men most certainly included.
Male inclusion in the conversation around sexual assault – and in events such as Reclaim the Night – could, however, be seen as rather a complex issue. Statistics show that women are overwhelmingly more likely to be victims of sexual assault than men – according to Rape Crisis UK, approximately 85,000 women and 12,000 men (aged 16 – 59) experience some form of sexual assault in England and Wales annually. Alongside this, it is estimated that around 90% of perpetrators of sexual abuse are men.
Yet, in answer to the question of whether there is a possibility that women, trans and non-binary people, who are survivors of sexual assault the hands of men, may feel uncomfortable with an increased male presence at Reclaim the Night, Ayla stressed that men have never been unwelcome at the event.
“I think it’s always been important that men and people of all genders are included in conversations about sexual violence because if not everyone is involved in the conversations then [sexual violence] is not going to end.”
Photo: Kirstie O’Mahony
Prior to this interview, The Mancunion approached male students at the University of Manchester to ask them their thoughts on male inclusion in Reclaim the Night events. One student explained that he chose not to attended Reclaim the Night in the past, due to concern that he would be “intruding on a protest for those who feel unsafe at night due to fear of sexual assault.
“Even in the wake of the breaking of the serial rapist story in Manchester, I don’t think I am one of these people, so would still feel as though I would be intruding.”
Despite the hesitation some may have about getting involved, the Reclaim the Night march has grown in recent years from 1000 participants in 2018 to 3,500 in 2019. Ayla expressed a hope that this is because the stigma associated with talking about sexual assault is fading, meaning not only do increasingly more people feel empowered to come forward as victims, but others are also stepping up as allies:
“I think it’s really healthy that we’re talking about it more but it definitely still happens – there are still statistics showing that there are survivors coming forward all the time.”
Alongside this growing awareness of the prevalence of sexual assault, there is an increasing acceptance of the fact that men can be victims too, and yet maybe aren’t as included in the discussion as other genders.
Ayla stated that “not enough is done for survivors no matter who they are, and I think there is a stigma associated with talking about sexual abuse in general. But I think when we’re talking about men it plays into men talking about mental health and issues around that in general that need to be broken down.”
One positive to come from the horrors of the Sinaga case is a recent surge in the national conversation surrounding male survivors and survivors of all genders. This may help to alleviate some of the shame some people associate with being a victim of such an attack and may help educate people on how to get help.
Photo: Hannah Brierley
Reclaim the Night also does a lot to raise support for a number of organisations that help victims of sexual abuse:
“We raise money for charity through the sale of t-shirts that we make for Reclaim the Night and some of that money is going to go towards Survivors Manchester, which is a charity for male survivors. We are also going to have some of the money going to Rape Crisis, which helps women survivors, and an LGBTQ charity as well.”
“If we do want to change this culture, in which sexual assaults and sexual violence still happen, I think that everyone needs to be in the discussions both from their own experiences and in solidarity with people who are survivors themselves”
The Reclaim the Night march will be taking place on Saturday 20th February, beginning at Owens Park campus in Fallowfield and ending at the University of Manchester Students’ Union.
If you would like to support the event as a volunteer, you can sign up for roles on the Volunteer hub. Opportunities are available for stewarding and helping run banner-making sessions. Alongside this, a call is being put out to any feminist artists, crafters and jewellery makers who would like to run a stall at the charity fair taking place in the Students’ Union after the march.
If you have been affected by the issues covered in this article or wish to report an incident, please contact the Students’ Union advice service, visit the University’s Report and Support platform or contact one of the following charities:
Split/Mixed is a deeply moving production written and performed by Ery Nzaramba in lyrical language; full of honesty, humour and humanity.
It all began with a question: “Where are you from?”
This common question is not always easy to answer because it forces the recipient to think about their complex lives and condense it into a simple answer, or else risk follow-up questions such as: “Where are you really from?“/“Where are you from originally?”/“Where are your parents from?”
The protagonist Eddy explores different answers to this question as he reflects upon his own life journey. He has lived in Belgium, Rwanda and the UK, and survived nightmarish traumas, such as the horrifying Rwandan genocide and the tragic death of his friends and family.
The one-man-narrative is framed by a discussion between his two internal voices named “conscience” and “vanity”. The former blames him for surviving, attributing his current wellbeing to sheer luck and accuses him of being a “genocide benefactor”, while the latter defends Eddy and acknowledges the pain and guilt that comes with the title of “survivor”. Nzaramba’s beautifully crafted narrative displays the resiliency of human beings and how people can overcome unthinkable traumas and still be whole.
Nzaramba’s natural and believable performance drew the audience into his story, inviting them to be emotionally invested. From the very beginning, he established a sense of closeness with the audience. When he first entered the stage, he nervously waved and said “hi” and received some nervous “hi”s from the theatregoers. He told the story in a realistic, fragmented manner, as if he was following a stream of consciousness and adding things randomly when he remembered them.
His acting was believable and natural, he played multiple roles with suitable volume, articulation and body movements. His tone of voice was calm when he playing Eddy and exaggerated when playing the two dramatic sides of his psyche. Nzaramba was constantly engaging and interesting to watch as he rapidly switched between different roles with different ways of speaking as he skilfully showcased the protagonists’ overwhelming internal battle that is omnipresent throughout the play.
The set design was very minimalistic, a rough stone block and set of stairs in the same material make up Split/Mixed’s stage. Nzaramba was casually dressed in simple costumes that suited the honest and down-to-earth atmosphere of his narration. He utilised his clothes during his performance, for example, lowering and raising the waist of his jeans to signify his own mental and physical maturity.
The play only had a few props, which were used very effectively. Nzaramba brought a vintage boom box on stage and carried many cassette tapes in his pockets, which he proceeded to insert and extract from the cassette player during his performance. The prop was not functional, but he had previously recorded voice-overs to aid him in his storytelling, which began playing in the background speakers whenever he inserted a tape into the cassette player. These props had powerful significance for the play because they signified his own control over his story, or multiple stories, about his life.
Nzaramba not only delivered a great performance but he also collaborated wonderfully with his sound and lighting team. Background music was not used much for this production, but sound effects fitted perfectly with his acting to add a layer of realism to his storytelling.
The protagonist followed his train of consciousness and repeatedly switched between contrasting scenes swiftly, from a British nightclub, to a hospital in Belgium, to a Rwandan churchyard littered with bodies. This was achieved by the powerful sound effects and lighting change. The brightness of the stage changed naturally to suit the theme of the story and the progression of the plot. In addition, spotlights were used to highlight the storyteller. He left many things unsaid, and used sound and light effectively to fill in the gaps in his story.
Split/Mixed told an acutely moving and brutally honest story about the privilege of being alive and ran at the Royal Exchange Theatre Studio from the 9th to the 11th of December.
