The Martlet - Issue 5

Page 1

3

NEWS

The end of free speech?

6

UK NEWS

Is our health service on its last legs?

15

FEATURES

The Interview: Where does North Korea stand?

23

SPORT

Football’s greatest prize?

Abingdon School’s Leading Newspaper

SPRING ISSUE

ISSUE 05

ARSENAL: WHAT NEEDS FIXING? P.24 ‘Wide angle composite of the Emirates Stadium at dusk‘ by Ed g2s is licenced under CC BY-SA 3.0

THE CONSPIRACY OF MALAYSIA AIRLINES P.8

ONE DAY MORE P.15

Invasion, Injustice and the Kremlin Murder COVER STORY

James Beazley investigates the timely murder of Boris Nemtsov.

W

ith Russia growing in power, a tyrant leading invasions, and the outspoken being murdered, Eastern Europe seems to have all the elements of a Bond novel: all but one. There is no eponymous character, no 007, no James Bond. Five years ago, tensions rose between Russia and Ukraine. In 2010, a presidential election was held in Ukraine which was declared free and fair by international observers. This was won by Viktor Yanukovych. In 2013, Yanukovych declared that Ukraine would abandon an agreement to strengthen ties with

Europe and instead become a closer ally of Russia. This sparked controversy across Ukraine. Demonstrations began in Kiev, Yanukovych disappeared, and the pro-European protesters won. A temporary government was set up and preparations were made to hold further elections. In 2014, Russia sent troops and supplies into Ukraine, slowly taking control of various territories within. Crimea was annexed, yet the Kremlin denied involvement. This claim, however, was later repealed. With Crimea annexed, pro-Russian separatists continued to

fight the Ukrainian government across the country. Again, allegations were made that the Kremlin sent troops and supplies into Ukraine, yet President Putin denied these. The conflict between pro-Russian and Ukrainian forces raged on with casualties rising and planes falling. However, in mid-February, for the first time in months, a small glimmer of hope appeared: after 17-hour peace talks in Minsk, a cease-fire was agreed. For the first time in a long time, tensions seemed eased and breath could be drawn. This was the case until Friday February 27th, until the timely death of

‘Moscow Kremlin‘ by Alexey Kljatov is licenced under CC BY-NC 2.0

ASEAN: RISE OF THE EAST P.8

Boris Nemtsov. Nemtsov was a figurehead of the opposition and openly opposed the Russian intervention in Ukraine. On February 27th, at 23:40, local time, he was violently murdered. After having dinner with his girlfriend, Anna Duritskaya, Nemtsov was shot in the back four times while crossing Great Moskvoretsky Bridge, in direct view of the Kremlin. President Putin condemned the murder and elected to take ‘personal control’ of the investigation. This, unsurprisingly,

Continued on page 2


2

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

News

A letter from the Editor W

elcome to this new edition of The Martlet, our third edition of this academic year. We have once again expanded the paper to 28 pages, due in part to the great success of the previous editions. The quality of our writing has been greatly improved since we relaunched The Martlet last year, and I feel that this is our best yet. These are exciting times for the paper, as we start a new online section with our own website. As we move forward, articles and stories will be published online alongside the print version, which enables us to respond quickly to current affairs. We have recently appointed a new editorial team, who will take over the production of the next issue. I have greatly enjoyed my time editing The Martlet; I am particularly pleased that the popularity of the paper and the quality of our written work has been enhanced over the last year, thanks to the tireless work of everyone involved. I am confident that the new team of Toby Jupp (Editor), Henry Waterson (Deputy Editor), Blake Jones (Features Editor) and Nick Harris (Head of News) will further improve the overall quality of The Martlet, and I am sure that they are the right people to carry it forward into next year. This edition is packed full of interesting and stimulating articles. Our cover story details the escalation in tension in Russia and Ukraine, and the recent murder of Boris Nemtsov, a well-known critic of Putin’s regime. The Russian police took a long time to identify any suspects, despite the murder taking place in one of the most secure places in the entire country, just outside the walls of the Kremlin - perhaps the

least comforting aspect of this story is that Mr Putin has taken “personal control” of the investigation! We also cover the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris, and examine the role of the EU and ASEAN. Closer to home, our writers discuss the NHS crisis (which is set to be central to the General Election campaigns) and satirise domestic politics. We also feature a response to a previous article on feminism - it is important that The Martlet starts a conversation about important issues by allowing a right to reply, and that we function as a platform for intellectual debate. The central section of the newspaper is our most varied yet. We cover the controversial The Interview film about North Korea, as well as reviewing the excellent Les Misérables production. Technology and music also feature heavily, as we investigate the Virgin Galactic mission and take a look at Abingdon’s award-winning Film Unit. Sports are typically well-represented, with an overall look at the Year of Sport accompanied by articles on the Ballon d’Or and Arsenal’s perceived ‘crisis’ as well as a debate about domestic Twenty20 cricket and a review of the NFL season. An expanded and hilarious Dudley concludes the paper, and there is an opportunity to discover your own political orientation with our fun quiz. Whilst I am disappointed that my time in charge of The Martlet has ended, I am excited for what the new editorial team will bring to the paper. This is another excellent edition, and I am proud of how far we have come since last year. As usual, I hope that you enjoy our fantastic articles and thanks for reading.

Invasion, Injustice and the Kremlin Murder COVER STORY

James Beazley investigates the Bond-esque situation in Russia and Ukraine. Continued from cover page has caused outrage from the international community, with various motives being suggested. The leader of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, has suggested that western special forces murdered Nemtsov to cause internal conflict within Russia. There is a possibility, others suggest, that his murder was due to enmity within his personal or business life. Some even allege that Islamic extremism is to blame. The Ukrainian President, Petro Poroshenko, suggested Nemtsov was in possession of clear evidence that Russia had sent armed forces in Ukraine following the

annexation of Crimea. Nemtsov had planned to lead an opposition protest on March 1st and had gathered around fifty thousand supporters. Poroshenko blames the Russian government itself for Nemtsov’s murder. This view is shared by opposition figures, Ilya Yashin and Gennady Gudkov. Looking through the alleged dark history of the Kremlin, this

er, his opponents have been leaned on and killed off. In 2003, the liberal politician, Sergey Yushenkove, and the investigative journalist, Yrui Shchekochikhin, were assassinated and poisoned respectively. In 2004, the Russian editor of Forbes magazine was killed in a drive-by shooting. In late 2006, another investigative journal-

um. March 2013 saw Boris Berezovsky, the former Kremlin power broker turned Putin critic, murdered here in the UK. These scenes, more fitting to Westerns than Western society, mark a trend which seem to reveal abhorrent corruption within the Kremlin. If Poroshenko’s allegations are correct, it seems the Russian government is untouchable. The Kremlin has invaded Ukraine, annexed Crimea, and murdered its opponents, and has done so without genuine threat or punishment from the West. As nothing has been done to stop Russia, Russia may stop at nothing; with the threat stretching beyond Ukraine. In recent weeks, Russian military aircraft have been seen off the Cornish coast and Russia is a danger to Britain, according to the former head of MI6, Sir John Sawers. In saying that the country may need to defend itself in months to come, the former head of the SIS made it clear: the time to prevent major conflict with Russia is gone. Unlike those Bond novels, this will not end with a quick resolution, a heroic spy, and a smooth one liner. Russia has no limits and Britain has no Bond.

Russia has no limits and Britain has no Bond. final suggestion seems not only plausible but highly likely. Throughout Putin’s time in pow-

ist, Anna Politkovskaya, was shot and the former Russian spy, Alexander Litvinenko, drank tea laced with poloni-


3

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

‘Köln, Németország‘ by Elya is licenced under CC BY-SA 4.0

News

People were in mourning all over Europe, as seen here in Cologne

WORLD NEWS

Free Speech: Down But Not Out? Sam Chambers considers the ramifications of the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

O

n the 7th of January 2015, 12 people were killed in the Paris offices of the publication, Charlie Hebdo, by two islamist gunmen from Northern France of Algerian descent. As I’m sure you know, this act of terror sent shockwaves around the world. It dominated news in every medium. But the significance of this is is felt much wider afield than France or even Europe. It undermines one of the cornerstones of democracy, freedom of speech. Charlie Hebdo was notorious for its controversial cartoons, many of them on the topic of Islam and the customs and taboos within the religion, such as homosexuality, and even after the event they showed a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad - portraying the prophet through any medium is outlawed by the Koran. However, this article is not about what occurred, rather what the incident means for wider society and what it could lead to in months and years to come. It was perceived as an attack on one of the cornerstones of all democracies, constitutions and republics of the free world: freedom of speech. These men attacked Charlie Hebdo simply because they did not like what was being published. Outrageous on so many levels, the attacks themselves were an appalling catastrophe. Though

performed by some disillusioned young men who had a blurred perception of right and wrong, at least their cause was justifiable, unlike the means which they employed to enact it. The terrorists were protesting against an offensive publication which poked fun at a serious religion. It is dangerous to provoke Islam because of the reach and influence it has, yet Charlie Hebdo still did it. People claim that they were brave journalists who risked their lives daily

(and did) provoke. But this incident opens up a much wider issue: the fact that we are in an age of terror - terror not only in physical form, but also a fear of the unknown, brought about largely by the internet. As a consequence of the internet, anyone can wreak havoc completely anonymously from their kitchen table. As Q says in Skyfall: ‘I can do more damage on my laptop sitting in my pyjamas before my first cup of earl grey than you can do

They published insensitive and offensive material for their readers, but frankly, that’s being a little too kind to them; they published insensitive and provocative material that was just there to be controversial. As a result, I do not hold the publication in a particularly high regard and they should have been more conscious of the risks and possible retribution they could have

in a year in the field’. Q’s statement just about sums up the modern age. Why is it relevant? Because the threat of cyber terrorism makes people fearful. People are scared of being attacked and having everything taken from them remotely by a person they aren’t even aware of. Seen in this light it could be argued

that Charlie Hebdo is brave to continue without being influenced by the opinions of the communities they were portraying. Unless we are careful, our fears do our own censorship for us. It’s been said that a country should not be held hostage to the views of a minority, but the fact remains we are ruled by minorities, and I can’t help but find that sad. This is a problem for the Muslim community because the host community often stereotypes them as terrorists. It is all too easy to forget that terrorist attacks around the world are performed by extremist groups who represent a minuscule percentage of the population. However, most Muslims don’t share the views of terrorists but because of a handful of extremists, the Muslim community is often tip-toed around by government and public alike for fear of offense. Many muslims are ashamed of the extremists and furious at the poor reputation terrorists give the minority Muslim communities across the Western nations. The shooting in Paris reinforces the need for all of us in the West to be brave about confronting terrorism and about engaging in a proper discussion about what free speech really means. Despite the carnage, free speech is far from dead but it’s up to us now to make sure it stays that way.


4

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Opinion EQUALITY

Why Feminism Matters

I

Bruno Rodgers responds to an article in The Martlet’s previous edition

’m sure many of you will have seen the article in the last issue of the Martlet on the topic of Feminism claiming that Feminism has “lost its foundation of equality” and sees all men as “rapists and pigs”. I read this in utter disbelief as I felt it hugely misrepresented almost all aspects of Feminism, feminists and the inequality in current society, claiming vast untruths and assumptions on the ideology and motives of feminists in the modern world. Perhaps I should start by clearing up the Marilyn French “quote”, “All men are rapists, that’s all they are” upon which the writers’ claims appeared to be entirely based: it is a line said by a character in French’s novel, The Women’s Room, and nothing of the sort was ever expressed by the author herself. I suggest proper research is done before making such claims in an article. But onto the more important point – the conviction that Feminism does not “understand the meaning of equality”. As the article rightly said, Feminism is about striving for the political, social and economic equality of the sexes. And make no mistake, there is enormous inequality even now, in 2015. The FTSE 100 CEOs recently reached their highest ever female proportion – 20%. And yet girls have significantly higher average exam results

than boys. The House of Commons is made up of only 23% women – to represent a population which is 50% female. Women only hold 5% of executive positions in the media. And what about that pay gap? In the UK, full-time-employed women earn £100 a week less than men. How often do you hear a girl being called a “slut”, and men “players” for the same reasons? Are women not allowed to manifest their sexuality in the same way as men? In America last year over 700 bills were proposed to regulate women’s bodies and clothes, and not a single one for men. Why are women labelled “bossy” when they fail to fulfil meek and submissive gender stereotypes? I’m in a pretty good position as a white man; I can expect to walk down the street without constant cat-calling and comments on my body. I don’t expect there will be T.V. shows dedicated to “pulling” me, like a subhuman accessory. My body probably won’t be depicted as a newspaper’s unique selling point. Next time you watch a film, count how many conversations there are between female characters, which aren’t about another male character – you’ll struggle to find any. Or see how many films you can think of with a central female character, whose role does not revolve around a romantic relationship. These roles in fiction are the way women are seen in usual society. Even in innocent everyday language, how often do you hear “pussy” being used as an insult, denoting ridiculous female stereotypes such as cowardice? Why do we say “man” or “mankind” when we mean “human”, and use “he” as a default pronoun rather than “she”? Yes you might dismiss this as tenuous and pedantic, but when you actually look at our modern society, it is painfully clear to see: sexism is deeply rooted and ingrained into almost every aspect of it; this world is run by men, for men. It is so normal that we hardly notice it, but it is simply undeniable. If you think men are owed anything, you are hugely mistaken. Now, why “Feminism” rather than “gender egalitarianism”? If it is all about rectifying inequality then how do you do it? You take the oppressed population and raise them up to the level of equality. When gay people are oppressed, you sort it out by giving them equal rights – hence the “Gay Rights Movement”. It is the same with sexism: women are hugely oppressed (don’t even try to deny it), and we need to raise women up to the point of equality. That is what Feminism is about. Feminists are the people fighting against

everyday sexism and oppression in an attempt to put things right. So, you are not a feminist but “pro-equality”? Surely that means you also complain about the irrefutable, inherent sexism of schoolboy language, and campaign against the objectification of women’s bodies in the media, being “pro-equality”? I doubt it. The “gender egalitarians” are people who, by society’s compulsion, label themselves as “pro-equality” but in actual fact rather like the way things are, refusing to acknowledge and address the actual inequalities which exist. Many men are all too quick to jump on the “feminazi” bandwagon, criticising individual chauvinistic women while they consistently turn a blind eye to the same attitudes in men. Feminists are the people who actually care, who actually try to change things - in this case, gender inequality, as already described. It is not an anti-men label, it’s not a one-sided chauvinistic statement, it’s not sitting idly at home, calling yourself “egalitarian”. It’s the term for real intent and real action in striving for the political, social and economic equality of the sexes.


5

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

‘Polling station (way in)‘ by Paul Albertella is licenced under CC BY-NC 2.0

Opinion

The General Election takes place on the 7th May.

SATIRE

Labour will win the General Election!!! Ben Ffrench looks ahead to the biggest event of the year through his left-wing crystal ball.

W

ith the general election a small matter of months away, I thought it was about time to express my views and tips for the coming months, and to counter the frankly right-wing material displayed for your benefit last issue. Labour A party fraught with ‘leadership issues’, lacking economic credibility and a fear of ‘white van men’(if you read The Sun, Daily Mail or The Times). Ed Miliband’s party certainly failed to bring home the bacon on the PR front; their leader was recently snapped having a tussle with a certain sandwich, and his apparent lack of knowledge of the price of food certainly raised a few eyebrows. However, is it really as bad as foretold? A TNS poll from the seventh of January put Labour seven points ahead of the Tories. The party also holds higher credibility with the NHS, young people and ethnic minority voters (on the whole!), and their

plans for the economy? Not as bad as they say; Labour’s ‘Back to the 1930s’ narrative is somewhat convincing - austerity under the Tories is controversial. As well as this, Labour are set for a number of gains at the general election, and the bedroom tax remains hated as ever. I predict: Minority government UKIP Ah, UKIP. It seems the neverending pantomime of scandals within the party will never stop: Farage’s German wife, the pro-apartheid campaigning UKIP member, the expenses scandal and the horrifically racist comments posted on social network by candidates have all shocked. But the amphibious features of Nigel Farage, once unknown, now gaze out of every newspaper and Television screen, accompanied by a pint. This is now much replicated by Cameron, and their antiimmigration rants have spurred Cameron to European isolation. Stereotypical as it is, the party does enjoy great support among the elder generation and disgruntled extory voters. With two seats in parliament just from by-elections already, the party looks set for a minor explosion this time round. I predict: 10-20 seats, opposition.

Conservatives The Tories time in power has been all but smooth; Cameron was forced to sack Michael Gove, the loathed Education Secretary, only to replace him with ‘the bride of Gove’, Nicky Morgan, also the Minister for Women (dubbed ‘minister for straight women’ due to her orthodox beliefs). Sorry guys, this might be harsh, but it’s true - she has continued the policies started by the man with a plan who is Michael Gove. The bedroom tax was a hit on their popularity - such a giveaway to Labour. That said, they are supposed to have more economic credibility. Just how, I don’t know. The chancellor’s Autumn statement was met with little enthusiasm, mostly because it didn’t mean anything, and most acts passed through by George Osborne aren’t good ones; he even wanted to tax hot cross buns! The benefits regime under Ian Duncan Smith is somewhat ruthless; this is controversial and they will likely lose votes for that. The Tories are in a bad place. I predict: 200 or so seats, opposition. The Liberal Democrats Oh, the poor Lib Dems. What can I say?! Recent cartoons have seen Nick Clegg as David Cameron’s footstool as

well as ‘Cleggo- adopts any position’. They’ve taken the rap for the coalition, and have lost many voters. They won’t be annihilated, but they’re pretty seriously stuffed. I predict: 1-5 seats, opposition The Green Party Recently, we’ve seen a Green Party on the rise. Their recent exclusion from the TV debates cemented their reputation as ‘anti-establishment’, and their current membership figures put them above both UKIP and the Lib Dems. They have a lot of support, and have been branded the ‘UKIP of the left’. Caroline Lucas is also very popular; her campaigning on issues such as fracking and drug policy has won her a lot of plaudits. Currently (29 January 2015) Green party membership is at 50,000* in England and Wales, and can only get bigger. In hard times, their unbridled support for immigration is also a welcome change, while the main parties have all gone down the Farage route. The party has been compared to a watermelon: green on the outside, red on the inside. For many voters, it’s a very tasty one. I predict: 10-20 seats, opposition/ mutual Labour agreement

Ed Miliband’s party certainly failed to bring home the bacon on the PR front


6

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Image by Dave Kella, is licenced under CC BY-SA 2.0

News

Makeshift ambulances used due to a lack of resources.

T

he NHS continues to be an increasingly common discussion point for the party leaders in the General Election, but going to hospital could be more of a nightmare than a lifesaver. With progressive cuts being announced and overcrowding becoming a prevalent issue, can the NHS still provide adequate healthcare for all the citizens of the UK? From December 2014 to this January, budget cuts have to the NHS cancer budget and other departments have been announced. Funding to 25 different cancer drugs and treatments has been cut due to the NHS overspending £100 million in 2014-2015. NHS England stated that they had to make ‘difficult decisions’ so that they could fund new research projects. Professor Clark, Chair of the Cancer Drug Fund said, ‘There are drugs that do not offer sufficient clinical benefit so we simply cannot go on funding those.’ The NHS will supply such medication to cancer sufferers in serious cases only. However, the fund will increase next year to £340 million to reduce the chance of overspending happening again. Over-stretched and under-resourced hospitals are among those that have suffered the most. In some cases fire engines have to be used as makeshift ambulances and patients have to wait on trolleys for hours on end for their medical examination. The Fire Brigade Union was outraged by these faults on behalf of the NHS and has commented that the use of the fire brigade as a makeshift ambulance service has diverted firefighters from doing their own work to cover for mistakes by the NHS. The Fire Brigade Union General Secretary, Matt Wrack, said: ‘The A&E crisis is a direct result of the government’s failed austerity agenda. The public are

Health Risk in the Health Service COMMENT

Saul Rea and Piers Mucklejohn investigate whether the NHS is struggling under the nation’s increasing demand for healthcare. being put at risk because the government have cut staff, resources and equipment in both the NHS and fire and rescue service.’ Amid the cuts and the pressure facing the NHS came a hardly-surprising fall in life expectancy in people above 85. According to the Office of National Statistics, Women who live over 85 are expected to live less. This has decreased from 6.81 years in 2009-2011 to 6.79 years in 2011-2013. Over the past four years there has been a £3.5 billion cut to adult social care; with 16.5% of the population being over 65 as of 2011, cuts to their care is po-

tentially disastrous. This is going on at a time when the number of people receiving state care outside of hospital is dwindling. This raises concerns over how well elderly people are looked after outside of hospital, and whether this is bordering on neglect. ‘We know we need to work differently to respond to the challenge of our ageing population.’ The spokesman from the Department of Health said. ‘Our Care Act and the £5.3 billion Better Care Fund, the first ever national programme to join up health and social care, will focus resourc-

Waiting times in Accident and Emergency are at their worst for a decade

es on helping people to live independently which will save money and prevent people from needing more support.’ Furthermore, many people check into hospital with very minor issues such as coughs and common colds, which wastes time and money. Such patients are being advised go to the chemist before hospital. These crowds coming into hospital with negligible complaints bring longer waiting times for those who actually need urgent medical treatment - a waste of money and a waste of time. Individuals who have a problem that does not require immediate medical attention are also being instructed to call 111 instead of 999 - the number for non-urgent issues. In addition, waiting times in Accident and Emergency are at their worst for a decade. On top of this, yet more problems are spreading around the health service; more departments are facing setbacks rather than technological triumphs. For example, the number of operations that were cancelled from November 2014 to January 2015 was up by a third - which represents a return to 2013 cancellation rates and a step backwards. Another problem is that the proportion of in-patients waiting longer than 18 weeks for treatment rose to 12.5% in November - the highest level since this target was introduced in 2008. John Appleby, the chief economist of the health charity, The King’s Fund, said: ‘While recent attention has focused on the problems faced by A&E units, performance against waiting time targets and other indicators has continued to worsen.’ In conclusion, the NHS is indeed facing huge problems. Suffering budget cuts and departmental issues, the NHS is losing ground. Though it saves lives on a daily basis, the government must crack down on the issues challenging its progress.


7

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Opinion

EU: Fight or Flight? POLITICS

Nick Harris investigates the ins and outs of a British exit from the EU Image by Dave Kella, is licenced under CC BY-SA 2.0

O

Can these two flags ever fly in harmony? and there are no new doctors to replace them. These new workers have to come from somewhere and, already, we are finding ourselves recruiting in many parts of Europe with 1 in 10 new nurses at NHS trusts coming from Portugal. Can we really withdraw from a system which is providing a nation with a ready and willing workforce which is happy to put a lot more in than many of us Brits? However, there are those who argue that this immigration is having a negative influence on our country. These people are focused into one group: UKIP. The argument for Britain’s exit is centered around immigration and how immigrants are

‘Jean-Claude Junker‘ by Zinneke is licenced under CC BY-SA 3.0

n January 15th, Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the EU Commission, compared Britain’s relationship with Europe to that of two doomed lovers, saying at a conference in Paris, ‘It’s easy to fall in love and more difficult to stay together.’ The debate on Britain’s involvement in Europe has spanned the centuries, from military intervention against Napoleon, ‘splendid isolation’ from Europe under Disraeli and reconciliation following two world wars. But is Mr Juncker right about Britain and Europe, specifically the EU? Is our relationship doomed to fail? For the most part, the EU is beneficial for our country. The immigrants which some are so quick to condemn are young, hard-working people who just come to this country wanting to find work and do their job well. It is not their fault that the British public does not occupy these jobs, let alone want to occupy them. As for the claims of benefit tourism, these can also be proved false; in 2011, for example, European Economic Area (EEA) immigrants put 34% more into the public purse, in the form of taxes, than they took out. The same is even true for nonEuropean Economic Area immigrants, although by a smaller margin of 2%, and most likely because many of these nonEEA immigrants came to this country during the wave of Commonwealth immigration immediately after decolonisation and are therefore older and no longer in work. Furthermore, this influx of young workers could turn out to be a blessing. We have an ageing population in our country and in many sectors, like the NHS, we will have a crisis in the next few years when our older GPs retire

Jean Claude Juncker - President of the EU commission

stealing British jobs, taking up British housing and breathing British air. This party is completely bigoted against any kind of immigration. They ignore any of the EU’s benefits for Britain and even claim that current immigrants who are settled in the UK should only be allowed to stay for a ‘transitional period’ following a theoretical exit from the EU. In the last five years, through a campaign of scaremongering and propaganda, UKIP have whipped the British public into a europhobic frenzy. The ‘facts’ that this party spreads about the EU and how it drains our country’s economy are often not true. It is much less noticeable here in the SouthEast than in many other regions, but the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) has invested billions into everything from infrastructure to keeping museums and galleries open. Maybe not all of this money is invested wisely, but one cannot claim that we don’t see any of the money we put into the EU. The claims put forward by UKIP about a possible escape from EU energy regulations are largely fictional; if British businesses were to begin working without regarding these rules then they would have great difficulties in trading with the EU bloc. The Europhobes often point to countries like Norway and Switzerland as examples of survival outside of the EU, but our country has developed in an entirely different way to these

countries and there are no case studies to suggest that the UK would fare well out of the EU. However, Europe has hardly displayed itself as a paradise for its members in the last five years; the Euro is a currency in danger of collapse, with a Greek walkout looking even more likely following the recent election of the anti-austerity left wing party, Syriza. The European sovereign debt crisis, combined with other fundamental issues with the Eurozone, is making it harder for europhiles to argue their case, and has given UKIP a weakness to exploit. The Eurozone is, however, attempting to rekindle its appeal with the huge quantitative easing to the level of around $1 trillion. However, even this has been met with criticism, particularly from the German contingent who will never forget the hyperinflation in their country in the 1920s. If the EU club wants to make itself more appealing to Britain, then it must advertise the advantages. The last five years of continuous problems and indecision has done nothing to convince the British public of the EU’s credibility. The desire for the UK to participate in the EU has to be mutual; the British public must not allow itself to be influenced by the fog of propaganda spread by certain political parties, while Europe must endeavour to reach out to the UK and show us that EU membership is worth our while.


8

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Comment

ASEAN: Rise of the East POLITICS

Pawin “Pea” Sermsuk introduces Asia’s answer to the EU.

The recent 25th ASEAN Summit in Nay Pyi Taw, the new capital of Myanmar, showed a strong and stable relationship between member countries.

European Union

Formation: 1958 Treaty of Rome Capital: Brussels, Belgium Member states: 28 states President of Commision: Jean-Claude Juncker Area: 4,381,376 km2 Population: 507,416,607 (2014 estimate) GDP Total: $18.124 trillion GDP Per Capita: $35,849 Human Development Index: 0.876

O

ver the past century, there have been a vast number of international movements attempting to form political bonds in order to prevent the outbreak of war and inhibit extreme forms of nationalism. One of the most prominent is the well-known Treaty of Brussels, uniting five countries together in 1957: Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the UK. But as the world progressed and each nation concentrated on its own internal development, these multinational communities started to focus on economical and trading agreements, in the hope of benefits towards domestic growth. That is, therefore (with some exceptions in a few parts of the world) the main ambition of a multinational alliance in the modern world. The familiar European Union dates back to the Treaty of Brussels (signed in 1948), which was a treaty of ‘economic, social and cultural collaboration and collective self-defence’. The allied powers soon formed the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), creating a great economic bond between the 6 countries involved in the community: Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. The European Economic Community (EEC) was formed in 1957 as an extension of their earlier co-operation within Europe, the ECSC. The EEC morphed into the

European Community (EC) in 1993, and all the other treaties and communities in place eventually combined, following the Maastricht Treaty, to form the European Union that we know today, which fully came into effect in 2009.

In many ways, ASEAN is just like the EU

The actual story of the EU’s history is a bit more complicated, but the main point is that a few major changes have been made to the member countries of the EU, particularly in economic terms. The EU has established a single market across the territory of all of its members. 19 member states have also joined a monetary union known as the Eurozone, which uses the Euro (€) as a single currency. This single market involves the free circulation of goods, capital, people, and services within the EU. The free movement of people means that EU citizens can move freely between member states to live, work, study or retire in an-

other EU country. This required the lowering of administrative formalities and recognition of professional qualifications of other states. Currently, 26 members of the EU have also agreed to the Schengen Treaty, an agreement on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders. It led the way toward the creation of open borders without passport controls between most member states and some non-member states, and ASEAN is a near-exact replica of that. So what is ASEAN? Well, it is the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations, in other words, the EU of Southeast Asia. It consists of ten member states: Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines, Brunei, Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam. It began with the Bangkok Declaration in 1967 as an organisation called ‘the Association of Southeast Asia’ (ASA) with five states as members. Its aims are to promote collaboration and co-operation among member states, as well as to strengthen international relationships; should an unexpected war break out, these countries will stick together through every crisis. Not only does it deal with internal regional collaboration, but ASEAN also intends to advance the interests of the region as a whole, including economic and trade growth. The association has negotiated a free trade agreement with countries outside ASEAN, such as Japan


9

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

The 10 firm members of ASEAN and the Economic Community

The ten bound stalks of rice in the centre of the Emblem represent the member states of ASEAN and China, strengthening trading relationship in the region in the long term as well. This forms yet another sub-group, ‘ASEAN Plus Three’, which basically includes all the members of ASEAN along with China, Japan and South Korea. Peace and stability is also a very important matter for the community. Members have to sign a treaty pledging not to have nuclear weapons, and they also share a central intelligence force. In many ways, ASEAN is just like the EU. In terms of economics, there is a great overlap between the two unions. The EU traces its origin to an internal organization called the European Economic Community (EEC), which provides a common market between the member countries, and is currently embedded in the EU itself. Likewise, the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), which will come into effect later this year, will establish a common market for the people in the region to be able to trade freely. The organisation stated that the upcoming economic community will create a single market and production base, turning ASEAN into a highly competitive region. It will be a region of equitable economic development and will be fully integrated into the global economy. By the end of 2015, the AEC single market, like in the EU, will ensure the free flow of goods, services, investment and skilled labour as well as even freer flow of cap-

ital, allowing the 600,000,000 people within it to travel and trade freely. This will boost the region’s staggering annual growth rate of 5%. There are also a few significant flaws from the EU that ASEAN has noted and prevented. Unlike the EU, ASEAN will not have a single common currency. There are considerable obstacles in the way of developing a single currency for ASEAN. As the Eurozone crisis has shown, problems in a weak economy can swiftly make trouble for the stronger per-

ASEAN will not have a single common currency

formers. So instead of looking towards a single currency, ASEAN first has to focus on its goal of economic integration later this year. The challenge for them will be to integrate the enormously different economies suitably and sustainably. As we look forward into the future, there are still many things that ASEAN has to deal with, mainly with regards to

Lê Lương Minh, the Secretary General of ASEAN

the development gaps between member countries. For instance, the gap between Greece and Germany is far narrower than the yawning economic chasm which currently separates Cambodia - one of the world’s least-developed countries - and Singapore, which is one of the wealthiest. There is also the issue of the South China Sea, where an escalating territorial dispute has emerged as a challenge to the unity of the bloc; The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia have overlapping claims with China which says a U-shaped swathe of the sea is its territory and is increasingly assertive on the issue. At the July 2012 summit held in Phnom Penh, ASEAN failed to issue a joint statement for the first time in its history when member countries could not agree on how to deal with China. What complicates matters is that some members, such as Cambodia, are seen to be close allies of China. Nevertheless, ASEAN is, overall, a very interesting and exciting leap into what is potentially a great development opportunity for the region. As a citizen of the community, I really do believe that, the leaders have finally found a way to integrate each member’s different culture, economy, politics and people together. They have stepped through the barriers and united all the countries together, which, I think, is a successful step forwards for all of us.

ASEAN

Formation: 1967 Bangkok Declaration Headquarters: Jakarta, Indonesia Member states: 10 states Secretary General: Lê Luong Minh Area: 4,479,210.5 km2 Population: 602,658,000 (2011 estimate) GDP Total: $3.574 trillion GDP Per Capita: $5,930 Human Development Index: 0.669


10

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Opinion

What Has Changed in the World of Oil? ECONOMY

Toby Collins looks into the barrel of global oil prices and discusses what it could mean for the rest of 2015.

I

am sure that everyone has noticed the change in the price of oil over the last few weeks, drivers most of all. Petrol prices have just dropped to their lowest point in years, at 99.7p a litre in one petrol station. The last time a litre of petrol cost under one pound was five years ago, and since then the prices had risen continuously until June 2014, when it reached a maximum average of 131.5p. But why have these prices now dropped? Is the fall in petrol prices only part of a broader trend? And what are we doing to prevent it from having a wider impact both positive and negative?

Petrol prices have just dropped to their lowest point in years

Oil prices have been steadily rising since the late 1980s, and though there have been slight fluctuations there has been no significant drop other than that accompanying the financial crisis of 2008. This is chiefly due to high oil consumption in countries such as China, combined with conflicts in leading oil producers like Iraq. This meant that supply couldn’t keep up with demand and prices continuously rose. So why have prices suddenly dropped? One rea-

son is that the US and Canada have accessed new reserves; there has been an increase in fracking and more extraction of hard-to-reach crude oil in the North Dakota shale formations and the Alberta oil sands. This substantial increase in the amount of new oil now available in the market means that the demand has been met; as a result, prices have begun to drop. On top of this there has been an increase in oil production rate from countries such as Iraq, which rely on oil to support their economies, decreasing the demand even more. Another reason for the drop in oil prices, especially in Europe, America and Asia, is the weakening economies of some countries within them. All of these factors have contributed to the drop in oil price, forming the basis of the change. Furthermore, the way that the drop has been handled has made for some interesting consequences. After the drop many would have expected OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, the world’s largest oil cartel) to cut production and prop up prices. You’d think so because many of the large OPEC states rely on oil to support their economy; it is therefore in their interests to cut production of oil, in order to decrease supply and therefore increase demand, pushing the price back up. With a decline in the production of oil, prices would rise once again, sustaining the economies of countries like Venezuela and Iran. However, such a drop in oil production didn’t happen. Instead, OPEC continued production of oil and the prices continued to drop. They hoped that this would slow the US oil boom and made sure that they

would keep their share in the oil market. The fact that production of oil continued at the same rate meant that its price continued to drop, almost halving in price from June 2014 to January 2015.

We are not sure at the moment what the long term consequences will be

Saudi Arabia, one of the major oil producers, is one culprit for this cut back. Although a lot of countries, including Iran and Venezuela, wanted to cut production, Saudi Arabia was cautious, keen to avoid a repeat of the 1980 oil price drop, when production was cut and prices still fell, leaving them with a smaller share in the market and ultimately less money. However, what is different about the current price drop is that the Saudis think they can survive despite their losses and even hope to drive the US companies out of business, allowing prices to stabilize once again. So, for the next six months until mid 2015 it was decided that the rate of production would stay constant and the market monitored carefully. Although we are not sure at the moment what the long term consequences will be, we have seen varying reactions from oil companies and local people. One

company that has reacted drastically is BP. They have frozen wages within the company and are also planning to cut 300 staff from their North Sea workforce. We already knew that BP was trying to save money in the coming months, from their CEO’s last statement and the fact that the oil price has dropped will only contribute to that target of saving $1 billion as they will have to make even more cuts to save the same amount as their profit will drop. On top of that there will be some impact on the UK, but besides the the obvious drop in petrol and diesel prices, these won’t be too bad will not have much other effect. For the most part we will benefit from this drop in the price of oil; we aren’t a big player in the oil industry. There will, of course, be some negative effects, specifically in towns like Aberdeen where we are reliant on oil to survive economically. Despite this apparent tragedy, many of Britain’s oil extraction methods were already faltering and its profits falling, so the loss is not a huge one. Finally, what does the future hold? From what we can see at the moment, the price could continue to drop, which would have huge effects on some countries both positive and negative, such as political unrest. Although most net importers (countries importing the majority of their energy) would cope, we may see many problems for net exporters, including political unrest due to the drop in economic output, which in itself could have many outcomes. Overall, from our point of view, the oil price drop is great, but for many countries whose economies are based on oil, along with many oil companies, it could be a disaster.


11

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Opinion

Snow: A Crisis? SOCIETY

James Gordon explores the effect of a white winter on Britain as a whole, and outlines what must be done to limit damages.

Long awaited for some, forever feared by others

W

aking up on a chilly February morning, peering outside to see a blinding whiteness. Wonder. Excitement. The promise of an inevitable snowball fight on Lower Field. But for many, in fact most of the population, such scenes represent chaos and confusion - and not in a good way. Although the early stages of 2015 have granted Oxfordshire little more than an inch of snow, elsewhere in Britain a Siberian weather front has plunged temperatures to below that of Greenland and brought with it as much as 10 inches of the white stuff. Such extreme conditions have inevitably led to widespread disruption, with up to 2,000 road accidents predicted over the coming months and over 500 schools and transport links closed by late January. This has led many to question: why aren’t we more prepared? First of all, it’s important to understand the efforts that are already being made to combat wintery conditions: local councils spend hundreds of millions per year, as do private firms - Heathrow airport recently invested £30 million on runway-clearing snow ploughs and other equipment. However, more still needs to be done, when you consider that 10% of Heathrow flights were grounded and dozens of trains delayed or cancelled per day throughout the latter stages of January. The potential damages are shocking: the recent cold snap of 2010 cost the UK

economy an estimated sum of £6 billion, due to lost sales and slowed business that arose from snow-related travel problems. When you look at the crisis from this perspective, investment in anti-snow infrastructure seems the logical option. But despite such shocking figures, there is still a sense that very little more can be done beyond the basic gritting and snow ploughing that limit the effects of a light, solitary snowfall: we can’t control nature. Outside of the UK, various radical attempts to prevent any damage have been implemented – however, many have resulted in negative outcomes disproportionate to the lives saved. This was particularly evident in New York, where

‘The White Stuff’ comes to Oxford eventual tame nature of the storm caused outcry among the population: the ensuing chaotic scenes as people tried to find accommodation, together with the costs of implementing such rulings resulting in the economy grinding to a halt, raised questions over the decision.

The recent cold snap of 2010 cost the UK economy an estimated £6 billion

the threat of late January snowstorms prompted authorities to enforce a curfew and close all transport links. This was the first time the New York subway had been closed in its 110-year history, and the

However, the snow problem may just be solved for us without anyone spending a penny: a recent study has led scientists to conclude that the next generation may never even see snow, as a direct result of

global warming. Global temperatures are rising by around 0.2 degrees Celsius per decade, and with conditions in southern England already struggling to drop below freezing, snow may soon be a thing of the past. But is global warming an imminent threat to our annual snowfall? Unless conditions change drastically over the coming years, probably not. At least not in our lifetime: my estimate would be that by around 2500 most snow in Oxfordshire will fall as rain. Hence, the government must act to resolve the threat posed by snow. But there is little point in wasting the taxpayer’s money on more of the same old methods or radical new ones - I believe that investment in the development of new technology to combat snow is the way forward, such as snow-melting machines. For now, we must make do with the veins of our economy, transport links, being partially clogged up and find other ways to make institutions, such as schools, more accessible throughout white winters.


12

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Features

Is the Virgin Galactic Dream Really Worth It? TECHNOLOGY

How is Virgin Galactic’s plan holding up after the crash? Jonathan Lee explores this issue in more detail.

Virgin Galactic’s latest spacecraft, SpaceShipTwo, attached to its carrier aircraft

N

ever before had anyone ventured into the dream of space tourism until Virgin Galactic came along, planning to develop commercial spaceflight. Founded in 2004 by Richard Branson, the company, part of the Virgin group, aims to become the first ‘spaceline’ on earth, democratising access to space for the benefit of the human race. The company has started to create prototypes; their spaceflight system consists of two vehicles: a carrier aircraft and a spaceship. These two vehicles are WhiteKnightTwo and SpaceShipTwo respectively. WhiteKnightTwo is a four-engined, dual-fuselage jet aircraft. Just three of the signature design features are its twin-fuselage configuration, single-piece carbon-composite main wing and four jet engines, with a space in the middle into which SpaceShipTwo is attached during takeoff. SpaceShipTwo is a reusable spacecraft, designed to carry at most six passengers and two flight crew. It is powered by a hybrid rocket motor. This motor uses a solid fuel source and a liquid oxidizer. These are both completely unique designs, and both vehicles will be built by the companies - Scaled Composites and The Spaceship Company. Virgin’s plan is to have WhiteKnightTwo bring SpaceShipTwo up to an altitude of about 50,000 feet and then launch it. Then, when SpaceShipTwo reached Mach 1.4, pilots would unlock the ‘feathering system’, allowing them to pull back a central lever, making the tail booms move into an upward braking position which would increase the drag and increase stability. Crucially, this mechanism is only to be activated during atmospheric

re-entry. Next, the aircraft would use its hybrid rockets for 70 seconds, accelerating to 2,500 mph. The rockets are then shut down, letting the power from the acceleration take it to a maximum height of 361,000 feet, allowing the passengers the best anti-gravity experience possible. After a few minutes, SpaceShipTwo is due to re-enter the earth’s atmosphere, and the feathering system mentioned above is to be activated. The system would then slow the aircraft, reducing heat build-up, and

Virgin Galactic will not be affected by this accident

then let it fall through the upper atmosphere. When the aircraft reached 70,000 feet, the wings would de-feather, giving control to the pilots and allowing them to glide back to a safe landing. However, on the 31st of October 2015, a planned test flight ended in a catastrophic in-flight break up. The prototype WhiteKnightTwo was VMS Eve and the prototype SpaceShipTwo was the VSS Enterprise. The VSS Enterprise disintegrated in mid-air and crashed into the Mojave Desert, California, just after separating from VMS Eve, killing one of the pilots and leaving one injured. At first, most critics thought that the cause of the crash was the fuel source blowing up,

NTSB examines the wreckage of VSS Enterprise on the Mojave desert, California but this claim was quickly rejected after further investigation by NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board). A video taken inside the cockpit showed that the crash was caused by the early release of the feathering system. It showed that the feathering system was accidentally unlocked by the pilots when VSS Enterprise was traveling at the speed of Mach 1, instead of Mach 1.4. The video also showed that the tail booms snapped back to the braking position without the pull of the central lever, suggesting that there was a technical malfunction referred to as an ‘uncommanded feather’. Already about 700 people have put down deposits for this journey, with each ticket costing $250,000 (£156,000). There are many billionaires and celebrities already in the queue, including Justin Bieber, Leonardo DiCaprio and Stephen Hawking, but some have already given up their tickets due to the VSS Enterprise incident and demanded refunds. During the flight the passengers will experience zero-gravity. However, well known astronaut Chris Hadfield (who manned the ISS for five months and became famous for his rendition of ‘Space Oddity on YouTube) said: ‘it’s not much of a space flight’. He believes people are signing up for a ticket without really

knowing what they are going to get. Virgin Galactic will not be affected by this accident, and will continue guiding the world in space tourism. They have already been delayed several times before, with the maiden flight originally announced by Richard Branson to be sched-

The crash was caused by the early release of the feathering system

uled for 2009. Richard Branson said: ‘Was Virgin Galactic, and everything it has stood for and dreamt of achieving, really worth it? I got a very firm answer to that question immediately when I landed in Mojave. From the designers, the builders, the engineers, the pilots and the whole community who passionately believed — and still believe — that truly opening space and making it accessible and safe is of vital importance to all our futures.’


13

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Features “Aurora from ISS” by NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

Life on Earth depends entirely on the magnetic field

Upside-Down Earth SCIENCE

Adriano Matousek investigates the consequences of an overdue geomagnetic reversal which is considered much more deadly than global warming.

H

ave you heard? They say that it will wipe out life on Earth. That means us! Gone! Forget about global warming, this is much more serious and what we do know is that it’s going to happen soon and there is nothing much that we can really do. Life on our Earth is dependent upon the geomagnetic field, as it protects us from potentially fatal radioactive solar flares. A geomagnetic reversal is the flipping of the North and South poles. This is a very slow process, taking up to 1,000-10,000 years, and during this time our magnetic field can drop to beneath 5% of what it is at right now. This would cause worldwide havoc and the extinction of countless species. The geomagnetic reversal, on average, takes place every 200,000 years and it has been over 780,000 years since it last happened, so we can expect to occur just about any minute now. If you’re wondering how our magnet-

ic field works, it is basically powered by the heart of our Earth; at the core, hot iron rises to the outer sector and then quickly cools and sinks back into the core. This process is thought to cause a

are still uncertain, but by examining ferromagnetic minerals in rocks and magma, we can observe every geomagnetic flip throughout history as there is an alteration of the electrons in each layer of

Life on Earth will cease to exist

‘geodynamo’ that powers our magnetic field. But due to natural changes in temperature and currents, the magnetic field can vary in strength and even flip. The details behind the geomagnetic reversal

rock. If we use this knowledge, we can deduce that most recent geomagnetic reversal was in 77,900 BC. During the reversal, the magnetic fields formed chaotically around the Earth and its strength

dropped by 95%. But what would happen if our Earth began to flip today? you may ask. Well, first of all, our compass needles would be chaotically twisting and twirling round and round as the magnetic field randomly shifts around the Earth. Then, our satellite navigation systems would fail, followed closely by solar radiation which would increase the chances of cancer and even cause a high fluctuation in temperatures, causing an increase in forest fires and melting poles. Without our geomagnetic field, we are more succeptible to coronal mass ejections from the sun which can cause international black-outs and major satellite and telecom problems. Soon our atmosphere will be ripped apart and there will be a more frequent display of meteorite hits. With all the confusion, riots shall break out and government/ economical stability shall crumble. Life on Earth will cease to exist.


14

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Features

One Man, Two Plays CULTURE

Patrick Cole reviews a pair of plays by British playwright Richard Bean.

Great Britain

T

he playwright of One man, Two Guvnors fame has had a golden year with another roaring West End success. Premiering on the 30th of June 2014, Great Britain is a play full of ‘Press. Police. Politics’, as the banners outside the Theatre Royal in Haymarket boast. This play is crude, outrageous, irresponsible and absolutely brilliant! Rehearsed in secret so as to avoid attracting the attention of the media or even of the court itself, this play focuses on the phone-hacking scandal that shook the country in recent years. The play follows the exploits of Paige Britain, played brilliantly on the West End stage by Lucy Punch (St. Trinians, Hot Fuzz), as she struggles to rise to the position of chief editor of the ‘Free Press’, which she does by using any means necessary to get herself the important stories. This is one way that Bean actually makes the audience side with the press, when the idea of phone-hacking

Pitcairn

F

rom British newsrooms of last year to a small Pacific island of 1789. From social climbing news editors to society founding mutineers. On the 22nd of September 2014, Richard Bean launched yet another play that’s destined for stardom. A co-production between the Chichester Festival Theatre (where it was premiered at the Minerva Auditorium), Shakespeare’s Globe and Out of Joint, this play has already embarked on tour, thankfully stopping at the Oxford Playhouse on it way. In 1789, the crew of the ship HMS Bounty, mutinied, led by an officer named Hans Fletcher Christian (in this

is first broached it’s shocking, but very quickly it becomes interesting and amusing. As Britain herself says, if the hacking had solved the murders the public would all love her. This makes another interesting sub-plot in the play and you get the feeling that despite all the jokes about sex and the chief editor being ‘pleasured’ whenever he hears a headline that is alliterative, Richard Bean has a very serious moral; the public was fine with celebrity gossip, they loved the Politician expense leaks, but where do you draw the line? When someone dies? When it stops being funny? What is clear, however, is that throughout the play, as amazing as the information the press gets is, at least half the time they get it wrong, which makes you wonder why the hacking is so worrying when the press were lying for the sake of a story way before the idea of hacking was even breached. The majority of the play takes place in the Free Press offices, with a couple of excursions to restaurants, a ‘spy’ company, lawyers and occasionally a character’s

home, or, to be more precise, their bedroom. The stage design is incredible, with glass panels, representing the walls of offices, which could slide back to reveal other rooms or even be projected upon. The projections were either a breaking news story, for which they had video clips with separately credited actors, or they were a reel of newspaper headlines which acted as a plot-forwarding device as each of their spoof papers (such as ‘The Guardener’) had a headline of the latest event. These usually had some ramification on the ‘Free Press.’ This is with the exception of their version of the Daily Mail, which was always last and always had a headline such as ‘Immigrants Cause Cancer’ or ‘Immigrants Steal Railways’. ‘Press. Police. Politics.’ could not be a better tagline for this raucous new play, as it perfectly ties together the secret lives of these three groups. Bean writes in the play about a sleazy Conservative leader who has the police in his pocket and the press (literally, in one scene) in his bed.

The idiotic, black, gay Police Commissioner (Sully Kassam, played by Aaron Neil), who is constantly trying not to upset the public, despite always having shot a minority or said something stupid in a press interview (some of which are remixed and put on YouTube to be later projected onto stage), has to be one of the funniest characters in the play due to the way it is played by Neil with absolute sincerity. To offset Neil’s commissioner, who wants nothing more than to be thought of as a ‘big, gay Terminator’ is the scheming, rank-climbing Assistant Commissioner, Donald Doyle Davidson (a gift for lovers of alliteration), who is manipulative enough to work in the press, and at several points in the play it feels like he literally does. This play is so exceptional because, I think, of the way Bean manages to interweave characters, plots and politics. This is an absolutely outstanding piece, intelligent, funny and interesting - a play that makes you question you own ethical morals while laughing at a phallic joke.

version played by Tom Morely) to pursue the paradisiacal life and sexual pleasures that were rife on the islands of Tahiti. This is the story of what happens after the mutiny, on the island of Pitcairn. This play has so different a setting to Great Britain earlier in the year, but was still pulled off ingeniously - with twists that leave you reeling, incredibly believable characters and actors, and more sex jokes than you could shake a stick at (one of the dancers tried, at least I thought they were sticks...). One may very well think that Bean’s writing is crude and unnecessary, but in Pitcairn, the writing above all reflects the views and cultures of the characters. If you were born on an island where you

enjoyed watching sexual activity as entertainment and found nothing weird about it, of course you would have no qualms talking about it. There are two narrators in Pitcairn, and they are incredibly intelligently used. There is a young boy of the age of 15, played by Eben Figueiredo, who the Bounty picked up on a Tahitian island. He was constantly interacting with the audience from the very beginning and acted as a plot-forwarding device through his philosophy of ‘good days being Life, bad days being History days’. As such, the events of the play sped through the time period of several years to jump to the next ‘History day’. This meant that, as an audience member, you always

knew something bad was going to happen, but it was rarely what you expected. The other narrator figure was an older Tahitian who the men picked up among a horde of other women to provide ‘pleasure’ to the men at sea. Both narrators interacted with the audience and moved the plot forward with an elegance that was thrilling to watch. Pitcairn began with the arrival of a ship to arrest the mutineers several years after the end of the main story arc of the play, it was at this point we met the one surviving mutineer. This seems like a spoiler, but this play leaves the audience guessing right up until the moment when the rug is pulled out from under us, just as we were getting back up from the last time.


15

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Features NORTH KOREA

The Interview:

Where Does North Korea Stand?

T

Blake Jones considers how insulting the most controversial film of 2014 really was.

he most controversial film of 2014, Sony’s most successful digital release, the spearhead of the most sneaky marketing method: The Interview, by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg, made millions and made the world’s most secretive country pop its head out. Our human nature results in us typically wanting what we cannot have. Sony declared that The Interview was something we could not watch; immediately, people wanted to watch this film, especially those who had not heard of it before. Was it just a marketing act or are Americans watching the film in cinemas genuinely defying North Korea? One notable trend throughout all of history is that the films and book which we ban turn out to be the most popular. So where does North Korea stand? Is it being outrageous in banning the film? If we look at banned media throughout history, is The Interview controversial in the same ways? Or is North Korea being more unreasonable than other countries have been in the past for banning it? Films are the most commonly banned media. They are much more explicit and it is easier to see the more edgy sides to them and therefore they are at much greater risk of being banned. Some films are quite correctly banned. Some are overly gruesome and have been banned to protect citizens, for example Cannibal Holocaust, Grotesque and Andy Warhol’s Frankenstein. There are also sexually explicit films which have been understandably banned, including Last Tango in Paris, The Tin Drum, The Outlaw and, of course, all pornography. Whilst the other films are unnecessarily banned, it is more understandable to ban a film due to its nature. Yet The Interview is not as offensive as Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence) and instead we should look at books, a form of media which tends to be banned under much more interesting

and particular circumstances. Among books there is an undeniable correlation between popularity and controversy. The Harry Potter series, Catcher in the Rye, Of Mice and Men, The Da Vinci Code and The Bible, are amongst the top-selling books ever, yet they have all been banned at some time either nationally, from libraries or from schools. Where does this correlation come from and what causes certain books to be banned? Possibly the most banned book of recent years is George Orwell’s Animal Farm. It is currently banned in Cuba, Kenya, China, UAE and North Korea, and was banned in the USSR. If one were to put together the years this book has been banned in different countries, it would amount to over 221 years. Whilst it is mainly banned due to its criticism of communism, in the UAE it is banned due to the images of pigs which go against Islamic values. How does Animal Farm compare to The Interview? Animal Farm is considered an intellectual masterpiece and one of the best books of the twentieth century; The Interview generally gets the caption: ‘rubbish’. Undoubtedly Animal Farm is more subtle, with the book being one extended metaphor for the Bolsheviks; instead, The Interview blows up subtlety (along with Kim Jong-Un). This may well be less tasteful, and this may be why Animal Farm is critically acclaimed instead of The Interview. However, George Orwell never denied that the book represented the Bolsheviks and it aligns so perfectly that Orwell can barely be called subtle. The success does not come from the comparison to communism, instead it is the fact that it comments so boldly on the selfishness of human nature and how we are not much better than pigs if they had power. George Orwell’s controversy does not end there. Nineteen Eighty Four was

banned in the USSR for its entire reign. Moreover, during the Cuban missile crisis, the book was nearly banned in the USA and UK. However, not just attacks on communism are banned. The Communist Manifesto was banned in Turkey for 165 years. New ideas and the critiques of them are the most powerful and dangerous things to governments, and when they are spread through books, the easiest response is to ban them. The Interview spread one simple idea: Kim Jong-Un is a normal human being and not a god. This was emphasised by him pooping his pants on live worldwide television. All the same, certain ideas and messages are so powerful that they have to be stopped. It may be hard for us to think of The Interview as powerful, but for such an uninformed people it is truly shattering and would result in widespread riots if it were to reach the North Korean public. Books are also banned when they hit on particularly emotive topics; the greatest example is religion. The Satanic Verses, a book which comments on the life of the Prophet Mohammed PBUH, is currently banned in 21 countries. The Da Vinci Code, perhaps the most controversial book of this century, is currently banned in Lebanon. The Bible was banned in Ethiopia and the USSR. Whether these books promote faith or criticise it, they have been banned. Religion is something people are naturally defensive about, often because it is the most important thing to them. Thus, it is unsurprising that books with religious themes have been banned. Compare this to North Korea: Kim Jong-Un has a god-like status. If North Koreans were to watch The Interview would they find it offensive, since such a divine being was being insulted? We cannot know, but this is why The Interview is more controversial than a film about assassinating David Cameron would be. They were insulting someone who means so much to many people. They should attack this idea, since it is based on political propaganda, but all the same it is a more risky area, which they should have avoided. However, if they wanted to be controversial they were definitely doing the right thing. Perhaps media is only controversial because it is the only way to appropriately portray the subject manner. Was The Interview made to be edgy? Probably, but fundamentally it was made to be funny. Having Kim Jong-Un sing Katy Perry’s Firework whilst driving around in a tank blowing up forests and firing missiles on each ‘boom, boom, boom’ in the song, is undeniably funny and that is why they

You know what’s more destructive than a nuclear bomb? Words.

did it. They would have been aware that it would cause offense, but they were happy to. The Interview may not be the greatest artistic masterpiece, but it pushes whatever boundaries it needs to, to create what it wants to create, and we commend that in other works and writers. Thus, before we pass The Interview off as some rubbish which was controversial to gain attention, we must remember that the creators were undertaking a brave act and, in the same way as many who went before them, they are risking a lot to make the best film they can. Therefore, whilst controversial books are often successful, it all hinges on whether or not they are good. An incredibly edgy book may not be banned if it was so awful no one would read it. Perhaps being good is what makes a book controversial, because it comments on something in such a remarkable way that a government believes it needs to suppress this. The Interview must have been good in some part, since it did what had not been done before and created something which was disputed enough and different enough to cause dispute. There was without doubt good reason for North Korea to ban the film, though they may not have been right to do so. However, whilst I do not support the regime in North Korea, when one compares The Interview to the other films and books which have been banned over time, North Korea is no worse than any other country. Instead American propaganda has portrayed them to be far more morally wrong in the banning the film than in fact they are. The Interview is controversial in the same way many other banned films are. Sony was right to make this film, but North Korea does not stand in too shameful a place in history, compared to all other countries.


16

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Features DRAMA

One Day More... Please!

As Les Mis leaves the school, Charlie Landells explains why it was a masterpiece

The cast in the heat of the moment performing One Day More

A

s the curtains closed on the final night of the joint St. Helen’s-Abingdon production of Les Misérables, I knew we had come to the end of something really quite astounding. As the title of this article suggests, I really didn’t want it to end. The cast, crew and production team, totalling around 70, had spent the best part of five months working on this, and judging by the standing ovation they received on each night, it really was worth it. It’s something they can all be proud of for a very long time. Seen by more than 70 million people in 43 countries and in 22 languages around the globe, and currently in the Queen’s Theatre, London, Les Mis is arguably one of the biggest and most well-known musicals ever to be written. Set against the backdrop of 19th-cen-

tury France, Les Misérables tells an enthralling story of broken dreams and unrequited love, passion, sacrifice and redemption – a timeless testament to the

care for factory worker, Fantine’s young daughter, Cosette, their lives change forever. Abingdon and St.Helen’s sure did it justice. Now, when it comes to critiquing

The production was filled with passionate voices and powerful acting survival of the human spirit. Ex-convict, Jean Valjean is hunted for decades by the ruthless policeman, Javert after he breaks parole. When Valjean agrees to

performances, I find the critics can be a tad ‘picky’: it is as if they can’t stand seeing a good piece of film or drama. So, before I start singing Les Misérables

praises, let me just explain why I won’t be picking out every tiny fault and inflating it to seem like some kind of amateur mistake. This was a school production, and if you went to see it I’m sure you’ll agree that people would pay good money to see the same level of quality in WestEnd London. The production was filled with passionate voices and powerful acting as the students prepared to fight for their freedom. A huge barricade is swiftly and smoothly assembled, before one of the students, Enjolras, played by Tom Keogh, climbs up to sing a rallying solo. This was possibly my favourite moment of the play, but there were so many others of the same calibre. Many others enjoyed The Innkeeper’s Song, with Mr. and Mrs. Thénardier played by Ethan Sarphie and Marina Aspinall. The amount of


17

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

energy, volume and ‘fun’ this scene had was overwhelming once again, and really brought a smile to each of the 600 faces in the audience. But from laughter to love, Les Mis kept giving for a full three hours, with Cosette (Hannah Young) and Marius’ (Mitchell Keely) duet bringing tears to some of those 600. The range of emotion and levels of energy in this play were hard to keep up with to say the least, but each member of the cast really pulled it off, and put the audience on a roller coaster ride of emotion. At the centre of this was Jean Valjean, played by Hugh Cutting, whose incredible voice and never-ending energy reeled the audience in to love his character, so much so that more tears were shed when he met his demise. I could go on for hours about the cast, because each and every one of them did

The production was praised by the likes of Christopher Biggins an amazing job, and I personally couldn’t believe the amount of power they possessed after five months of rehearsing, but the unsung heroes of the show were the tech crew, who had a solid three hours of full concentration, with impossibly quick lighting cues, an array of mi-

crophones to manage, and only seconds to bring on and take off items of furniture and set. But they really pulled it off every night, with a level of professionalism and expertise that, like I said earlier, you’d expect from a West-End production. When faced with having to stop the show

mid-way through due to an unidentified alarm going off, they still managed to act calmly and swiftly to get the show back on the road. On top of this, the band created a sound parallel with one twice its size, and as far as I could hear there was not a single error in timing or tuning, something quite amazing considering the complexity and pace of Les Mis. Of course, every night there was the occasional mishap, but that’s only to be expected, in any play. The production itself was praised by the likes of Christopher Biggins, who came to watch it, and again in the local papers as they heard that all the tickets had been sold out. The stage really was set for a superb show, and it was all that and more. A huge congratulations to anyone involved, however big or small your role, it genuinely was quite something.


18

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Features

From Celluloid to C: Drive INTERVIEW

Asten Yeo and Charlie Landells interview Abingdon’s very own Jeremy Taylor on the future of film-making.

A

s surprising as it may seem, digital video is a newcomer to the movie industry. In fact, for almost a century, motion pictures have been shot on film which, for the first 40 years, was made from unstable explosive compounds. It wasn’t until 1948—the year the non-flammable film stock was introduced—that the motion picture industry made its first technological leap towards reinventing the medium, taking it away from the threat of cinema fires (which were surprisingly common at the time) and towards much safer means of filmmaking. Now, in the wake of the digital revolution, new technologies have completely changed the dynamics of filmmaking. From the introduction of tape in the late 70s to HD video recording on DSLRs in 2008, the shift from analogue to digital media has resulted in an explosion of creativity in the field of filmmaking. In the past decade alone, dozens of directors and cinematographers have turned to digital media as the solution to all the drawbacks of film. However, the biggest impact this par-

adigm shift has had is on the amateur filmmaker. With advances in consumer electronics allowing the layman to film, edit and showcase films of a progressively higher production value, the world of the motion picture has expanded to include the vast pool of independent filmmakers, eager to exhibit their works to a wider audience. Since its inception in 2003, the Abingdon Film Unit has been doing just that. Many of the 120 or more films from the AFU have gone on to be selected and screened at film festivals locally and abroad and have won various awards. In the last year alone, the Film Unit produced its first music video, had an alumni receive a BAFTA scholarship and also had one of their films screen at not one, but multiple film festivals. We spoke to Jeremy Taylor, head of the Abingdon Film Unit, about his opinion on the relationship between filmmaking and technology, as well as what he thinks the future could hold. What has the digital revolution brought to independent filmmaking?

“I think its been a huge democratizing force - it’s enabled pretty much everyone and anyone to make a film. When we first had the idea for a film activity at Abingdon, we would’ve need a trolley for all the equipment. By the time we actually came to start the film unit, you could do it with a camera and a laptop, so that’s been a huge benefit to people who want to make films. Perhaps what it’s also done, of course, is to saturate the market a bit. I remember hearing Mike Figgis, a well-known British director, worrying about how the next generation of filmmakers could come to prominence in that sort of environment. But there’s no doubt it’s been a fantastic thing for getting more people doing it.” Social media these days is being used for networking and getting your name out there. Would you say filmmaking and social media work hand in hand? “Oh absolutely. It’s fantastic because you can simply advertise your film instantly, not only that, but in terms of film financing and funding, there are new models now. Instead of having to go cap in hand to the gatekeepers - the Channel 4s - to get the money and the agreement to make the film, what a lot of professional filmmakers have now is their own email communities of fans and they say: “Look, I’ve got this idea and I need some money”. Quite literally huge budgets are being raised from this pledging system in a matter of a few days and then people can get on and make the film, rather than this endless process of waiting for some corporate guy to grant you the money.” Do you think that there are now more people in the filmmaking industry because there is less skill required to make a film? “That’s a good one. I don’t know the

numbers, I don’t know the statistics, so I can’t say whether there are more people. Is less skill required? I don’t think it is. I think just as much skill is required to make a good film. Loads of people can make a film, but to make a good film is still incredibly hard and one of the things that the digital revolution has brought about is that, because it is so much cheaper and instant to create the footage and to consume it, people maybe don’t have to think as hard before they shoot. So I think the challenge is still there you’ve got to have an idea. Without an idea you’re just going to be waving the camera around.” Where do you see independent filmmaking going in the next decade? “Well it’s hard to predict really. I think the harsh reality for lots of independent filmmakers is that it’s incredibly hard to make a living from it. I think there’s always the chance that an independent film can get through and get picked up but whether the industry can support the numbers of people going forward is hard to say. I think, though, in common with every art form, when the market is saturated, people have to be ever more resourceful and inventive in coming up with something different. Personally, I find it hard to see with any clarity where things will go. I suspect resolutions will keep going up, but I come back to the fact that, fundamentally, what makes the difference is the quality of the idea and the thinking that goes into it. People are really striving to be inventive and creative and I think that’s the way forward.” ________________________________________ The full interview can be accessed soon at www.martletonline.com


19

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Features

Technology at Abingdon: Brave New World? SCHOOL

Dan Alcock investigates how the use of technology is changing at Abingdon School.

iPads are helping develop the learning experience in the classroom.

O

ver the past 20 years the world of the internet and computing has advanced rapidly. Nowadays it’s almost essential for any office to be equipped with decent computers and bearable internet. A basic grasp of ICT skills has become a huge necessity, and this is no surprise, considering the fact that computers are hugely useful thanks to their accessibility. As a result of the internet, communication is easier than ever because of email, and it is revolutionising the way companies work. Of course, this ability, that has improved work in general, has also had an impact on teaching; over the last decade or so, inventions such as the SmartBoard and personal devices like the laptop and iPad have transformed the way we’re taught in the classroom. These rapid advancements aren’t going to be slowing down any time soon, especially here at Abingdon. First of all, as I’m sure many of you have noticed, Firefly has been rolled out across the school over the past few months, and it’s being presented as a useful tool for both students and their teachers. As Mr Whitworth, Director of eLearning, said: ‘we’re not using the site just as a dumping ground for resources.’ The site is providing easier ways to revise, as teachers have the ability to upload past papers and questions for students to do in their spare time.

It is also a very useful area where teachers can clearly tell their pupils what their homework is through the handy ‘tasks’ feature. Another benefit is the ability to actually be able to hand in your work electronically without having to email it. To add to this, currently if you’re a member or founder of a current society in the school, you can create a page dedicated to that group. All you need to do is go on to Firefly and re-

at school are being discussed. According to Mr Whitworth, discussions are currently going on about where to go next. For example, as I’m sure many of you have noticed, members of Lower School have, in the past, been given iPads. These assist them with written work and allow them the use of educational apps in a lesson, or so they can just read an eBook in the library. With gadgets, the number of possibilities that you can

A tablet can be a replacement for your entire pencil case

quest a page in the ‘Societies’ section and wait for a response. Currently that part of the website is quite sparse, but developments on it, and other areas, are likely in the future. Of course, Firefly isn’t the only exciting new thing for Abingdon pupils; other plans to develop physical technology

come across is much greater than when learning with the old-fashioned pen and paper. In the future a tablet could be a replacement for your entire pencil case, as well as books, and even all those sheets flying about in your folders. Firefly and the Planner apps are very well integrated into tablets as well, which is very

useful for both teachers and students. There are also steps that have been taken recently by the IT department to gain an understanding of where to go next. Not long ago we were all emailed a survey to fill out, and while this was primarily for teaching purposes within lessons, the results turned out to be pretty interesting. For example, it turns out that, generally, more pupils possess laptops than tablets, which personally I find surprising. These figures could contribute to our use of gadgets in lessons. I’ve already had a few lessons in which we’ve used our phones to help us with a specific job. To add to this, there’s the recently formed Technology Group: a body of about 15 students that gather at meetings and give feedback on what is and isn’t going well and what can be improved. This gives Mr Whitworth access to a first person look at how we feel about the situation and what we want for the future. It is clear that the use of technology at Abingdon School is growing and being encouraged as a practical and useful way to learn. I strongly believe that devices can be beneficial to the classroom as well as Other Half activities. It appears that even more changes are in store for the school in the future, and I’m excited to see how Firefly and the use of tablets will develop.


20

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Features POP MUSIC

Music:

Back to 2014 and the Future of 2015

Tom Buckle takes a look at the artists who announced themselves onto the world stage last year as well as up and coming artists to look out for in the future.

2

014 was a great year for music. People up and down the country were clapping along to Happy, which became the most played song of 2014 after the release of Despicable Me 2. John Legend put himself back on the world stage after he re-entered the charts last year with All of Me, which became a chart-topper in May after his performance at Kim Kardashian and Kanye West’s Wedding. But I can’t talk about the music of 2014 without mentioning Ed Sheeran. Last year was seen as his ‘return’ with the release of X, and X marked the number one spot for a record duration, as it remained top of the album charts for 11 consecutive weeks, beating the previous record, achieved by Adele’s 21. The album, which contained singles such as Sing and Don’t, was Sheeran’s second album since ‘+’ back in 2011, and since then the singer from Yorkshire had only released one single; I See Fire, which was featured in The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug in 2013, raising expectations for the new album. Ariana Grande is someone else whom I should mention; she became one of the very best artists of 2014 with singles such as Problem, featuring Iggy Azalea, and Break Free, featuring Zedd. Both of these have more than 250,000 views on YouTube, and Problem reached 23rd most popular song last year. Grande became famous after her appearance on Victorious, a show that aired on Nickelodeon from 2010-2013, and was noted for her singing in the soundtrack. She is already one of the biggest artists around, but who knows what 2015 will bring her? What we also saw last year was the explosive emergence of new groups and producers, taking the rest of the world by storm. We found out there was nowhere else Clean Bandit would Rather Be, as their debut song became the second-highest-selling single of the year. A remix of Mr Probz’ Waves buried many

of his competitors beneath him. In fact, it was these new artists, along with others such as George Ezra and Ella Henderson, that made more appearances on the list of British Number ones than ever before. If 2014 is anything to go by, we can look forward to the emergence of new artists in 2015. The BBC’s Sound of 2015 compiles tips from over 140 critics, naming the best new artists of the coming near and suggesting who we should keep an eye on. Previous winners include Adele and Jessie J, who have both had their share of the number one spot. This year, the award was won by Years and Years, a group formed in 2010, who produced Desire, which peaked at number 22, and the group was also featured in Sunlight by The Magician. The London-based group was described as ‘a young band with loads of ideas and a clear vision of the music they want to make’ by Radio One DJ, Huw Stephens, and their description on the iTunes Store reads ‘we think they’re going to be huge’. The band announced its emergence onto the world stage after tours with Clean Bandit and Sam Smith, two of the most popular artists in 2014. The band consists of keyboardist, Emre, bass player, Mikey, and main singer, Olly Alexander, who gave up his acting career to be a member of the band shortly after appearing in Skins. The group are no strangers to the official chart, and the fact that they have been chosen as the Sound of 2015 shows they are definitely worth keeping an eye on. The artist I was most surprised with last year was George Ezra. After he came fifth in the BBC’s Sound of 2014 few expected him to have such a good year. The singer, who grew up in Hertford, released his first chart-entering hit, Budapest, which came inside the top 10 of 2014, and his album, Wanted On Voyage, was the third-best-selling album of the year. The inspiration for Budapest came to him when he was on a trip around the

We just don’t know who will be the next top artists, which means that it’s open to anyone

Ed Sheeran, a leading artist of 2014 world, having been sent by his record company not knowing what to write about. Ezra is the fastest-growing artist that I have seen in a while. The album was released in May, and his best-selling single a month before that, so it was from then on that he began to grow in terms of recognition and popularity. And who knows - maybe his next album will grab the top spot of 2015. Another artist to look out for is Becky Hill; her performance in the blind auditions on series one of The Voice gave her the recognition she needed and, quite frankly, deserved. She went on to join Jessie J’s team but was eliminated in the semi-final. Since then she has appeared in collaborations with other producers, her most famous being Gecko (overdrive), by Oliver Heldens, which peaked at Number One. She has featured in others such as Afterglow, by Wilkinson, in 2013. So what does the future hold for her? Well, she has the experience of the top spot, and with advice from Jessie J and a history of being in the charts, she is certainly worth looking out for in the future. The final artist I’m going to look at is American singer, Banks, who came third in the BBC’s Sound of 2014 (the year that Sam Smith came first). Although

many haven’t yet heard any of her singles, yet alone her name, I believe that 2014 was just the foundations for far greater achievements. Last year she released over 20 singles, such as Begging for Thread, that, in my opinion, didn’t win her the awareness she deserved. However, she is starting to become more and more recognized for her music, with many of her singles reaching the five million view milestone on YouTube. 2015 is already looking promising for her, and she has her very first event in Florida in May, where she’ll be performing alongside stars such as Hozier. With the recent release of her new album, Goddess, her popularity continues to rise. I think she will be big this year. Let’s just hope the music this year is as good, if not better, than it was last year. With talents emerging from shows such as The Voice and Britain’s Got Talent, there will continue to be individuals who will proclaim themselves onto the world stage. The thing is, we just don’t know who will be the next top artists, and I believe that’s a good thing, because that means it’s open to anyone; it could be anybody I’ve mentioned here, or it could be someone new. That’s why we can look forward to the music of 2015.


21

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Sport

2015 Sports Crystal Ball PREDICTIONS

Toby Jupp looks into his sporting crystal ball to predict the outcomes of the major sporting events this year

Clockwise from left: Jonny May, Lewis Hamilton, Steve Smith

Australia to lift World Cup on home soil

London clubs have a good year

Can McIlroy do Grand Slam?

Tennis: new era or brief relapse?

With home advantage, it is hard to go against the Australians who ooze quality throughout. From Warner and Finch down to the likes of Watson, Smith, Clarke, Bailey and Maxwell, Australia has the best one-day batting line up. Their left-arm pace trio of Faulkner, Johnson and Starc isn’t bad either but the lack of a decent spinner could be crucial. India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka will be playing in alien conditions, while England and the West Indies are in a phase of rebuilding after the respective sackings of Alastair Cook and Dwayne Bravo as ODI captains. As a result, South Africa and New Zealand will most likely be Australia’s biggest threats, with the explosive AB de Villiers (recently hitting 149 off 44 balls against Windies) and Brendon McCullum in leading their sides respectively.

Can Rory McIlroy build on the two majors he won at the back end of 2014 (The Open Championship and The PGA Championship) and do the grand slam in 2015. In my opinion, the manner in which he won those majors, having shown great nerve and composure, demonstrates that he can dominate golf and win the clean sweep this year. He will need to break his Masters hoodoo, while the likes of Bubba Watson, Phil Mickelson and Sergio Garcia will provide stiff competition but the Northern Irishman can certainly challenge for all four majors. If he wins the first two, he will hold all four titles, an achievement yet to be repeated since Tiger Woods won the 2001 Masters, having won the last three majors in 2000.

Mercedes dominate from the start

I do not expect Formula One will follow a dissimilar trend to 2014; Mercedes will continue to dominate, while Lewis Hamilton will overcome Nico Rosberg more easily compared to last year. The Briton was riddled with reliability issues in 2014, allowing his German counterpart to assume a supposedly unassailable lead after the Belgian Grand Prix. The Brit roared back to win five races in a row (six of the last seven) and win the title by 67 points, as Rosberg fought his own reliability issues, most notably in Singapore when he was unable to start the race. In 2015 however, barring unsavoury incidents a la Monaco or Spa, Hamilton should win fairly emphatically as he has proven that he is the better driver in race conditions. Williams and Red Bull will probably be the closest to the Silver Arrows as Ferrari and McLaren are entering new eras - politically at Ferrari, technically at McLaren, in the form of a switch of engine supplier from Mercedes to Honda. Hopefully, Caterham and Marussia will return to the grid as they are hugely missed when absent.

Chelsea are my pick to win the league; their midfield quintet of Willian, Fabregas, Matic, Hazard and Oscar have been excellent all season, and the addition of Cuadrado only strengthens their already cushioned position. They have a world class striker in Diego Costa and also have arguably the best back four, along with the best keeper (Courtois is better than de Gea in my opinion) in the Premier League. Arsenal, as demonstrated against Man City, have rediscovered a winning formula and while the league is out of reach, an FA Cup win is a possibility; especially with Man City, Southampton, Tottenham, Everton and Chelsea all out of the competition. Both clubs have winnable draws in the Champions League last 16 (PSG v Chelsea and Monaco v Arsenal) which means that 2015 could be the year of the London clubs.

The world of tennis was becoming increasingly interesting at the end of 2014, with Marin Cilic and Kei Nishikori contesting the final of the US Open - the Croat becoming champion himself for the first time. With Grigor Dimitrov knocking Andy Murray out of Wimbledon, and the likes of Milos Raonic, Tomas Berdych and Stan Wawrinka getting to the quarter finals of Grand Slams consistently, it was wondered whether tennis was entering a new era. This turned out to be a false alarm, with Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic reaching the final once again at the Australian Open in January (the latter winning 7-6 6-7 6-3 6-0). With Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal returning to form and fitness, it is hard to conceive a repeat of Flushing Meadows 2014. I expect Djokovic and Murray will win all four majors between them in 2015, with Nadal finally being beaten at Roland Garros (French Open) by the Serb, and I expect Wimbledon to have a British champion once again.

All Blacks to reign again

I expect New Zealand will retain their Rugby World Cup title at Twickenham on 31st October. I would argue that, after beating Australia and coming close to beating the New Zealand and South African teams in the Autumn Internationals, it is England who are best placed to challenge the All Blacks, fresh off the back of a fantastic victory over Wales in Cardiff; with strong runners in the backs, such as Jonny May and Luther Burrell, and a very strong forward pack - England can definitely mix it with the Springboks and the reigning champions on their day. But New Zealand are a class act and time-and-time-again they have proved that they can beat anyone on any day and I can’t see anyone inflicting defeat upon them later this year.


22

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Sport

Big Bash or IPL? CRICKET

Which is a better competition? Let’s find out...

Dan Brown argues that the Big Bash trumps the IPL every time.

T

The MCG stadium in Australia - Home to the Big Bash

he Big Bash League is a relatively new cricket league on the international stage. It is an Australian domestic franchise Twenty20 inter-city cricket tournament established in 2011. It is a league that is now starting to give the so-called ‘cricket giant’ - the IPL (Indian Premier League), a run for its money. Though it may seem that no one in England really cares about the IPL (it is mostly found on ITV 4) the IPL is admittedly a more established cricketing competition. However, the Big Bash has risen to the Big Time, mainly through its TV coverage with Sky Sports. Its attendance is still relatively high, averaging around 18,000. Despite originating from a small country,

it still dwarfs the English equivalent of a T20 cricket league: the NatWest Blast. One could argue that the IPL is worth

ers in the Big Bash, including including ex-English cricket legends, Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen, as well as

Our readers will relate a lot more to the Big Bash than the IPL

more money and is therefore more important. However, the Big Bash is substantially more relevant to the English public. From my experience, it is more widely talked about in England than the IPL. There are many English play-

the current Twenty20 and ODI cricket captain, Eoin Morgan, and many others. One star-studded team, for example, is the Melbourne Stars, in which Brad Haddin, Mitchell Johnson, Shane Watson, Darren Sammy, Aaron Finch, Alex

Hales and Andrew Flintoff all play their cricket. Whilst there are big names in the IPL, these names are mixed with some far lesser known players, and this is major pitfall for the IPL. Because of this, our readers will be able to relate to the Big Bash a lot more easily than the IPL. On another level, the overall experience of the Big Bash is that it is more fun and friendlier than the IPL. I started watching the league last year and it was very entertaining; from the opening dance routines to the now-traditional ‘tournament closing memory erasure ceremony’, it’s one of those little things that is different and it sets the Big Bash apart from the rest, making it that bit more entertaining than the IPL. Another feature of the Big Bash, which I find very amusing, is when iconic cricket players like Kevin Pietersen and Freddie Flintoff take to the big stages of Australian cricket, such as the MCG, whilst speaking to the commentary team through an earpiece. This makes for truly entertaining viewing and very impressive cricket at the same time. Personally when deciding whether I’d rather go and watch an IPL or a BBL game, the answer is obviously the latter, but that’s just my opinion. My point is that the BBL was made for the English and International population; why would Sky Sports ship out millions of pounds if they were not expecting viewers? Whilst the IPL is popular in India, the BBL has a more wide-reaching appeal.

Jeff Abraham fights the IPL’s corner.

I

PL, short for ‘Indian Premier League’, is a world-renowned cricket tournament in which 20 overs are played between teams from several cities to see who comes out on top. Famous for its excellent star players and enticing atmosphere, the IPL is on another planet in comparison to the Big Bash; anyone who has seen a match would agree, after experiencing the riveting colours, entertaining cricket and enthralling sounds. Having started in 2008, three years before the Big Bash, the IPL is worth a hefty $3.2 billion. So, not only is it more experienced, but it has a lot more value. Although IPL stadiums are smaller, the average attendance is ten-thousand more than the Big Bash. This shows better commitment from IPL fans, who feel more devoted than Big Bash fans. Although the IPL may be broadcast less on British TV and substantially fewer England players feature in the league, I believe that lots of English people feel the IPL vibe during the season and are still keen to follow the games. I very rarely hear anyone talk about the Big Bash or who knows what’s going on, and this is mainly because it is not so interesting. I find that fewer people knew about the last BBL final (Sydney

Sixers vs Perth Scorchers) than the infamous rivalry between Chennai Super Kings and Mumbai Indians.The fact that there are more English players in the Big Bash is almost insignificant - certainly not as important an aspect as some would first think. One other key element of the IPL’s success is the impressive array of brilliant star players that compete. Looking at it from this point of view, Australia’s Big Bash cannot compete. Many IPL star players don’t play in the Big Bash, including Chris Gayle and pretty much every Indian legend (such as MS Dhoni and Virat Kohli). There are also more overseas players in IPL teams, giving a great diversity compared to BBL teams. A good example is Kings XI Punjab, which is famous for its Australian players, such as Glenn Maxwell, Shaun Marsh, George Bailey and Mitchell Johnson. In light of everything, my personal experience tells me that the Big Bash League, with its half empty stadiums, is outgunned and trumped in terms of quality (and quantity) by the superior Indian Premier league. Though I feel the BBL has a lot of potential and I foresee a bright future for this amateur tournament, I can never imagine it coming close to the ‘cricket giant’. Frankly, the Big Bash doesn’t quite cut it for me.

“ the average attendance is ten-thousand more than the Big Bash


23

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Sport

Ballon D’Or: FOOTBALL

High achievement or worthless prize? Francesco Cipriani investigates the integrity of the Ballon d’Or, and whether it is really worth all the publicity it gets.

T

he Ballon D’Or is considered to be the most important prize a footballer could ever win. Journalists, footballers and managers vote to elect the best player of the year. Legends like Michel Platini, Roberto Baggio, Diego Maradona, Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi have all been crowned with this prestigious prize; the latter broke Platini’s record by winning the Ballon D’Or four times in a row by 2013. But is this prize really worth all the publicity it gets? Is the winner really the best footballer in the world? In my opinion, the Ballon D’Or is awarded unfairly. This is due to a number of factors. Firstly, a lot of bias is involved; the award is given based on human opinions, not on statistics or trophies. Just to give you an idea: in 2012, Messi was awarded the prize having only won the Copa del Rey and scored 73 goals. He came second in La Liga and the spanish Supercup. Andrea Pirlo won the Serie A with Juventus, the Italian Supercup, came second in the Euro 2012 and the Coppa Italia (equivalent to the FA Cup) he made 10 assists and scored 2 goals, but where was he placed? Seventh. Some people explain this as follows: ‘But surely, as the Ballon D’Or is awarded to a single player, the personal achievements are more important than the team’s success?’ What these people seem to forget is that Messi and Ronaldo do not score on their own; Messi never starts play and he rarely gains possession. It’s people like Gerard Pique or Andres Iniesta that conquer the ball and start the attack. The striker gets almost all the merit for the goal, but the goal could never have been scored if the possession had not been won. If Ronaldo, the player that scores the most goals in the world, moved to Cambridge United, would they win the Premier League? The world has changed; technology has evolved and adapted and so have we. We are more impatient, we want everything sooner, and expect more of it. Have you ever noticed that when there is a problem with the TV our reaction is to hold our faces in despair or curse? On the contrary, our grandparents stand up and calmly try to fix the problem. They have more patience and they are more used to coping with difficult situations. This relates to football; When your dad or your friend checks the score on their phone and tells you that Manchester City won 3-0 against

QPR, what is the first question that you ask them? I can guarantee it will be ‘Who scored?’ not ‘Who assisted the goals?’ nor ‘Did Joe Hart have a good game?’

A lot of bias is involved Instead, it is always the strikers who get the glory in modern football. They are the ones in the spotlight. Children want to become Ronaldo or Messi, not Gianluigi Buffon or Gordon Banks, and why is that? It’s because we want to be at the centre of attention ourselves. We want to be talked about and we want all the glory. ‘Oh, that was a sick goal!’, ‘Amazing bicycle kick!’ These are the phrases that we hear most, especially among young people. Rarely do we hear ‘Good goal, but that pass was way better’ or ‘That save was amazing!’ Think about this: have you ever been on Youtube and searched ‘Best passes of 2014’? How many times have you seen ‘Best goals ever’? All of this is very ironic, of course, since defender and goalkeeper are the most important positions on the pitch. If the striker misses an open goal, he gets another go; if the defender or goalie messes up - oh dear - you are 1-0 down. Because of this, in my opinion, when journalists come to vote for the Ballon D’Or their minds are corrupted. Of course, journalists are not the only ones voting, but if a third of the voters go in and their mind has already been made up for them, that is 33% of the votes predetermined. They want to please the public, so most of them do not write down what they truly believe, rather what they are forced to believe. I am not saying that all Ballon D’Or awards are undeserved; Messi definitely should have won one, perhaps two - but four? Ultimately, the journalists just wanted to make news to break a record - to please the crowd. This aligns with the television scenario; we want new stuff - we want to be surprised - amazed. This has led to the corruption of the most important award any footballer can earn. The numbers are

overwhelming. When was the last time a defender won the Ballon D’Or? It was Fabio Cannavaro, in 2006. When was the last time a goalkeeper won the prize? It was Lev Yashin, in 1963. The last time a goalkeeper was in the last three before Manuel Neuer this year? Buffon, in 2006. My final point just proves how much more we care about strikers than defenders and goalkeepers. I’m sure most of us remember the Champions League final of 2012: Chelsea vs. Bayern Munich at the Allianz Arena. Chelsea won a penalty shootout after a breathtaking 88th minute equalising header by Didier Drogba (who later scored the winning penalty), cancelling a Bayern lead that had been gained only 5 minutes earlier. The next day, the English press went crazy about Drogba. The headlines read: ‘DROG-

BA WINS IT FOR CHELSEA’. Drogba’s score out of ten varied between eight and nine. What the journalists forgot was that Drogba’s penalty would not have made any difference if a certain other player had not saved three penalties already, one of which was in extra time and the other two in the actual shoot out. Incidentally, the first of the three was Drogba’s fault, as he tripped Franck Ribery in his own box. The true hero of that match was Petr Cech. His score varied between seven and eight. Think about how many times you have known a striker score eight out of ten, and then how many times you have known a goalkeeper score eight out of ten. As Oscar Wilde once said, ‘There is one thing worse than being talked about: not being talked about.’

Ronaldo: recipient of the 2015 Ballon D’Or


24

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Sport FOOTBALL

Arsenal :What needs fixing? Arsenal fan Toby Jupp investigates the true problems at the heart of his club’s alleged ‘crisis’

T

he worst points tally after 20 games for 54 years’: these were the words of disgruntled Gooners on the drive back up to London from St Mary’s after a 2-0 humbling by Southampton on New Years Day. Goals from Saints’ Sadio Mane and Dusan Tadic (both due to errors from Wojciech Szczesny) condemned Arsenal to a catastrophic defeat. The last time Arsenal had only 33 points by that stage, Tottenham Hotspur won the league. But are the Gunners really in crisis? is Arsene Wenger really at fault for their ‘disastrous’ league position? My opinion is that there is no doubt whether the North London outfit should be challenging for the league. 2013-14 saw Arsenal lead the table for the longest period of all the clubs, while in the calendar year of 2013, not one side picked up more points than Arsenal. Their 2014 FA Cup win finally shifted the nine-year old monkey off their backs - so why has 2014-15 been such a big disappointment? Although Arsene Wenger made quality signings in the form of Danny Welbeck and, of course, Alexis Sanchez (who has undoubtedly been one of the best players of the Premier League so far this term), he did let Thomas Vermaelen go - thus leaving the club with only two senior centre backs for the majority of the season: Laurent Koscielny and Per Mertesacker, an issue only recently addressed with the £14m signing of uncapped Brazilian centre-half Gabriel Paulista from Villarreal in January. Arsenal were already a centre-back short, which arguably cost them the title in 2013-14, so to allow another to leave without replacement was criminal, especially given that the versatile Bacary Sagna, who could fill in at centre-half,

Coquelin: the new Vieira? decided to leave for Manchester City in the Summer. Calum Chambers remains a very hot prospect but is unpolished as a centre back and certainly lacked the experience to play week-in-week-out. Though once again, Wenger had ignored Arsenal’s weakest position, which is both utterly unforgivable and unbelievable. I am of course talking about (as I have been every season since 2005) the Patrick Vieira-shaped hole in central midfield: an enforcer who can allow the players around him, such as Sanchez,

Premier League results among top four* table since start of 2012/13

* Top four = any team that has finished in top four in the period Correct as of 21/02/15

1

Chelsea

41/63

2

Manchester City

35/66

3

Manchester United

28/60

4

Liverpool

18/60

5

Arsenal

17/63

Mesut Ozil, Aaron Ramsey and Santi Cazorla, to play with more freedom and provide a solid platform behind them, protecting the back four. Arsenal’s big game form over the last three seasons, as the table demonstrates, is nothing short of embarrassing. 17 out of 63 points is awful, but of the 33 possible away points, the Gunners have only taken 8, which is an atrocious statistic for the North Londoners. The lack of a no-nonsense enforcer in the middle of the park is the issue, not the defence nor goalkeeper (although he does himself no favours). Arsenal’s arrogant, expansive style is simply ineffective on the road because too much space is left in behind and there is no shield; Chelsea have Nemanja Matic while Man City can call on Brazilian duo, Fernando and Fernandinho, to protect their defence. But in Francis Coquelin, a free youth signing in 2008 from Stade Lavallois in France, Arsenal do appear to have stumbled upon and unearthed the long-awaited replacement for Vieira. It was fantastic to see him order around nine other full internationals at the Etihad as Arsenal ran out 2-0 winners against Man City. He was the major reason for which Arsenal were able to walk out with three points, and although Cazorla won man of the match, it was the French defensive midfielder who should have got the plaudits. Arsenal produced a similarly disciplined

performance at White Hart Lane three weeks later, when Harry Kane was the only Spurs player who ever looked like scoring, and as we know he scored twice and Tottenham won the game. However, despite the disappointing result, I was satisfied with the fight and discipline that the defence showed, limiting Spurs to shots from the edge of the box despite having so much possession. Much of this was down to Coquelin, and the 23-year old deserves much praise for displacing the vastly experienced Mathieu Flamini. Minus Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain and Alexis, Arsenal lacked a counter attacking threat which I felt was the reason they didn’t win the game. It was nothing to do with kamikaze style ‘YOLO’ tactics that have previously been deployed by Wenger, which resulted in the 5-1, 6-0 and 6-3 thumping of last year. Providing Arsenal can finish in the top four this season, of which I am almost certain, I think this Summer could be the most important window in their recent history. With Paulista added and Bellerin performing so well and consistently recently, I feel Arsenal finally have enough defensive depth, while the goalkeeping department is also settled, with David Ospina proving to be more than capable of competing with Szczesny. It is in midfield where changes should be made to add more steel. In my opinion,


25

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Coquelin is the only player in the current Arsenal squad who can play the role of anchor in Wenger’s 4-1-4-1. Mikel Arteta does not have the physique, Flamini lacks the distribution or positional play while Jack Wilshere completely lacks discipline. Therefore, it is imperative that Arsenal land at least one of Morgan Schneiderlin, Lars Bender or William Carvalho in the Summer, and make room by ridding of Arteta, Flamini and the injury-prone Abou Diaby. For the five positions ahead of Coquelin (or whoever ends up there), Arsenal’s options are amongst the best in world football and probably up with Manchester United as the best in England: Ramsey, Cazorla, Wilshere, Tomas Rosicky, Ozil, Sanchez, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Theo Walcott, Olivier Giroud and Welbeck will all be competing for five starting positions. This is almost impossible to select (not to mention Joel Campbell and Yaya Sanogo who will return from loans at Villarreal and Crystal Palace respectively). Chuba Akpom also recently signed a new deal and has had a taste of first-team football in the latter half of the season. But the most infuriating characteristic of the Wenger era, is the repetitive

lack of progress year-on-year. 4th Place, Last 16 knocked out, no trophy. 4th Place, Last 16 knocked out, no trophy. How a team can pull off the incredible victory at Man City and play so horrendously against Monaco is baffling. Arsenal are in a lull. The board is not brave enough to call time on the Frenchman while Wenger is too stubborn to walk away. I am wary of what happened at Manchester United with the change of manager after a large period of stability, but Wenger’s successor will face much less pressure than what Louis van Gaal, and initially David Moyes, has had at The Red Devils. They will have a huge budget (saved from Wenger’s financial prudence over the years) and actually have very little to address. It may be worth testing Mats Hummels’ loyalty to Dortmund as a potential recruit to replace Mertesacker, as well as one of the aforementioned trio of defensive midfielders. One could debate that a prolific finisher such as Lyon’s Alexandre Lacazette could be brought in to compliment the skills of Giroud and Welbeck. But Arsenal’s squad should certainly be near the summit of the Premier League next year; else the annual ‘Wenger Out’ campaign will be back.

Arsenal’s arrogant expansive style is simply ineffective on the road

NFL: Review AMERICAN FOOTBALL

A

Patrick Johnson reflects on SuperBowl 49

fter 22 weeks of thrilling play we are now at a point where we can reflect on the NFL season that has just passed. I think it has been an exciting season this year, especially with all the last-minute game changing plays recently enhancing the Super Bowl. So, in my opinion, stand out performers have appeared in the shape of Antonio Brown, Tom Brady and DeMarco Murray. Antonio Brown, a wide receiver of the Pittsburgh Steelers, was particularly spectacular this year with 129 successful receptions, 13 receiving touchdowns and 85 first down receptions. Tom Brady, the New England Patriots’ quarterback, is another player

who performed well this year. Although he did not receive the top statistics, with a solid average of 256.8 yards per game and passing 4109 yards with 33 passing touchdowns, I believe he did well; especially when you consider the fact that he came back from such a substandard season last year, coordinating the Patriots to a Super Bowl victory. During this season DeMarco Murray has really been a powerful force at running back for the Dallas Cowboys. His running back efforts enabled him to score 13 rushing touchdowns and rushing a total of 1845 yards in the regular season. On a larger scale, teams which have done well have been the Dallas Cowboys (who reached the postseason for the

first time since 2009), the Seattle Seahawks (reaching their second successive Super Bowl) and of course the New England Patriots (the eventual champion of Super Bowl XLIX). They all had an incredible set of results as they just win and win and win, but by contrast , at the other end of the tables, struggling teams have been the Jacksonville Jaguars, the New York Giants (despite their catch of the season) and the Cleveland Browns. Recently, the season reached its climax in the spectacle of the Super Bowl, another win for the Patriots and their

fourth Super Bowl victory. That put them level with the Green Bay Packers and Giants on the all-time leaderboard, only bettered by the Cowboys, Steelers and San Francisco 49ers. The scoreline, Patriots 28 - 24 Seahawks, reflects how tense the game was with a fantastic final interception from Malcolm Butler for the Patriots, who pounced on the ball after an unbelievable play-call from the Seahawks, to pass, instead of rushing, off the one yard line. I thought overall it was a very exciting game and a fitting way to end the season.


26

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Miscellaneous

Dudley’s Dilemmas HUMOUR

Abingdon School’s unofficial mascot takes the time to respond to our most trivial of problems. By Henry Waterson and Blake Jones

Rotten Revision Oi, I’m in the fifth year and have my IGCSE exam things this year. I like know they’re important because all the teachers go on like, I need solid results to get a good future. But what all the teachers forget is that exams may be important but I like really need to build up my team on FIFA 15. Because that summer is coming up with a really long break or something, so I need my team to be really fresh for that or I’ll look like a right mug. Dud, I’m gonna do well in the exams cos their really boring so like really easy, but I still want to do enough mental beving on the ween. So after some post slosh yam I realised that to be a prolad in my exams I need to like learn the stuff, but do it without working loads. What should I do to get results which aren’t like a disgrace and let me have a real classy job in the future? Creds to a bro who told me to set you a message about this. Cheers, Anonneymouse 5th yr.

Dear client, Thank you for choosing to confide in Miss Lusk’s empathetic dog, soon to be only one of Abingdon School’s many counsellors. My loyal secretary and I have shifted hundreds of messages over these recent weeks, many of them seeking consolation over unfulfilled new years’ resolutions, but in your plea I recognized a desperation unsurpassed by any failed diet. The sheer burden of your dilemma has jeopardized your ability to speak English. Therefore, for the convenience of our readers, Mr. Dawswell and I have worked arduously to ‘translate’ your original message into a form recognizable to the British public:

Salutations, I am currently studying in the fifth year (at Abingdon school) and I am due to sit my International General Certificate of Secondary Education examinations at a latter stage in the year. I am fully conscious of their significance to me (having been informed on numerous occasions that I require adequate examination results in order to ensure my future well-being) but the crucial factor that the vast majority of my teachers fail to take into account is the tense conflict of priorities raging in my conscience; I must measure up success in the upcoming exams against the augmentation of my virtual football team. It is essential for my social standing among my close contemporaries that my virtual football team is in peak condition prior to the expansive Summer holiday, during which time my virtual football players will be subjected to rigorous exercise. If their performance is anything short of exceptional, then I face the serious danger of becoming a social outcast. O, Dudley, I hold great faith in my success in my forthcoming I.G.C.S.E. examinations. This belief of mine is based on my theory that any challenge or task that presents itself to me as monotonous or unstimulating can, as a rule, be overcome without either effort or mental faculty on my part. I shall nevertheless endeavour to make/do a sufficient amount/number of (beving on the ween). Therefore, after some (post slosh yam) I realized that if I were to become a prolific youngster throughout my examinations, it would be necessary for me to fully collate my knowledge of the subject matter. However, I would be very much more comfortable if I could complete the required revision without trying. Thus, what measures must I take in order to achieve a set of results in my International General Certificate of Secondary Education examinations which will not stain my career with failure and shame, but instead ensure my safe passage into the higher echelons of society? Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to convey my gratitude to the close friend whom had recommended me your counseling service. Yours sincerely, An anonymous member of the fifth year.

Continued on next page


27

THE MARTLET SPRING ISSUE 5

Miscellaneous Now that we’re speaking the same language, we can correspond much more easily. Despite the initial alarm that the distressed syntax of your message agitated in my analytical mind, the issue at its core turns out to be a case of revision phobia - particularly common among the fifth form around this time of year. The condition can usually be cured by reminding the affected pupil that failure to prepare adequately for public examinations ultimately leads to a tragic, lonely death in poverty and squalor, followed by an eternity of damnation. However, observing several unusual misconceptions in your message, I believe that some more specialised correction is in order. Your work ethic is in error, it seems; the correlation between enjoyment and difficulty as laid out in your message is backward, naive, and, without any need for further explanation, disappointing. I am afraid to say that your IGCSEs will continue to demand your full capabilities whether you find the process enjoyable or not. I didn’t win best-in-show three years straight without making sacrifices. Furthermore, I think you really ought to evaluate the casus belli for your conflict of priorities. For reasons beyond my comprehension, you cannot choose between success in the most important set of examinations you are likely to ever take in your life and a computer game. Yes, you are at Abingdon to develop your mind and further your emotional intelligence, but also to pass the occasional exam. Your current indecision indicates a dire shortcoming in this capacity. Do you want to become a footballer? If so, why don’t you just play real football in a real team? Sport is a welcome accompaniment to academia, and as of last year you can play your favourite sport within the school timetable without placing your studies in jeopardy! With a solution in sight, I will not rest until the error of your ways is corrected. My acute sense of duty dictates that it is my responsibility to force my advice upon you to save you from your own idiocy. By the power invested in me by Miss Lusk, the Board of Governors and the great Mercers’ Company, I hereby command you to surrender your copy of FIFA 15. Failure to comply within 48 hours will convince me beyond all doubt that you really don’t understand education at all, under which circumstances, please report to the Turner Correctional Facility for intensive electroshock therapy at 9am sharp Friday week, remembering to report to Mr. May in advance to find out where the Turner Correctional Facility actually is. Yours sincerely, Dudley

What is a Martlet? TRIVIA

A

martlet is, at heart, a bird. It appears on the school’s arms and can be found in several other notable places. I have explored the origins of this strange, legless bird for your enlightenment. The martlet, in its common form, is a stylized bird with no legs, a short beak and plenty of fluff; similar to the house martins and swallows native to this country. To that end, it is thought that the martlet takes its name from the diminutive form of ‘martin’, indicating its smaller size. Thus, it is likely that the martlet was originally a bird smaller than the house martin:

Henry Waterson educates us about Abingdon’s iconic bird. i.e. a swift. Indeed, this bird had legs so small that in times of old it was believed to have no legs at all! The martlet is not to be confused with its French counterpart, the merlette. This word means ‘little female duck’ in its respective language. A merlette can also be a female blackbird, but both are referred to as ‘blunted’, lacking a beak or teeth. The martlet is rooted in our culture. It appears in Shakespeare’s works on multiple counts, mistaken as a good omen on Macbeth’s castle prior to Duncan’s death, referred to by Duncan and Banquo as a ‘guest of Summer’. The martlet nests also in

Act 2 Scene 9 of The Merchant of Venice, also appearing as a heraldic charge on plenty of shields around the country. One of its earliest appearances, for example, is the arms of the Valence family (pictured left), Earls of Pembroke, onto which it is thoroughly pasted no fewer than 19 times. Martlets also feature on the arms of Edward the Confessor, the county of Sussex and other assorted nobility. More recently, the Martlet has played a star role in ER Edisson’s fantasy novel The Worm Ouroboros, in which it acts as a messenger of the gods. One suggested symbolic meaning of the martlet as a heraldic icon is the cadency of the fourth son. Back in the good old days, the first son inherited the estate, the second and third went to the clergy, leaving the fourth without a firm base on

which to build his life. Thus, the martlet is a fitting symbol, having no legs and being unable to land. Today, it remains part of many traditional shields of arms, adorning those of various academic institutes, including leading Oxfordshire independent schools. This legless bird also, of course, lends its namesake to a certain publication.


Which Political Party Should You Support? Uncertain about how to vote? Ben Ffrench comes to your rescue with a quiz that will help you decide.

1. What’s your attitude to immigrants? a) Rotten benefit scroungers! They should all be rounded up and kicked out. b) They’re alright - as long as they don’t harm the environment. c) W e love immigrants! Freedom of movement is important and must be respected. d) We like immigrants, but it’s important we have strong border controls and that they can’t milk the system. e) W e must certainly have curbs on freedom of movement, and welfare curbs. f) Immigrants are fine, it’s all propaganda against them to distract us from our capitalist society.

2. What do you think about bankers’ bonuses? a) They’re fine! Bankers are great chaps. It’s the immigrants you have to worry about. b) Like global warming, they’re bad for the planet and should be stopped. c) T hey mustn’t get too high, but hey, economic freedom and all that! d) In a world of inequality, it is terrible that bankers get paid so highly. They should be abolished permanently. e) H ard working heroes of our country deserve large rewards. f) It’s terrible, but the establishment will never allow it to stop.

3. What’s your favourite pastime? a) Enjoying the Great British pint in The Plough. b) Going to the park enjoying the green spaces. c) Going to a nudist beach. d) Going to the workers’ club to play snooker. e) J ogging in the Cotswolds with my bro Barack. f) Transcendental meditation.

4. L ooking at the shelves in Waitrose/Tesco/ Budgens/Sainsbury’s/Aldi/Lidl/Morrisons/ Asda (delete as appropriate), which paper appeals to you most? a) The Daily Express- very few papers speak common sense these days, this one does. b) The Guardian/the Observer. c) T he Guardian/The Telegraph/The Times d) The Daily Mirror/The Guardian e) T he Times/Daily Mail f) T he i.

5. Should we stay in the EU? a) No, not at all: it’s outdated and bureaucratic. b) Certainly- how else could we get countries to pass green laws? c) Yes d) Of course, we cannot risk our economy and jobs. e) mmmm….probably not. f) Yes, so we can kick out the old order forever.

6. Who’s to blame for the need for food banks? a) Immigrants taking jobs and stealing all the food. b) The policies of the government. c) No one - they can have all the free food they like. It’s a free country after all. d) Ian Duncan Smith’s harsh welfare reforms have left people starving. e) The British people- the greedy masses can’t resist the lure of cake. f) The system and the establishment.

How did you score? Mostly As

You should definitely support UKIP - you have grave concerns about immigrants and their pouring into Britain.

Mostly Bs

You’re a GREEN supporter - the environment matters most to you, but the NHS and drug policy is also important.

Mostly Cs

You’re a LIB DEM - You believe in freedom, civil liberties, and are a tad to the left.

Mostly Ds

You should support LABOUR - You’re a socialist like Tony Benn who hates the upper classes, is working class and believes in the Mansion Tax.

Mostly Es

You support the CONSERVATIVES - You believe in keeping your wealth, are a capitalist and generally quite well off.

Mostly Fs

Don’t vote. You’re a political anarchist like Russell Brand. PUBLISHER Emma Williamson MANAGING EDITOR Tom Harkness DESIGN EDITORS Blake Jones Pea Sermsuk George Jeffreys Asten Yeo

STAFF WRITERS Adriano Matousek Asten Yeo Ben Ffrench Blake Jones Bruno Rodgers Charlie Landells Daniel Alcock Daniel Brown Francesco Cipriani Henry Waterson

James Beazley James Gordon Jeff Abraham Jonathan Lee Nick Harris Patrick Cole Patrick Johnson Pawin ‘Pea’ Sermsuk

Piers Mucklejohn Samuel Chambers Saul Rea Toby Collins Toby Jupp Tom Buckle

Contact us at martlet@abingdon.org.uk Initial design by Asten Yeo

Printed by the Newspaper Club


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.