THE PILOT MICHAELMAS 2023 by Chigwell School

THE PILOT MICHAELMAS 2023

Editorial

The Pilot is back! Every term, we compile the best works from across the Senior School. In this edition, you will find prize-winning Howard and Mitchell submissions, excerpts from EPQ submissions and a selection of work produced within and outside of the main curriculum. Our aim is to showcase the very best that students of Chigwell have to offer. Every submission has been carefully curated to best represent as broad a range of subject areas as possible, and although some are only extracts of a wider piece, we believe that the work showcases the effort and excellence of Chigwell students. The citations from some academic works have been removed, but a full set of references is available on request. We hope that you enjoy the read! Manraj; Larissa; Roma; Shayan; Tom; Rhys; Kayuki; Julianna; Lily

CONTENTS FRONT COVER

ANYA HUSSAIN

2. EDITORIAL 3. ISOLATION

ANYA HUSSAIN

4. GREEN POWER

DT HIGH ACHIEVERS

5. EXPERIENCE

AAYAN MULLA

6. WHEN YOU DURST DO IT THEN YOU WERE A MAN

AAYAN AHMED

30. ALGORITHM

ALFIE LONG

32. THE LAST LETTER

NANAKI SETHI

37. THE KITCHEN WHEN I WAS A BOY

AARAV VEER SINGH BAXI

38. LaTeX and GROUPS

RHYS SATHYAN

40. THE DECLINE OF US DEMOCRACY

THOMAS SCOTHERN

57. THE NEOLITHIC REVOLUTION

FRANCESCA HALLETT

70. THE MUSICAL MEMORY AND DEMENTIA

MAGDALENA RODZAJ

BACK COVER

KAMILE BALNIONIS

Anya’s work explores social isolation and mental illness. Through her work, she presents the impact of family and the sharing of history as powerful influences on our well-being. ANYA HUSSAIN, MVI

The Y10 and Y11 D.T. students have been working hard to build an IET Formula 24 electric kit car during ‘Greenpower’ club. The students are working in three main groups: construction, bodywork & design and reverse engineering. Once completed, the car will be raced (by students!) at the regional competition held at Ford Dunton Technical Centre in July. So far it is progressing well!

Experience Heart melts, Like candy floss, Into cotton. Wisps of wind, Chiming slowly, Its return. Soul snaps, In two halves, Rippling across. Heart melts, Like candy floss, Into cotton. Unrequited Soul.

Flutters, Across Waterfalls Of Fire, Across Ravaged Lands, Of Blood. Paints sky Colour of souls. Bound in chains of hope, To find you. In rivers Of hope, Embittered. Valleys of silence, Reverberate, Unrequited.

AAYAN MULLA, REMOVES

AYAAN AHMED, UV Ayaan produced the following piece as part of his IGCSE coursework. In the work, he explores Shakespeare’s presentation of masculinity in the play Macbeth.

‘When you durst do it, then you were a man …’ The definition of masculinity in the present day is contested. Some argue that it is a social construct used to force regressive and difficult stereotypes onto men, while others argue that it is an intrinsic part of men, characterised by their biological development as well as hormones such as testosterone. Masculinity is often associated with certain qualities, such as aggression, bravery, emotional suppression and honour or chivalry. In Macbeth, Shakespeare explores the definition of the perfect Jacobean man through the characters of Macbeth and Macduff. While at first, they value the same things as part of their masculine identity, Macbeth strays away from this initial model, which eventually leads to the finale, in which their two different models of masculinity clash, and only one is proven to be superior.

At the beginning of the play, Macbeth is presented as the ideal Jacobean man, with typicallymasculine qualities of bravery, ruthlessness and decisiveness, and most importantly, total obedience to the ruler. This is established in Act I Scene II, before he even comes on stage. He is first mentioned by the sergeant alongside the adjective ‘brave’, and the parenthetical clause ‘(well he deserves that name)’ afterwards emphasises this masculine quality and points to his numerous military successes explained later in this scene. He is also described as ‘Disdaining

fortune, with his brandish’d steel, / Which smoked with bloody execution.’ The use of the present continuous verb ‘disdaining’ in conjunction with the abstract noun ‘fortune’ suggests that he continually obtains victory despite luck or odds, and perhaps foreshadows his diminished masculinity towards the end of the play due to him overly relying on ‘fortune’ (i.e. the witches’ prophecies). The noun phrase ‘brandish’d steel’ displays the means through which he achieves victory: skill with the sword. This was especially important in 11th century Britain (the setting of the play), as under the feudal system, all land and property belonged to the king, and was received by nobles similar to Macbeth in exchange for allegiance and, critically, military service when required. Therefore, Macbeth’s typically-masculine qualities of brutality and skill in swordsmanship are directly proportional to his social standing in the Scottish court. Furthermore, the verb ‘smoked’ and the adjective ‘bloody’ continue to highlight this brutality, as they paint a vivid image of the blood ‘evaporating’ off the sword due to how much Macbeth has shed. Also, the use of the abstract noun ‘execution’ is an intelligent pun from Shakespeare; it can either mean to take action (another masculine quality emphasised throughout the play) or to kill. Additionally, Macbeth is praised with the title ‘valour’s minion’, whereas MacDonald is targeted with the pejoratives ‘rebel’s whore’ and ‘slave’. The noun ‘minion’ especially ties the trait of ‘valour’ to subservience to the king, and shows that part of Macbeth’s masculine honour is directly tied to his obedience. This encapsulates both 11th century and Jacobean attitudes regarding the Great Chain of Being; that God willed for every creature to have a certain station in life, and that all would be raised in the kingdom of heaven as long as they respected this hierarchy. This could perhaps foreshadow his fall from glory for trying to disturb this hierarchy. Macbeth’s hypermasculine attitudes are also displayed in his military success against the Norwegian army, as he and Banquo dismayed ‘As sparrows eagles, or the hare the lion’. This simile compares the two men

to animals at the top of the food chain, while likening the common enemy soldiers to weak, insignificant prey animals, which could have a range of effects. On the surface, it displays the natural ease with which Macbeth and Banquo are able to kill, highlighting their masculinity; however, it could also allude to their current high position within the Scottish aristocracy, and could even foreshadow the witches’ prophecies of their further rise in society (where Macbeth becomes king, and Banquo fathers a line of kings, thereby ascending to the top of the Scottish court). This dehumanisation of enemy soldiers is present even within contemporary society; for example, the dehumanisation of Afghan men went to the extent that even civilians who observed foreign soldiers were profiled as ‘spotters’ and therefore killed (according to the Australian Journal of Political Science). They are also described ‘As cannons overcharged with double cracks, so they / Doubly redoubled strokes upon the foe’ – the repetition of ‘double’ highlights the relentlessness of Macbeth’s attacks and further emphasises his masculine strength. This is juxtaposed with the description of the Norwegian soldiers: ‘Except they meant to bathe in reeking wounds, / Or memorise another Golgotha, / I cannot tell.’ The noun phrase ‘reeking wounds’ and the proper noun ‘Golgotha’ are an allusion to Jesus’ crucifixion – according to the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible, Jesus is the ‘[sacrificial] Lamb of God’, hence why he was sacrificed in Christian theology. The dehumanisation of the enemy forces, and in particular the downplaying of the honour of selfsacrifice, which was idealised in Jacobean society, implies that God is not on the enemy soldiers’ side. This is interesting, as these soldiers serve ‘the Norway’s king’, who should also have a Divine Right to the throne like the Scottish king, a detail which likely alludes to a unique duty of James I (the monarch when the play was written) and other post-Henry VIII monarchs; the rulers were considered heads of the Church of England, as written in Section A 7 of the Canons of the Church of England: ‘We acknowledge that the [monarch]'s excellent Majesty,

acting according to the laws of the realm, is the highest power under God in this kingdom, and has supreme authority over all persons in all causes, as well ecclesiastical as civil.’ While this concept could be seen as anachronistic because England and Scotland had different rulers until James I’s ascension to the throne, and because England remained Catholic until Henry VIII’s reign, it nevertheless cements the extreme importance of the Scottish king; that he was superior even to all other kings, and was below only God. For his defence against the Norwegian invaders, Macbeth in particular is praised as ‘that Bellona’s bridegroom’. The plosive alliteration in ‘Bellona’s bridegroom’, and the allusion to the Roman war god Mars yet again cements Macbeth’s explosive, hypermasculine aggression, but the use of the determiner ‘that’ implies that there is more than one person like Mars – this foreshadows Macduff’s ability to both physically and ideologically oppose Macbeth. Finally, Ross refers to Macbeth ‘curbing his lavish spirit’, which could have two meanings – firstly, the noun phrase ‘lavish spirit’ could refer to his bloodthirst on the battlefield. However, it could also refer to his ambition to rise through the rungs of the Scottish feudal system, an ambition which ultimately leads him to usurp the title of king from Duncan. As a result, this scene both establishes Macbeth’s hypermasculine qualities and hints to the ambition which ultimately results in the undoing of these qualities.

Macbeth’s fatal flaw of ambition, combined with implied witchcraft from his wife, gradually corrupts him throughout the play just before and after he murders King Duncan, as the formerly brave, masculine Macbeth is reduced to a person prone to emotional outbursts and mood swings, and hysterical due to his guilt – qualities which would usually be associated with women both in 11th century Britain and in Jacobean England. Firstly, in Act I Scene V, before Macbeth returns to his castle, Lady Macbeth remarks (referring to her husband), ‘Thou

wouldst be great, / Art thou not without ambition, but without / The illness should attend it.’ Here, Lady Macbeth admits that Macbeth is ‘not without ambition’, suggesting that the desire to usurp the throne is deeply buried within him, and also suggests that he would have embraced this ambition had he been ‘without / The illness’. The abstract noun ‘illness’ is likely a metaphor for Macbeth’s fealty to King Duncan; this conceptualisation of loyalty to the ruler as a disease to be cured would have been shocking to a Jacobean audience, as ‘to the King is due both the affection of the soul and the service of the body of his subjects’, according to King James I himself. Lady Macbeth also says, ‘What thou wouldst highly, / That wouldst thou holily; wouldst not play false / And yet wouldst wrongly win.’ The modality and repetition of the auxiliary verb ‘wouldst’ links the adverbs ‘highly’ and ‘holily’ together; the former has connotations of status and nobility (which likely refers to Macbeth’s ambition to rise in social status), while the latter has connotations of Godliness and divinity (likely referring to Duncan’s Divine Right as a king). These two clauses therefore reinforce Macbeth’s currently-pure character by suggesting that, even in his pursuit of greater power through which to elevate himself and his family, he still respects and even aids King Duncan due to Duncan’s God-given right to rule. This link between the two adverbs could perhaps imply that, in Lady Macbeth’s perception, Macbeth’s perfect fulfilment of his patriotic duties shackles his potential to excel at his patriarchal duties (by embracing his ambition and increasing his family’s social standing at any cost). The second clause ‘wouldst not play false / And yet wouldst wrongly win’ further suggests that he cannot ‘wrongly win’ without being willing to forsake his ‘noble’ qualities and lie and cheat – the adverb ‘wrongly’ directly acknowledges the treasonous nature of Lady Macbeth’s plan to make Macbeth king, and the nonchalant nature with which she acknowledges the wrongness of this would have been even more shocking to Jacobean audiences. This is because the punishment for treason was incredibly grave in Jacobean

England – dissidents, such as Guy Fawkes of the Gunpowder Plot and Alexander Ruthven of the Gowrie Conspiracy were hung, drawn and quartered. Towards the end of this soliloquy, she says, ‘Thou ’dst have, great Glamis, / That which cries “Thus thou must do,” if thou have it’; the modal certainty of the verb ‘must’, in tandem with the verb ‘do’ allows the audience to understand Lady Macbeth’s model of masculinity, which she intends to instil within Macbeth in following scenes: a model which advocates for ‘do[ing]’ things and taking action above all, even if it requires the abandonment of one’s dignity, honour and allegiance to the king. Later in this scene, she compels the ‘spirits’ to ‘Unsex [her] here … Make thick [her] blood. / Stop up th’ access and passage to remorse’ – on the surface, this seems to refer to her desire to enter her menopause to amplify her masculine ruthlessness, as well as her willingness to call upon ‘metaphysical aid’ to corrupt herself and her husband. This would be a massive taboo in Jacobean times, as King James I especially cracked down on witchcraft; he wrote a book called Daemonologie expressing his views on witches, and sentenced any suspected witches to death. This also alludes to the strength of a masculine model which prioritises patriotic duties and fealty to the king (and thereby God) – it is incorruptible without the presence of a witch (who were believed to have formed a pact with Satan). Moreover, this not only foreshadows Lady Macbeth’s masculinisation, but also Macbeth’s feminisation – following his treason, he becomes more upset, anxious and subject to mood swings, which matches some of the symptoms of premenstrual syndrome, a condition which many women experience before their menses. This therefore foretells Lady Macbeth’s role as a dissident and a witch who tries inverts the (perceived as morally right and proper) natural order. She tries to invert the definition of the ideal Jacobean man; she prophesises her increasingly-bold, masculine attitudes and her husband’s increasingly-timid, feminine attitudes throughout the

middle of the play and she sows the seeds with which to invert the Great Chain of Being through Duncan’s death.

The first signs of the degradation of Macbeth’s masculine dignity are shown in Act I Scene VII, with his long soliloquy expressing his doubts with the plan to kill King Duncan. The presentation of this as a soliloquy (in which a character monologues about their innermost feelings) suggests that even the thought of treason is causing Macbeth to become more sentimental and emotional, qualities which were frowned upon among both men in the Middle Ages and Jacobean men. Macbeth remarks, ‘First, as I am his kinsman and his subject, / Strong both against the deed; then, as his host’. The noun ‘subject’ shows that, at this stage, Macbeth still retains most of his honour because he is still loyal to the king, and the noun ‘host’ and modal obligation of the verb ‘should’ also depict another duty of his – that he was obliged to follow the Renaissance code of hospitality and serve his guests to the best of his ability. Both the nouns ‘subject’ and ‘host’ have the connotation of service in common, suggesting that service and obedience were important aspects of Jacobean masculinity – this is far less the case in the present day, because many men who go against the status quo and disobey authority (such as Malcolm X) are seen as masculine role models. He also says that ‘this Duncan / Hath borne his faculties so meek, hath been / So clear in his great office’ the repetition of the adverb ‘so’ in conjunction with the use of positive adjectives such as ‘meek’, ‘clear’ and ‘great’ highlights how excellent he perceives King Duncan’s reign to have been. Ironically, these praises could be seen as hyperbolic and perhaps untrue, as King Duncan attracted multiple large-scale rebellions and defensive wars while on the throne, and was only able to win with the help of war heroes such as Macbeth and Banquo. This irony could reveal the real reasons which Macbeth tells himself this; he is desperately trying to ‘true’,

honourable Jacobean manhood, which implies that he is insecure about his masculinity – this consequently also foreshadows his wife’s exploitation of this insecurity. Macbeth then goes on to talk about the potential terrible consequences of treason: ‘his virtues / Will plead like angels … That tears shall drown the wind’. The repetition of words and phrases with connotations of divinity (such as ‘angels’, ‘trumpet-tongued’ [trumpets are important, holy instruments within Christian theology] ‘damnation’ and ‘heaven’s cherubin’) in addition to the repetition of plosives (such as ‘plead’ and ‘blast’) and repeated alliteration (such as ‘trumpettongued’ and ‘naked, new-born babe’) very strongly underscore Macbeth’s fear of divine retribution, and by extension Duncan’s Divine Right to the throne. This is one of the most explicit references to the Divine Right of Kings in the play – this was the concept in both the 11th century and the 17th century that kings derived their authority from God and that God ruled from them – King James I was in particular a proponent of this ideology. Overconfidence in this ideology has been proven historically to warrant assassination – for example, James I’s son and successor Charles I was killed due to abusing this Divine Right to remove Parliament’s political power. This could suggests that Macbeth holds a deep-seated, suppressed resent towards Duncan’s (perceived) theocratic hegemony, which may have worked in tandem with his ambition to lead to the king’s demise. At the end of his soliloquy, he indeed admits that he has ‘only / Vaulting ambition, which o’erleaps itself / And falls on th’other’. The personification of the abstract noun ‘ambition’ as something which ‘vault[s]’ and ‘falls’ highlights Macbeth’s acknowledgement that no matter how high his greed may bring him, he will eventually fall down if he succumbs to it – this belief comes true in the final scene of the play. However, his unwillingness is not appreciated by Lady Macbeth, as she remarks, ‘Art thou afeard / To be the same in thine own act and valour / As thou art in desire?’ The use of the verb ‘afeard’ in combination with the repeated direct address with ‘thou’ and ‘thine’

emphasises the direct attack on Macbeth’s masculinity through accusing him of cowardice (which has throughout time been considered as a highly unmasculine quality), and the contrast between the abstract nouns ‘act’ and ‘valour’ (honourable, positive qualities) with the abstract noun ‘desire’ (a negative quality) links the two to each other, implicitly makes the claim that his ambition is just as integral to his masculinity as his dignity, and perhaps suggests that said ambition supersedes his obedience to the king. The framing of this as a rhetorical question furthers its confrontational nature, and therefore heightens the impact of Macbeth’s emasculation here. Macbeth is also addressed with the pejorative, emotive noun ‘coward’, which starkly contrasts his initial description as a ‘worthy gentleman’ and serves as an even more direct attack on his hypermasculine courage. Even a simile, comparing him to ‘the poor cat I’the adage’ is used; this is an allusion to an Elizabethan nursery rhyme, which grossly infantilises him, and the use of the negative, emotive adjective ‘poor’ makes him seem weak and pitiful. This barrage of emasculating rhetorical questions parallels the story of Adam and Eve as per the Book of Genesis; Adam is gradually tempted by Eve until he follows her actions and disobeys God by eating the Forbidden Fruit. Macbeth’s reply is noticeably vulnerable, as he begins by saying ‘Prithee, peace’. The fact that this continues Lady Macbeth’s metrical line, the use of the polite word ‘Prithee’ (which means ‘please’) and the plosive alliteration all have multiple effects; firstly, this marks Macbeth’s desperation to immediately defend his masculinity, which supplements Shakespeare’s presentation of Macbeth’s insecurity. The use of ‘Prithee’ also suggests a level of submission from Macbeth towards his wife; this would have been incredibly anomalous in Jacobean Britain, as the KJV of the Bible commands women to ‘submit [themselves] unto [their] own husbands, as unto the Lord’. This signifies the beginning of the unnatural reversal of gender roles between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, and could imply that the beginning of his fall from glory is close. Despite this, Macbeth still

affirms that ‘Who dares do more is none’; the use of the pronoun ‘none’ in combination with the two verbs ‘dares do’ dehumanises those who indulge too much on selfish, ambitiondriven action. What does and does not qualify as human was especially important given the existence of the Great Chain of Being; since men and women alike were greater than animals, Macbeth’s statement implies that ‘dar[ing]’ too much reduces one to an inferior being. This also shows that Macbeth still somewhat respects the King’s position within the Great Chain as superior to all other humans. Lady Macbeth responds with ‘What beast was’t then, / That made you break this enterprise to me?’ The use of another rhetorical question again sets Lady Macbeth’s tone as confrontational and critical, which was contrary to the role that Jacobean women were expected to inhabit (as passive and domesticated homemakers). The use of the noun ‘beast’, an allusion to the Devil, is also ironic, because witches like her (as mentioned previously) were believed to have formed a pact with the Devil; this implicit accusation that Macbeth is being swayed by Satan foreshadows that her corruption of Macbeth’s character shall run so deep that even his perception of good and evil will be warped. She then goes on to explicitly present her ideal model of masculinity to Macbeth: ‘When you durst do it … Be so much more the man.’ This is reinforced by the repetition of the noun ‘man’, which allows the audience to understand this as a direct assault on Macbeth’s manhood. The use of the two verbs ‘durst do’ also starkly contrasts its use by Macbeth prior; while Macbeth condemns actions caused by unrestrained ambition, his wife encourages them, as indicated by the tricolon of intensifying words ‘so much more’. This further cements that Lady Macbeth’s ideal model of masculinity only values action, regardless of its morality. She later goes on to say, ‘I have given suck … had I so sworn’; this is a brazen admission that she would commit infanticide, and the shock factor of this is highlighted by the contrast between the gentle verbs ‘love’ and ‘milk’ and the violent, aggressive verbs ‘pluck’d’ and ‘dash’d’. From a

Jacobean perspective, this clearly furthers her presentation as an aberration of nature who seeks to subvert the status quo, both within the family unit and within the country; as Macbeth becomes more feminine, she becomes more masculine. Her declaration also bears eerie similarities to the symptoms of postnatal depression/psychosis, especially the symptom of ‘frightening thoughts – for example, about hurting your baby’ as described by the NHS. This allows for an alternative, modern interpretation of why Macbeth and Lady Macbeth act the way that they do – with their actions both being consequences of neglect towards their poor mental health (for Macbeth, his insecurity, and for Lady Macbeth, her depression and/or psychosis), and disobedience to the king acting as a catalyst for these mental health deficits to become apparent. Regardless of the motive, Macbeth consequently vows to ‘bend up / Each corporal agent to this terrible feat’ – this contrasts his adamance beforehand where, with the modally-certain verb ‘will’ he vows that ‘[They] will proceed no further in this business’. This is an incredibly significant moment, as it marks the moment when Macbeth chooses to fully embrace Lady Macbeth’s conception of masculinity by prioritising patriarchal duties over patriotic duties. Paradoxically, it also represents his first failure as a Jacobean patriarch, as he fails as a leader of his family and easily relents to his wife’s demands. This failure eventually spirals into a complete degeneration of Macbeth’s masculine qualities of bravery and leadership. This is shown perfectly in Act III Scene IV in his response to seeing Banquo’s ghost; ‘Thou canst not say I did it: never shake / Thy gory locks at me’. The use of the modal verb ‘canst’, which comes with a degree of uncertainty, immediately indicates an emotional, knee-jerk response of denial and fear. The use of the imperative verb ‘shake’ and the negation ‘never’ further emphasises his fear, as this command is utterly ineffectual at dispelling Macbeth’s hallucination. His fear of ‘gory locks’ in particular is notable, as it contrasts his ruthlessness in the opening scenes where he ‘unseam’d [MacDonald] from the

nave to the chops’ without remorse. This act of uncontrolled emotion in a public banquet would be seen as incredibly unmasculine and perhaps woman-like. Macbeth’s anxiety and nervousness match the symptoms of what used to be called female hysteria (a parallel which is reinforced by his insomnia in Act II Scene II), and in Jacobean Britain, the foremost cause of female hysteria was believed to be devil possession – this behaviour therefore also highlights the extent to which Lady Macbeth’s influence has corrupted him. This forces Lady Macbeth to take leadership and request the guests at the banquet to ‘keep seat’. The fact that Lady Macbeth’s command with the imperative verb ‘keep’ is acted upon whereas Macbeth’s command is not suggests that she has usurped Macbeth’s masculine authority. As a result, this marks another, graver failure from Macbeth to fulfil his patriarchal duties; not only does he fail to lead as men were expected to at the time, but his insufficiencies bring humiliation to his family, as shown when Ross speculates that ‘his highness is not well’, and indirectly force his wife to take leadership. Lady Macbeth describes Macbeth’s hallucinations as ‘the painting of his fear … a woman’s story at a winter’s fire’ – these metaphors comparing his visions to works of imagination infantilise him, and the noun ‘woman’ adds to his emasculation by equating his actions as emotional and irrational like a woman’s. His outburst is criticised for being ‘Shame itself!’ His outburst is criticised for being ‘Shame itself!’, and the use of such a short exclamation with the powerfully emotive abstract noun ‘Shame’ places great emphasis on Lady Macbeth’s disapproval of her husband’s actions. Despite this reaction, Macbeth continues to converse with the apparition, saying ‘Prithee, see there! Behold! Look! Lo! How say you?’ The repetition of many short exclamative words and phrases emphasise his panic, and the use of ‘Prithee’, as with its previous use, implies a sense of submissiveness and vulnerability, which were both perceived as feminine qualities in Jacobean Britain. The fact that he does not even respond to defend his masculinity this time

demonstrates a further degeneration of Macbeth’s masculinity; at this stage, he is so overcome with emotion that the insecurity which would normally drive him to defend his honour has been overridden. In response to this, Lady Macbeth asks ‘What, quite unmann’d in folly?’; this direct attack on his masculinity is bolstered by the use of the verb ‘mann’d’ (which continues Lady Macbeth’s repetition of ‘man’). Tragically, the answer to this question could be seen as yes at this point; because of Macbeth’s ‘folly’ through regicide, his guilt and emasculation from Lady Macbeth have gradually caused his masculine qualities to be stripped away from him. Macbeth then goes on to list what does not frighten him to reconcile the contradiction between his masculinity and his fear: ‘Approach thou … If trembling I inhabit then, protest me.’ The references to powerful, aggressive mammals such as ‘the arm’d rhinoceros, or the Hyrcan tiger’ initially seem to justify that he is still brave and dignified, but they can also be seen as only further reinforcing his cowardice. This is because all the opponents which he mentions are below him on the Great Chain of Being and the feudal system – the animals are below all humans in the Great Chain of Being, and even Macbeth’s proposition of a duel in the desert is unbalanced because Macbeth’s authority as king is now far greater than Banquo’s authority as a feudal knight. This refusal to fight on equal footing could therefore serve to showcase Macbeth’s newfound cowardice as a result of treason against the king. The fact that Macbeth’s hallucination is of Banquo in particular is notable, as Banquo act as a foil to Macbeth in the play, and even more prominently in Holinshed’s Chronicles (off of which the play is based). According to the historical account in the chronicles, Banquo’s heirs were ultimately able to ascend to the throne legitimately and without any violence (his grandson married Robert the Bruce’s daughter, who then birthed the first king of the Stuart line, King Robert II, to be exact), which proves that Macbeth’s violent means were unnecessary in order to gain the throne. In fact, Shakespeare might have

used this as a means through which to point out the detriments of an action-centric model of masculinity even more; because of Macbeth’s spontaneous and selfish act of treason, he made it impossible for himself to claim a Divine Right to the throne, forever stunting his kingship. Finally, at the end of this scene, Shakespeare shows the audience the new model of masculinity which Macbeth follows when he expresses the belief that his actions ‘must be acted ere they may be scanned’. The modal certainty of the verb ‘must’ contrasts the modal uncertainty of the verb ‘may’, and goes even further than previous descriptions of this model by implying that rational thought is no longer even considered a prerequisite to be considered a man. These scenes illustrate the downfall of Macbeth’s honour. His decision to prioritise his patriarchal duties and personal ambition while forsaking his patriotic duties is initially framed by Lady Macbeth as something that will strengthen his manhood, but ultimately this decision reduces him to someone who is emotionally unstable, submissive to people other than the king (such as his wife), cowardly and arguably feminised, and he ends up failing in both duties. Through this, Shakespeare critiques a model of masculinity which epitomises selfish action above all, and also suggests that kingly obedience is an intrinsic part of masculinity, and that its lack of existence is unnatural. Therefore, Shakespeare foreshadows the inevitable failure of such a model.

In the play’s latter half, Shakespeare begins to depict an alternative model of masculinity in Macduff. Firstly, unlike Macbeth, Macduff is shown to be willing to prioritise his patriotic duties over his patriarchal duties by travelling to England to convince Malcolm to take the Scottish throne. Initially, Lady Macduff portrays Macduff’s decision as cowardly. She remarks, ‘He had none; … Our fears do make us traitors.’ The words ‘He had none’ shares a metrical

line with Ross’s previous line, ‘You must have patience, madam.’, implying that this is an interruption; the brevity of this statement, and the use of the total negation ‘none’ in relation to the abstract noun ‘patience’ cements Lady Macduff’s impatience (in stark contrast to Ross’s request), and her dissatisfaction towards her husband. In addition, the uses of the abstract noun ‘madness’ and the plural abstract noun ‘fears’ not only introduce the allegation that Macduff is afraid of Macbeth’s new reign, but that he is emotionally weak enough to allow multiple worries to afflict him. The use of the noun ‘traitors’ (usually used to refer to insubordination against the ruler, rather than one’s wife) also foreshadows the impossibility of fulfilling both patriarchal and patriotic duties by suggesting that Macduff had to betray his wife and children in his effort to fulfil his duty to reinstate the rightful heir to the throne. Lady Macduff’s annoyance continues to heighten, as she accuses her husband of ‘fly[ing]’ from his mansion, and says, ‘The poor wren … in the nest, against the owl.’ The use of bird imagery, which contrasts Macduff’s bravery with that of a wren (described with the superlative phrase ‘most diminutive of birds’) displays how little she thinks of her husband in this moment – this is reinforced by the contrast between the verbs ‘fly’ (which has connotations of birds and cowardice) and ‘fight’ (which has connotations of action and aggression). In addition, the mention of ‘Her young ones in the nest’ has two effects. The use of the pronoun ‘her’ indirectly emasculates Macduff by implying that a woman has more bravery than him, and the concept of the ‘nest’ allows Shakespeare to explore Lady Macduff’s, and with it wider Jacobean expectations of fathers – that they must provide for and protect their family. This is reflected KJV of the Bible, which says, ‘But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.’, and (elsewhere) calls the wife ‘the weaker vessel’. Despite the rise of egalitarianism, this duty to protect has not changed much in modern society; for example, in the US in 2021, 86.7% of law enforcement

officers were men. This metaphor also foreshadows how Macduff’s son dies – he is not afraid to boldly call the murderers by the pejorative ‘shag-eared villain’ even moments before he is stabbed, and in a typically-masculine fashion prioritises his mother’s safety (saying the imperative ‘run’) even as he dies. This further reveals the impossibility of fulfilling both patriarchal and patriotic duties; Macduff’s son’s decision to abandon any patriotism towards the then-King of Scotland, Macbeth, and to defend his family ultimately gets him killed, which in turn foreshadows the disastrous consequences of Macduff’s abandonment of patriarchal duties. On the other hand, Ross defends Macduff’s decision, ordering, ‘I pray you [Lady Macduff] school yourself. But for your husband, / He is noble, wise, judicious and best knows.’ The use of the imperative verb ‘school’ and direct address in ‘yourself’ affirms Macduff’s patriarchal authority over his wife – according to the Great Chain of Being (which originated in the Middle Ages but survived through to Jacobean England), men were higher up than women, and women were closer to animals than men – this was used as a justification for patriarchal authority over women. Moreover, the tricolon of adjectives ‘noble, wise, judicious’ places emphasis on Macduff’s good qualities, and links him to Macbeth, who is also described with the adjectives ‘valiant’ and ‘noble’ in Act I Scene II. This foreshadows the conflict between their two conflicting models of masculinity in the final act.

Unfortunately, in the following scene, Act IV Scene III, it is revealed that Macduff’s wife and children were ‘savagely slaughter’d’, a reveal which shocks Macduff. Malcolm’s response is anomalous given attitudes in 17th century Jacobean Britain, as he says, ‘Give sorrow words: the grief that does not speak, / Whispers the o’erfraught heart and bids it break.’ The personification of the abstract nouns ‘grief’ and ‘sorrow’ likens the feeling of loss to a destructive entity, and the plosive alliteration with the verbs ‘bids’ and ‘break’ indicates the

harsh consequences of emotional suppression expected by Jacobean men. These consequences unfortunately persist today, as males accounted for three-quarters of suicide deaths registered in 2021. However, Malcolm also asserts his Divine Right as King over Macduff through the use of the imperative ‘Give’, which foretells that the ruler’s conception of masculinity is considered superior – throughout this scene, Malcolm continues to ‘finetune’ how much Macduff reveals his emotions and how much he displays typically-masculine qualities of bravery and aggression. Following the rightful king’s command, Macduff shows his shock, repeating rhetorical questions, and for some time never having a metrical line to himself (it is always shared with another person): ‘My children too?’; ‘And I must be from thence? / My wife killed too?’. This fracture in the usual iambic pentameter usually used by nobility in Shakespeare conveys Macduff’s emotional paralysis. In particular, his question ‘And I must be from thence?’ highlights his guilt for not being present with his family, and alludes to his Atlas personality. A person with an Atlas personality is defined (according to the American Psychological Association) as one who ‘cared for others before being taken care of themselves, and [who] took on adult responsibilities from a very young age with the result of missing important aspects of their childhood … [and] retain their excessive sensitivity and concern for the emotional well-being of others in their adult life.’ While many Jacobean men could be considered as metaphorically holding the weight of the world just like Atlas due to expectations of men at the time, this type of personality especially affects Macduff, as he was ‘from his mother’s womb / Untimely ripp’d’ – the use of the aggressive verb ‘ripp’d’ suggests that (as was typical for the time) Macduff’s mother died when he was born by caesarean section. This would mean that he would have to shoulder significantly more responsibilities than other men from childhood, and the lack of a mother – who would not have been expected to suppress their emotions nearly as much as the father – would likely have served

to worsen his own emotional suppression. Meanwhile, Malcolm continues to guide him on how to respond to this grief: ‘Be comforted. / Let’s make us med’cines of our great revenge / To cure this deadly grief.’ The use of words in the semantic field of medicine (‘med’cines’ and ‘cure’) likens grief to a disease, which showcases a rare example of masculine empathy towards Macduff. However, Malcolm also begins to steer Macduff towards the honourable, masculine solution for this: ‘revenge’. Macduff, still in shock, asks, ‘All my pretty chickens and their dam / At one fell swoop?’ The use of bird imagery with the nouns ‘chickens’ and ‘dam’ parallels that of his wife in the previous scene, which allows Shakespeare to establish their close relationship. The shock expressed in this rhetorical question further highlights how devastated he is at the death of his wife. This starkly contrasts Macbeth’s interactions with Lady Macbeth – Macbeth’s guilt leads to constant arguments between them, and when Lady Macbeth dies, Macbeth’s response is more nonchalant, as he says, ‘She should have died hereafter. / There would have been a time for such a word.’ – rather than ‘Giv[ing] sorrow words’, he withholds words regarding his wife’s death. This suggests that Macbeth’s disobedience to the King has impaired his emotional state to some extent; at times, he is too emotional (for example, in Act II Scene II where he ‘[thought he] heard a voice cry, ‘Sleep no more! / Macbeth does murder sleep’), and in this case, his hypermasculine attitude causes him to suppress this emotion. Further on, Malcolm prompts Macduff to ‘Dispute it like a man’. The use of the noun ‘man’ mimics Lady Macbeth’s repeated (and successful) attempts to emasculate Macbeth. However, Macduff’s response starkly contrasts that of Macbeth; instead of desperately trying to justify his manhood, he instead resolves that ‘[He] shall do so; / But [he] must also feel it as a man’. The fact that the latter line begins on a new metrical line suggests that he has regained his composure somewhat, and the contrast between the confrontational verb ‘dispute’ and the more docile, emotional verb ‘feel’ both shows a

departure from typical Jacobean conceptions of masculinity which purely value bravery, and shows Macduff’s confidence in his own brand of masculinity. It also shows a departure from his Atlas personality, as he momentarily prioritises his own emotional wellbeing over that of others. However, the modal certainly with the verb ‘shall’ demonstrates that Macduff’s (and perhaps by extension Shakespeare’s) preferred model of masculinity also values action. Finally, Malcolm instructs Macduff with the following: ‘Be this the whetstone of your sword, let grief / Convert to anger. Blunt not the heart, enrage it.’ The use of words relating to swords, such as ‘whetstone’ and ‘blunt’ underlines Malcolm’s efforts to rouse Macduff to action and to make him let go of his grief. The repetition of imperatives such as ‘Be’, ‘let’, and ‘blunt’ also demonstrates Malcolm’s supremacy upon the Great Chain of Being as ‘God’s lieutenant’ (according to King James I). As a result of following Malcolm’s instructions, Macduff is able to set aside his grief, vowing, ‘Bring thou this fiend of Scotland and myself; / Within my sword’s length set him.’ The mirroring of the use of imperatives such as ‘Bring’ and ‘set’ is anomalous, given that he is talking to the king – however, they are likely intended to further illustrate his vow to take action, a decision which Malcolm says ‘goes manly’. This scene depicts that Macduff’s overwhelming loyalty to the rightful heir to the throne allows him to manage his powerful emotions of grief and shock, even following the failure of his patriarchal duties, and allows him to retain his masculine honour. In contrast, Macbeth’s decision to prioritise patriarchal duties over patriotic duties leaves him even more mentally and emotionally disturbed than before, and causes him to suffer emasculation after emasculation. Through this, Shakespeare subtly hints to Macduff’s supremacy over Macbeth as a man, and therefore advocates for a model of masculinity which calls for unconditional obedience to the rightful ruler even in the face of difficulty, as this is depicted as what ultimately brings a man the greatest amount of inner peace.

In the final scene of the play, Macbeth’s and Macduff’s distinct models of masculinity clash with each other. Macbeth begins by questioning, ‘Why should I play the Roman fool and die / On mine own sword?’ This is an allusion to the tropes of Roman tragedies and how Macbeth’s tragedy subverts them. For example, in the tale of Ajax the Greater as per the Iliad, Ajax’s defeat by Odysseus drives his tragic downfall, as Ajax commits honour suicide afterwards. This contrasts Macbeth’s tragedy, in which his various successes at killing others drives his moral and masculine downfall. On one hand, the use of such a mocking, rhetorical question and the pejorative ‘fool’ could imply that Macbeth is utterly bereft of honour at this point in the play. Conversely, this could also foreshadow Macbeth’s means of redemption; rather than regaining his honour through killing himself like in Roman tragedies, he must instead engage in physical combat again, just as he did at the beginning of the play. Macbeth then goes on to say that ‘[his] soul is too much charg’d / With blood of [Macbeth’s kin] already’. The use of the noun ‘soul’ especially significant, as according to Christian theology the soul is immortal – therefore, the fact that Macbeth’s murder of Macduff’s family has left such a permanent taint either implies that Macbeth has never bothered to repent for his sin, or that his sin was so grave that it cannot be forgiven. Either way, this shows that Macbeth’s ambition has caused him to descend into moral depravity, and could be seen as a fulfilment of Macbeth’s prediction that ‘Who dares do more is none.’; his prioritisation of self-interested action has dehumanised him and reduced him to an amoral, animalistic person with nought but a thirst for ‘blood’. Ironically, his tone could be considered to be counterintuitive to his new masculine model, as he baselessly taunts Macduff rather than opting to ‘ne’er [shake] hands, nor [bid] farewell to him’ as he did with MacDonald, which could suggest that his masculinity has degenerated to the extent that he is too weak to engage in combat, and must therefore rely

on cheap provocation. This is juxtaposed by Macduff’s succinct reply: ‘I have no words; / My voice is in my sword’, showing that Macduff’s obedience to the rightful heir, Malcolm (in particular, following said heir’s order to ‘give sorrow words’) have empowered him and allowed him to overcome Macbeth’s exploitation of his grief and challenge him to battle in ideal hypermasculine fashion while still keeping his cool. Additionally, upon hearing about Macbeth’s ‘charmed life’, Macduff commands the former to ‘let the angel whom thou still hast serv’d / Tell thee, Macduff was from his mother’s womb untimely ripp’d’. The noun ‘angel’ and definite article ‘the’ form another allusion to Lucifer, the fallen angel, implying that Macbeth is totally subservient to the Devil at this point. This therefore poises Macduff as a hero in God’s service who stands against an agent of the devil, and bears intriguing parallels to Iraneus’s recapitulation theory – the concept that “the Son’s [Jesus’s] effective counter to Adam’s disobedience is to remain in a condition of receptivity throughout his entire life, to wait on God where Adam did not.” (as described by Anglican Theological Review). Similarly, Macduff never loses faith in Malcolm (considered to be ‘God’s lieutenant’) even after being struck by tragedy, whereas like Adam, Macbeth betrays King Duncan and falls to temptation. As a result, Macduff’s exertion of masculine superiority is portrayed as integral to ‘wiping’ Macbeth’s transgressions off of the earth. Following this plot twist, Macbeth admits that ‘it hath cow’d [his] better part of man’. This is clearly presented to be a moment of epiphany, as it contrasts most of his previous interactions; whereas he desperately tried to defend his masculinity in scenes prior, here he bluntly admits that he has been emasculated. However, this could be seen as a continuation of his previous passive, feminine attitudes, as the verb ‘cow’d’ has connotations of submissiveness. This cowardice is reinforced when Macbeth declares, ‘I’ll not fight with thee.’ The modal certainty of the (contracted) verb ‘will’, in combination with the negation ‘not’ lies in drastic contrast to his initial presentation, in which

the identity of the valiant war hero is inextricably linked with him. This would also underscore the extent of his feminisation to audiences, as surrender in warfare was and is still seen as a massive disgrace; in fact, even in the present day, in the UK armed forces, deserters can receive life imprisonment for being absent without leave to avoid active service. Macduff responds by instructing, ‘yield thee coward’; the use of the imperative verb ‘yield’ highlights Macduff’s masculine dominance over Macbeth, and the pejorative ‘coward’ parallels the same word’s use by Lady Macbeth in order to emasculate her husband. He also asks Macbeth to ‘be the show and gaze o’th’time’, which is a reference to freak shows, which were rising in popularity in 17th century Jacobean Britain. This reference therefore dehumanises Macbeth and provokes him to action – this provocation is successful, as Macbeth quickly decides that he ‘will not yield’. This could be perceived in two ways; firstly, it could be seen as Macbeth’s redemption, as he finally resolves to fight and die honourably. The second way is that this is yet another manifestation of his insecurity, as he just as easily uses the modally-certain verb ‘will’ to declare his intention to not fight just a few lines before, which implies that, as with Lady Macbeth, cheap emasculation was enough to stir him. His final sentence begins with the command ‘Lay on, Macduff’; the fact that Macduff actually listens to the imperative verb ‘lay’ could demonstrate that Macbeth has restored his honour at least enough that Shakespeare considers him worthy to give commands. Nevertheless, according to the stage directions, ‘Macbeth is slain’, which comprehensively proves the victory of Macduff’s masculine model over Macbeth’s: the model of masculinity which places allegiance to the king at its forefront eventually claims victory over a purely self-centred model which only values action.

To conclude, Shakespeare depicts two different models of masculinity within his play: one which prioritises allegiance to the king over all else, and another which prioritises ambition-

fuelled action above all else. At the beginning of the play, both the eponymous protagonist Macbeth and Macduff conform to the former archetype; however, Macbeth is gradually swayed to the latter throughout the play throughout the corrupting influence of his wife. Shakespeare clearly portrays Macbeth’s model of masculinity in a negative light, as it ironically leads him to present more traditionally-feminine qualities of submissiveness and emotional instability, whereas Macduff is able to retain his bravery and emotional control due to his kingly obedience. This contrast seems to prove that Shakespeare, like many others of his time, embraced rigid constructions of masculinity and femininity with certain qualities associated with each sex. Shakespeare’s equation of allegiance to the king with enhanced masculinity is highly outdated in the present day, especially because England’s kings and queens are constitutional monarchs – that is to say, their political power is now incredibly limited compared to their power in the 11th and 17th century. Moreover, political dissidents such as Olaudah Equiano are now hailed as examples of masculine men despite rebelling against the status quo. Even the rigid constructions of masculinity within the play would be frowned upon in the 21st century by many, as the spread of egalitarian principles in contemporary society has led some to believe that men and women are functionally the same and are therefore able to embrace roles that used to be restricted to one sex. Regardless, Shakespeare’s use for Macbeth and Macduff in order to express his views on masculinity is clear: Macbeth acts as a warning to Jacobean males who dare commit treason through his feminisation in the play, while Macduff acts as a foil to Macbeth, showing the benefits of obeying the king to Jacobean audiences. If Malcolm were to kill Macbeth, then this would simply cement the king’s superiority over the rest of society; however, Macduff’s existence is used to showcase how the average Jacobean male can benefit in their own character and own masculinity by

accepting this hierarchy, and portrays acknowledgement of the Divine Right of Kings as an intrinsic part of ideal Jacobean masculinity.

ALFIE LONG, MVI Alfie Long wrote this algorithm because of his love of programming and its ‘time complexity.’

#ainclude <stdio.h> #include <iostream> #include <cmath> int binary_search(int* arr, int target) { int start = 0;

// apparently the number of sizeof() here is the same as the last index int end = sizeof(arr); while (start <= end) { int midpoint = floor((start + end) / 2); if (arr[midpoint] == target) { return midpoint; } else if (arr[midpoint] > target) { end = midpoint - 1; } else {

start = midpoint + 1; } } return -1; }

int main() {

// indices: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 int nums[] = {1, 4, 5, 6, 10, 13, 21, 24, 30}; std::cout << binary_search(nums, 5) << "\n"; std::cout << binary_search(nums, 21) << "\n"; std::cout << binary_search(nums, 30) << "\n"; std::cout << binary_search(nums, 1) << "\n";

std::cout << binary_search(nums, 10000) << "\n";

return 0; }

NANAKI SETHI, IIIRD FORM Inspired by her reading in the gothic genre, Nanaki, created this story relaying to the reader the final moments of a father on the verge of death to his young daughter. Then after the father is taken by darkness the readers get to see the father's reaction to time passing him by, as he is trapped in the location of his death unable to talk or to interact, only watch.

THE LAST LETTER

The night had wrapped the manor in its ebony shroud, and the wind whispered secrets through the gnarled branches, casting eerie shadows on the ancient walls. I stood alone in the dimly lit chamber, the quill poised above the parchment.

The air hung heavy with a foreboding feel, as if the very walls held their breath, awaiting the words that would etch my fate. The candle's flickering flame danced like a phantom, casting long, skeletal fingers across the room. The silence was only broken by the distant cries of unseen creatures, their mournful wails haunting the night.

With trembling hands, I began to write, each stroke of the quill a deliberate echo in the stillness. The ink flowed like dark blood, forming words that seemed to rise from the depths of my soul. The paper itself seemed to shiver beneath my touch.

"My Dearest Eleanor," the ink whispered, “My time has run up, and darkness creeps closer. The house groans with memories, both sweet and bitter, like the fading echoes of a longforgotten melody."

A chill ran down my spine, the air growing colder with every passing moment. The room seemed to exhale, as though exhaling its own weary moan. Outside, the wind howled, a mournful symphony that emphasised the weight of my words.

"Like the ivy that clings to these ancient walls," I wrote, "our love has weathered storms and trials, growing stronger with each passing year. But

now, as the shadows lengthen and the final embers of hope flicker, I fear it may not be enough."

The quill trembled in my hand, its feathers whispering secrets of their own. The ink pooled, forming letters that seemed to writhe and dance on the page. The words themselves took on a life of their own, a spectral presence that hung heavy in the air.

"I implore you, my love, to remember the laughter that once echoed through these halls. Hold fast to the memory of our stolen moments, for they are the light that guides me through this darkest hour."

As the final words flowed from my quill, the room seemed to sigh, a mournful exhalation that echoed my own weary heart. I folded the letter, sealing it with a drop of wax, and placed it onto the table, for my darling Eleanor to see.

With a heavy heart, I turned away from the ink-stained parchment, knowing that it held not just my words, but my final plea to a love that time had betrayed. The manor seemed to exhale once more, as though releasing a long-held secret into the night.

As I stepped into the shadows, I knew that this letter was my last.

In that moment, the darkness claimed me, and my spirit became one with the ancient manor, forever entwined with its secrets and shadows. The sealed letter now cradled in Eleanor's trembling hands contained a message she would cherish for a lifetime. And in Eleanor's tear-

stained eyes, she realised that the note she held in her hands was the final, bittersweet words of a father to his precious child.

As I crossed the pathway to death, a strange sensation washed over me. It was as if I were weightless. I turned to look back at the manor, but the sight that met my eyes was not familiar. Instead, the walls seemed to shimmer and fade, like mist.

A realisation struck me with a force that took my breath away—I had become a ghost, a fraction of the man I once was, bound to this place by the strength of my love and the weight of my final words. I watched in awe and sorrow as the world around me shifted and changed.

In the days that followed, I wandered the halls of the manor, a ghostly observer of the life I had left behind. I watched Eleanor, my dearest child, as she read my letter, her fingers tracing the familiar handwriting, her eyes brimming with tears.

As the years passed, I watched over Eleanor, a silent guardian of her journey through life. She faced her trials with a courage that mirrored the strength of her mother, and I marvelled at the woman she had become. The manor, once a place of fading memories, now lively and a joyous place. I became a part of the manor, a ghostly presence intertwined with the very essence of the place I had once called home.

And so, I watched, a phantom in the shadows, as the world outside changed, as seasons shifted and generations passed. In the quiet moments, when the world held its breath, I whispered my love to Eleanor, a silent promise that I would always be with her, a ghostly presence, a guardian of her heart.

As the years rolled on, the manor's ivy grew thicker, entwining itself even deeper into the ancient stones. Time seemed to blur, the days merging into

one another, but my watch remained steadfast. The world beyond the manor continued its ceaseless march, but here, in these hallowed halls, time stood still.

Eleanor, once a child with tear-streaked cheeks, had blossomed into a woman of grace and strength. She brought life back to the manor, her laughter ringing through the very rafters that had witnessed our shared joys and sorrows. She married, and the manor echoed with the mirth of her own children, a new generation to inherit the legacy of our love.

Through it all, I watched, a phantom in the background, a guardian of moments both grand and ordinary. I saw the seasons paint the world outside in hues of gold and crimson, felt the winter's chill seep into the very bones of the manor. The moon swelled and diminished, a constant companion in my ghostly wanderings.

Sometimes, in the quiet of the night, Eleanor would pause, as if sensing my presence. A soft smile would grace her lips, a hint of a feeling that I was near. In those moments, I felt a connection that transcended the boundaries of life and death, a bond unwavering.

The manor itself seemed to respond to Eleanor's touch, its timeworn structure gaining a renewed life. The gardens flourished under her care, vibrant blooms mingling with the ivy that clung to the walls. The echoes of our past became intertwined with the joys of the present, creating a tapestry of memories that stretched across generations.

As the years stretched into decades, I became a part of the tapestry, a thread woven into the very fabric of the manor's existence. I watched Eleanor's children grow, their laughter echoing down the halls, their footsteps a sign of the pulse of life.

And so, as the world outside continued its relentless march forward, the manor remained a sanctuary of stillness, a haven where the past and present coexisted in harmony. Through it all, I remained a silent watcher, a guardian of love's enduring legacy, bound to the place and the people that had captured my heart so long ago.

AARAV VEER SINGH BAXI, IIIRD FORM Step into the heart of nostalgia with Aarav’s poem, ‘The Kitchen When I Was a Boy’ — a vivid tapestry woven with memories. Through the lens of innocence, Baxi paints a vibrant portrait of childhood recollections each phrase capturing the essence of a bygone era. THE KITCHEN WHEN I WAS A BOY. Ketchup stains on the walls, Orange juice spilt on the floors, In the kitchen when I was a boy. My brother Zach with all his toys, Being thrown around and in the drawers, In the kitchen when I was a boy. Fried eggs and sizzling bacon, The smells I remember when I had awakened, In the kitchen when I was a boy. The rack of knives up on the shelves, That we weren’t allowed to touch ourselves, In the kitchen when I was a boy. Greasy plates and half-finished drinks, Beginning to pile up in the sink, In the kitchen when I was a boy. One Christmas, I remember it well, Mum made Christmas Pudding, oh what a smell! Dad made Turkey, so juicy and plump, But after dinner, he was so full, he slumped! In the kitchen when I was a boy. These are the memories I had as a boy, From Christmas Dinner to playing with toys, I had fun when I was a kid, And I will never forget the things that I did, In the kitchen when I was a boy.

RHYS SATHYAN, LVI This is a small extract from a larger project that Rhys produced during a Cambridge summer Mathematics course, using a programming language called LaTeX. Rhys explores how certain sets of items can be classed as Groups if they follow specific rules or axioms when paired with a binary operator (either addition or multiplication). He then goes on to prove two of these groups using mathematical reasoning. This demonstrates a more abstract side of mathematics quite different to what is learnt in school and has all sorts of applications such as molecular symmetry in chemistry, to even music theory and geometrical art.

THOMAS SCOTHERN, MVITH Thomas intends to study International Relations and Politics at university. Included in this term’s edition is a reduced version of his EPQ essay on the decline of democracy. We include only the sections where Thomas looked into the primary cause and areas of overlap in answer to his question. A full list of works consulted and references are available on request. The Decline of US Democracy Since Obama's Victory in 2008 until the storming of the US Capitol on January 6th, 2021: Is Right-Wing Populism a Symptom or a Cause?

From Washington to Obama, the United States has maintained a free and fair electoral system paired with a peaceful transfer of power. However, with President Trump's denial of the 2020 election outcome and the unprecedented storming of the US capitol on the 6th of January 2021, a new light has been shone on the supposed decline of US democracy. This observed decline in US democracy is visible in V-Dem Institute’s 2022 Democracy report, with US democracy rated on a 0-1 scale declining from 0.91 under Obama to 0.60 under Trump1. However, V-Dem’s 2017 report notes that “declines start[ed] gradually in 2012” with “a more robust drop in 2016”2. Therefore, it is evident that the US is experiencing democratic backsliding that started during the Obama administration but accelerated under the Trump administration. My project will compose of four factors contributing to the US’s democratic backsliding: the rise of populational and partisan polarisation, the decline of public trust in the government, the rise of wealth and income inequality, and the rise of right-wing populism. Keenly aware of other factors impacting democratic backsliding, such as gerrymandering and the rise of ‘Big Money’, the limitations of this project confine me to focus on a limited array of factors. The Economists Democracy Index places five main criteria when judging the strength of democracy: electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, functioning of government, political participation, and political culture3. However, I will be focusing primarily on the decline of the democratic system itself, rather than the decline of liberal democracy,

and will thus discard civil liberties and focus on the other four components in my analysis. Thus, this project will centre around how these four factors have contributed to the decline of US democracy from Obama’s victory in 2008 until the storming of the US capitol on the 6 th of January 2021, and whether right-wing populism was a symptom or a cause of this decline, as measured by the components of the Economist’s Democracy Index.

Defining Polarisation

Polarisation is defined by political scientist James E. Campbell as “the condition of substantial and intense conflict over political perspectives arrayed along a single dimension – generally along ideological lines”4. There are two distinct but intimately interwoven forms of polarisation: populational and partisan5. Populational polarisation concerns the divisions within the public, whilst partisan polarisation concerns the divisions between the political parties, namely Democratic and Republican, in the legislature. Concerning populational polarisation, there has been a sustained, elevated level of polarisation going into the Obama era6, which only worsened under Trump’s premiership7. This emphasises the elongated

nature of the US’s populational polarisation; thus, is not a recent phenomenon. There is ample data on the increasing divisions within the public sphere. There has been a rise of mutual mistrust amongst the two major parties, with 43% of Republicans and 38% of Democrats having “very unfavourable” views of the other side in 2014, up from 17% and 16% respectively in 19948. This deep-rooted, visceral mistrust of the other side of the aisle breaks down civil political discourse between the electorate, further entrenching populational polarisation. The complete breakdown of respect for the opposing party reduces the chance for reasoned debate and resolution, widens rifts, and encourages political silos. This may just further worsen existing populational polarisation. In addition, the overlap between the median Republican voter and Democratic voter from 1994 and 2014 virtually disappeared. In 2014, the median Democrat was more liberal than 92% of Republicans, up from 64% in 1994, and the median Republican is more conservative than 94% of Democrats, up from 70% in 19949. This highlights a continuous, large-scale shift away from ideological overlap in the electorates of both parties to a much more clear-cut, consistent ideological split between the two major parties. This manifests itself in reduced consensus around key issues and an increasing disconnect in the core values and beliefs of Democrats and Republicans. Populational polarisation has evidently worsened in the United States, with “the public becoming more polarised and less centrist over time”10. However, the trend in increased populational polarisation did not accelerate under the Obama premiership 11 but may have under Trump’s presidency12. Partisan polarisation has also undergone a similar worsening in the United States. DW-NOMINATE is the most widely used metric on congressional polarisation, using representatives’ voting histories to measure against a left-leaning/rightleaning scale. C., Farina at Colombia Law Review then aggregated this data to compare the ideological distance in voting patterns between Republican and Democratic legislators. The

resulting patterns are definitive and stark, with partisan polarisation from the 1980s until 2013 doubling from 0.5 to 1 in the Senate and 0.5 to 1.1 in the House13. There is also a notable acceleration in the data set from when Obama assumed office in 2008 14 suggesting partisan polarisation worsened under his premiership. There is yet to be any definitive data concerning congressional polarisation during Trump’s term in office, yet it is safe to assume, due to that Trump’s lack of bipartisan support in Congress15 and false allegations of a fraudulent 2020 election result, that it is still deeply polarised. There was an evident rise in populational and partisan polarisation entering the Obama years. However, the worsening trends in populational polarisation did not accelerate under Obama but did so under Trump. Congressional polarisation, on the other hand, accelerated under Obama’s tenure and remains inconclusive under Trump’s premiership.

The Impact of Polarisation on Democracy A clear, persistent rise in populational and partisan polarisation has been established preceding and then intensifying under Obama and then Trump. Partisan polarisation can lead to a fractioning of society16, breaking down cross-party dialogue and breeding increased mistrust17. Increased mistrust leads to a decline in the political culture of Congress, creating a dysfunctional legislature that reduces the functionality of the government 18. This can be evidenced by the government shutdowns under Obama in 2014 and under Trump in 2018, leading to delays in law enforcement and public safety, as well as Veteran services and healthcare19. Therefore, a rise in partisan polarisation intensifies the ineffectiveness of the legislature, worsening the functionality of government, and thus contributing to a decline in US democracy. Professor of Political Science J., McCoy studied examples of countries with “pernicious levels of polarisation”20 and compared their democratic outcomes with their

levels of polarisation. Half of the countries studied with elevated polarisation levels had their democratic rating downgraded, and only 16 countries were able to substantially reduced levels of polarisation21. Therefore, on a global scale, political polarisation generally worsens democratic outcomes, with Axelrod’s findings22 matching McCoy’s, and escaping escalating levels of polarisation is time-consuming and strenuous. The United States is of particular concern for McCoy, “quite alone” in the data set with “none of the other wealthy, consolidated democracies… [having] faced similar levels of polarisation for such an extended period”23. Thus, the United States’ democracy is under particular strain from the extent and length of its political polarisation, degrading the political culture and the functionality of the government. Populational and partisan polarisation develop heightened divisions and isolationism amongst the electorate, developing what political researcher F., Milacic names an “us versus them” mantra24. This stifles debate and bipartisanship as the other side of the aisle becomes increasingly demonised and even dehumanised. Political polorisation can evolve into tribalism and hyper-partisanship, transforming US democracy from a “democracy of citizens” to a “democracy of fans”25. This means that a once malleable and persuadable electorate becomes increasingly fixed on one party and develops a loyal fanbase. Right-wing populists can then play into this fanbase to attempt to overturn legitimate, democratic outcomes by playing into contempt for the other side of the aisle. Concluding Polarisation Overall, partisan and populational polarisation has worsened in the United States in the runup to Obama’s tenure, and into his and Trump’s presidencies. Partisan polarisation accelerated under Obama, is unclear under Trump, whilst populational polarisation worsened but did not accelerate under Obama but accelerated under Trump. Political polarisation is an apparent cause of the US’ democratic decline, limiting the functionality of the government

and worsening the political culture. Right-wing populists can and do play into heightened levels of polarisation to subvert democratic outcomes, further worsening the decline of US democracy.

Defining Wealth and Income Inequality

Economic inequality comes in two separate, but co-linked, forms: income inequality and wealth inequality. Income inequality concerns how inequitably income is dispersed throughout the population, whereas wealth inequality concerns how inequitably wealth is dispersed throughout the population. According to the OCED, economic inequality is “bad and getting worse”26 and Obama has called it the “defining challenge of our time” 27. Therefore, you would expect elevated levels of economic inequality over a prolonged period, which is what the empirical data suggests. J. Erickson, Associate Professor of Political Science at Boston College, highlights a phenomenon known as the “Middle-Class Squeeze” where the middle class’s “share of national income has fallen” and their “wages are stagnant” 28. Beginning in 1973, there has been a decoupling of the relation between workers’ salaries and the value

they produce for their employers, known as productivity. Therefore, as “compensation… [grew] about one-third as quickly as before [1973]”29 the increased productivity translated into higher profits for firms, and employees got minimal compensation. Thus far, Erickson has established a case that income for the middle class has stagnated as productivity and worker salaries are no longer correlated. Additionally, the middle class’s share of overall income declined from 62% in 1970 to 43% by 2014, while the upper-income household’s share increased from 29% to 49% in the same period30. Moreover, from 2010-2014 the top 1% of households within the United States have accumulated 95% of all newly generated income 31. Thus, a two-fold issue has emerged worsening income inequality in the United States: the middle class’s nominal income has stagnated, whilst their aggregate share of income has also declined. Therefore, income inequality has considerably worsened in the United States since 1973. During the Obama era, these underlying trends continued with the top quintile enjoying 50% higher wage growth than the bottom quartile, at 3% and 2% per annum from 2011-2018 respectively32. Under the Trump administration, the share of aggregate income held by the bottom 20% gained ground from 2018-2019, increasing by 1.8%33. However, these gains were quickly erased by the onset of Covid-19, declining 3.1% from 2019-202034. Therefore, regardless of party affiliation, income inequality has worsened under both Obama and Trump. Concerning wealth inequality, the concentration is even more stark than income inequality. In 2016, the top quartile held 60% of the income, but over 90% of the aggregate wealth, whilst the bottom two quartiles possessed 10% of the income but a negligible share of the aggregate wealth35. The share of wealth held by the wealthiest has also been concentrated over time, from 1989-2016 the top 1%’s wealth share increased from 30% to 37%, whilst the bottom 90%’s share declined from 34% to 23%36. Therefore, wealth inequality has worsened, including under the Obama administration, to historic highs that increasingly mean that the

wealthiest possess most of society's resources. This economically elite sect is also majority white, college-educated, and old (where being old is defined as 65-75-year-old respondents in the survey)37 meaning that a comparatively small section of society that is misrepresentative of the wider populous enjoys most of society’s resources at their disposal. Overall, wealth and income inequality have consistently worsened over the tenure of both Republicans and Democrats. A proportionality small section of society possesses a highly disproportionate share of its resources that is also majority white, college-educated, and old.

The Impact of Wealth and Income Inequality on Democracy Wealth inequality and income inequality have both worsened substantially within the United States since 1972. Therefore, as the Unites State’s democratic outcomes have declined in conjunction with the worsening of economic inequality38, it is imperative to explore the connection or lack thereof between the former and the latter. Professor of Political Science at Yale University K., Scheve establishes that there is “no automatic link between democracy and wealth inequality”39. Scheve’s analysis provides great value in the disassembling of the link between the establishment of democracy and levels of wealth inequality, however, does not delve into wealth inequality and democratic decline through a US-specific lens. Therefore, it is essential to look at the work of other political scientists to quantify a more concrete connection. Political Scientist A., Bonica at Stanford University alludes to the concept of democratic capture, where the increased concentration of wealth increases resources available to the wealthy to “influence electoral, legislative and regulatory processes” 40. Winters and Page attempt to quantify this gap in political influence between income quartiles in their “individual power index”. Winters and Page found that those in the top 0.01% of incomes possess 883 times as much “individual power” as those in the bottom 90% of

incomes41. Therefore, via avenues such as campaign contributions and lobbying efforts, the economic elite in the United States possess much more influence on elected officials than much of the electorate. This contributes to a decline in democratic outcomes as it erodes the concept of pluralism, alters the functioning of government to cater to the economic elite, and worsens the political culture as a small sect of society possesses an outstripped influence compared with most of the electorate. If this thesis of democratic capture were to be substantiated, then the voting patterns of legislatures would align most closely with this economic elite, which is precisely what L., Bartels establishes in “Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age”42. Overall, Scheve establishes on an international lens that the concentration of wealth and income does not correlate to the creation of democracy. However, worsening wealth and income inequality within the United States that preceded and continued from Obama’s victory in 2008 until the storming of the capitol under Trump increased the availability of resources at the disposal of the economic elite. Therefore, allowing for the intensification of lobbying and campaign contributions that made the interests of a select few disproportionally represented by elected officials.

Concluding Wealth and Income Inequality In summary, a disproportionate share of the United States, which is overrepresented by older, white, college-educated demographics, increasingly holds much of the wealth and income. Their share of the aggregate wealth and income has increased since the 70s, regardless of whether Democratic or Republican nominees hold the presidency. Scheve dismantles the automatic link between an incline in wealth inequality and a decline in democratic outcomes. However, democratic capture, as defined by Bonica, can worsen democratic outcomes as the

electoral process is dominated by the lobbying and political donations of the elite. Additionally, the functioning of the government is distorted as Bartels establishes that the voting patterns of electoral representatives most closely align with the interests of the wealthiest sect of society.

Defining Public Trust

Public trust in governments is, as defined by the OECD, “an indicator to measure how people perceive the quality of… government institutions”43. It is an essential driver of effective governance via citizens’ willingness to cooperate and participate in the democratic process. Within the United States, public trust in government is in deep decline, with 75% of adults believing trust in the federal government is declining at the time of polling in 201844, highlighting a near-universal belief in the abandonment of faith in the United States government. Additionally, those who have been historically marginalised, including Black and Hispanic minority groups, the poor, and those with a high school diploma or less, have less faith in the government45. Therefore, democracy which is meant to be inclusive, pluralistic,

and tolerant has the least confidence from those who are historically disenfranchised. Public trust in the United States government has long been in decline, falling from a record high of 77% under the Johnson administration in the 60s to a near-record low of 25% at the end of George W. Bush’s tenure46. Under Obama’s premiership, public trust fell to an all-time low of 15% in 2011, a level sustained by the Trump administration 47. Therefore, there has been a dramatic and sustained decline in the public trust in the government well predating and only worsened by Obama’s and Trump’s tenures. Additionally, there has been a sustained divergence of public trust in the government between Democratic and Republican voters, which each party placing higher faith in presidencies of their own stripes48. Therefore, intensifying existing populational and partisan polarisation as partisan overlap diminishes. Political scientist B., Morgan at the University of Chicago points to right-wing populism, namely Trump, leading an “intentional and well-orchestrated attempt”49 to develop a deeprooted lack of trust in the government, as populists generally thrive in a time of low confidence in governments. Therefore, right-wing populists have the incentive to develop distrust in the electorate towards the government to galvanise their support base. This creates a self-conflicting conundrum where depreciated levels of public trust increase their electoral chances but make governing much less effective once they hold public office.

The Consequences of a Decline in Public Trust on Democracy Since Obama’s victory in 2008 until the January 6th riot in 2021, the decline in public trust in US democracy has been at or near historic lows. This correlates to the same period when democratic outcomes in the United States have also reached historic lows 50. Therefore, a potential overlap but not a definite correlation. Devine at the LSE conducts a broad metaanalysis of public trust in politics and a variety of outcomes, suggesting a weak but positive

correlation between public trust and voter turnout 51. Therefore, the inverse correlation can be established that a decline in trust leads to a decline in voter turnout. Therefore, as political participation is a constituting factor in democratic outcomes, a decline in public trust, at least in this narrow incidence, leads to a decline in democratic outcomes. Devine also establishes a stronger correlation that the lower the public trust the more conservative voter’s preferences over environmental, immigration, and spending policy becomes52. Therefore, increasing the odds of voting for Republican candidates and reducing the tendency to vote for Democratic candidates. Pair this with the observation that voters are more likely to vote for challenger parties the lower their trust53, and it is reasonable to conclude that a Republican, challenger candidate such as Trump, and thus right-wing Populism, gains more support as public trust declines. Therefore, as right-wing Populist candidates such as Trump tend to worsen the political culture, electoral process, and functionality of government by denying the legitimacy of a free and fair democratic election54 it is reasonable to conclude that a decline in public trust leads to a decline in democratic outcomes. Pinner also establishes a link between a decline in public trust and a rise in right-wing populism, with a decline in trust leading to “greater support for anti-establishment and populist parties”55. Although this report centres around the UK’s democratic deficit and not the United States’, it still provides a useful hypothesis. Pinner also highlights a negative feedback loop between polarisation and trust, which are “intrinsically linked”56. Therefore, reinforcing the decline of political culture and functionality of government that polarisation induces. Therefore, a decline in public trust reduces democratic outcomes in a series of ways. It reduces political participation, encourages the development of right-wing populists, as well as exacerbating existing challenges induced by polarisation. Concluding Public Trust

Overall, the continuous and sustained drop in public trust in the United States primarily predated Obama’s victory in 2008. However, it did reach historic lows under Obama’s tenure that were sustained by the Trump administration. These historic lows, as evidenced by Devine, have had a marked impact on political participation in the US democratic process. Additionally, as also supported by Pinner, Divine establishes that a decline in trust leads to a rise in support for right-wing populists, which can worsen the political culture and functioning of the government. Paired with the fact that Pinner evidences an intrinsic link between trust and polarisation, therefore meaning that the worsening of democratic outcomes associated with polarisation occurs in conjunction with those associated with a decline in trust, a decline in trust has led to a decline in democratic outcomes within the United States.

Defining Right-Wing Populism

Right-wing populism is challenging to define, with no widely agreed-upon definition. However, it is defined by the European Centre for Populism Studies as a combination of the

traditional populist mantra, “opposition to the perceived ‘establishment’ and speaking to the ‘common people’”, combined with elements of “xenophobic, nationalistic traits, a tendency towards authoritarianism, aggressive leadership, and an anti-elitist message”57. The United States' two-party system dominated by the Republicans and Democrats makes any rise in right-wing populism hard to quantify. In Europe, the greater variety of countries paired with a much wider variety of parties in comparison to the United States makes a rise in right-wing populism easier to quantify. Halikiopoulou found a negligible share of Europe’s votes going to right-wing populist parties in the 70’s, gradually inclining, before reaching an 18% share by the 2010s58. Due to their cultural, economic, and political overlap, this data trend can at least partially be extrapolated to the United States if such a party was politically viable. However, both Campani and Greven both agree that the first-time that right-wing populist support translated on a truly national scale was Donald Trump in 2016. Campani notes that 2016 was the “only” time that a “populist leader… has won a presidential election”59 and Greven notes that “as Donald Trump secures the Republican nomination for president, right-wing populism has taken hold in the United States”60. Populist mantras have been used for decades within the United States, however, for example, Nixon’s Southern Strategy to employ the racism of Southern whites to win votes in the 60’s. Therefore, the rise of right-wing populism in the United States is a comparatively recent occurrence, only gaining national support with the election of Donald Trump in 2016.

The Impact of Right-Wing Populism on Democracy As emphasised above, defining right-wing populism is a challenging task. Therefore, identifying specific individuals who are right-wing populists is even more challenging. However, both Campani and Greven use the rise of right-wing populism and the rise of Trump

interchangeably. Therefore, the impact that right-wing populists have had on US democracy is, in effect, the impact that Donald Trump has had on democratic outcomes. Populism, and by extension right-wing populism, has no automatic negative impact on democratic outcomes. Liddiar notes that the focus on the “people” rather than the “elites” “offers a potential for a more representative democracy”61 that caters not for the moneyed elite but the everyman. However, within the United States, the rise of right-wing Populism did not coincide with a wave of representative, democratic renewal. Regarding the long-term functionality of government, the rise of right-wing populism appears to have, so far, had minimal effect. Kamarch notes that the powers of Congress remained intact during Trump’s tenure, “at no point during the Trump years did Trump attempt to formally weaken congressional power”62. House Speaker Pelosi brought impeachment charges against Trump on two separate occasions, and Congress retains its fiscal powers. Regarding the judiciary, Trump’s 62 lawsuits contesting the result of the 2020 election were, in all cases but one, rejected including by many of his own appointees63. Bibas, Trump’s own judicial appointee, rejected his lawsuit and took direct aim at Trump when he stated that “calling an election unfair does not make it so”64. In effect, despite efforts to do so, the rise in right-wing populism has had minimal impact on the functionality of the judicial and legislative branches, and thus minimal impact on democratic outcomes in this instance. An instance where a more measurable impact on democracy is on political culture. Trump consistently villainised and demonised certain sections of the media during his tenure, regularly tweeting attacks such as “The New York Times, NBC, ABC, CBS, and CNN are enemies of the American People” 65. This constant campaign to smear the media as fake has “caused large swathes of the public to lose trust in the mainstream media”66. This has had a twofold impact of disenfranchising Trump’s base with a large part of the US media, as well as isolating those who consume the “fake

news” from Trump’s base. Therefore, it worsens public trust, as evidenced by Hetherington 67, as well as damaging democratic outcomes directly by worsening the political culture. This decline in public trust, as established by Devine at the LSE, worsens rates of political participation68. The most televised and evident impact of right-wing populism and Trump is the impact on the electoral process. A foundational element of a democracy is a free and fair election, as established by the Economist’s Intelligence Unit69, and according to Sides in ‘The Bitter End’70, Trump tried to illegitimately overturn the result of the 2020 race with no demonstrable evidence71. Therefore, preventing the peaceful transfer of power between administrations as Trump tried to cling onto the Oval Office72. This has a substantial, negative impact on the electoral process and, therefore, decreases democratic outcomes.

Concluding Right-Wing Populism The rise of right-wing populism is hard to quantify due to the two-party nature of the United States’ democracy. Campani and Greven both link the rise of Trump and the rise of right-wing populism explicitly. Therefore, Trump’s impact on US democracy is, in effect, right-wing populism’s impact on democracy. Right-wing populism seems to have had minimal impact of the functionality of the legislative and judicial branches. However, Trump’s assault on the mainstream media, or “fake news”, and the attempted overturning of a legitimate election have both negatively impacted political culture and the electoral process respectively. Therefore, overall, right-wing populism has been a net-negative to the democratic outcomes of the United States.

Concluding Whether Right-Wing Populism is a Symptom or a Cause of the Decline in US Democracy From Obama’s victory in 2008 to the January 6th riots in 2021 there has been a sustained drop in democratic outcomes in the United States. Populational and partisan polarisation’s worsening negative impact on the functionality of government and political culture and the sustained decline in public trust’s negative impact on political participation and political culture have both decreased the democratic outcomes within the United States. Wealth inequality’s and income inequality’s impact on democratic outcomes appears less certain. Therefore, as the worsening of polarisation and trust occurred before the rise of right-wing populism, right-wing populism is at a minimum not a root cause of the democratic backsliding. Right-wing populists often play into a decline in public trust and a worsening of polarisation. Therefore, it appears to be a symptom of the decline in democratic outcomes. However, rightwing populism also acts as a cause by consolidating around a strongman candidate, such as Trump, who tends to worsen existing polarisation and public trust and worsen the overall state of democracy by ignoring legitimate electoral mandates and villainising the media. Therefore, a decline in democracy (arising from factors such as polarisation and trust) within the United States from 2008 led to the rise in right-wing populism, which then accelerated the decline further by 2021 via consolidating around a candidate who leans towards authoritarian tendencies.

Howard and Mitchell Essay Competition Prize Winners The Howard and Mitchell essay competition challenges Sixth Form students to submit an essay — based on independent research — regarding either a topic in the arts and humanities (for the Howard prize), or STEM (for the Mitchell prize). Our winner of this year’s Howard prize is Francesca Hallett who explored ‘To What Extent is the Pre-Existing Notion that the Neolithic Revolution was Beneficial, Correct?’. In her essay, Francesca explores the transition from prehistoric hunter-gatherer societies to the early farming communities that became the birthplace of modern civilisation. A full list of works consulted and references is available on request.

FRANCESCA HALLETT, MVI

To What Extent is the Pre-Existing Notion that the Neolithic Revolution was Beneficial, Correct?

Occurring in 10,000 BC, the Neolithic (or Agricultural) Revolution saw the transition of the prehistoric hunter-gatherer groups into the early farming societies which acted as the forefathers for civilisation. Traditionally, the scholarly view has stated that this shift was a metamorphosis – overseeing the development of a primal lifestyle into that of a sophisticated, orderly structure. Until recently, this concept has been globally accepted. Now, however, studies of surviving hunter-gatherer societies have kickstarted several debates1, exploring the causing factors of this process and even the duration of the so-called

‘Revolution’. This essay will focus on how beneficial the Agricultural Revolution actually was, considering the lost traditions of foraging tribes, the establishment of society, and the effect this change has had on animals, the environment and humanity as a whole.

The Neolithic Revolution (as coined by Australian archaeologist Gordon Childe in 19362), was the first of its kind, introducing the Neolithic period (10,000 – 2,200 BC) which succeeded the earlier Palaeolithic (3.3 million – 9,630 BC3) and Mesolithic (20,000 – 8,000 BC4) Stone Age phases5. Homo sapiens, pressured by competition for food and geological changes to the landscape6, decided to settle and cultivate land for farming – consequently discarding the forager lifestyle for a sedentary one. Areas of rich and fertile land, such as Mesopotamia, were the earliest affected – birthing prospering riparian civilisations such as Babylonia, Assyria, Sumer and Akkad.7 This Fertile Crescent8, situated favourably between the Tigris9 and Euphrates10, was an ideal location for the first irrigation and agricultural systems11 – allowing groups to domesticate cereal grains and sustain the appetites of large numbers of people for the first time in history. Though the majority of hunter-gatherer communities who practiced sedentism adopted agriculture, some groups – such as those evidenced in Ertebølle culture (5,300 – 3,950 BCE)12 – resisted this change. In contrary to the way the Neolithic Revolution has been portrayed as both a necessary and inevitable change, it’s interesting to note that

this particular culture preserved its Mesolithic lifestyle for 1,500 years after Europe’s transition to agriculture. This shift from hunter-gathering into localised farming, though inevitable, was not immediately adopted or viewed as beneficial.

The modern Western experience with social security and affluence has generated a widespread perspective that assumes any establishment of a social system was beneficial. Therefore, when the Agricultural Revolution saw the formation of an elite minority (kings, officials, merchants, and any others who profited from the grain surpluses generated by hardworking peasant farmers)42, the consequent emergent hierarchy has typically been presented as advantageous – which, arguably, it was. The creation of legal text, first introduced in 1755-1750 BC by Amorite king Hammurabi (of the Old Babylonian Empire13) exemplifies the beneficial nature of an established society. The creation of these casuistic laws - designed to “bespeak justice in the land”14 - provided the fundamental understanding of commercial, property, criminal and family law, with the contents being copied and referred to for over a millennium15. Thanks to this, the average farmer was able to enjoy rights that his ‘barbaric’ ancestors lacked, and hunter-gatherer remains unearthed in the Grosse Ofnet Cave (1908) support this theory: the skeletons exhibited marks of physical trauma, with the ‘infant’ remnants (contributing to 46% of those discovered) displaying “major damage”16 – presumably inflicted by slash wounds. Although this archaeological find supports the genocidal portrayal typically associated with the hunter-gatherers, such discoveries are scant and do not reflect the behaviour of all early homo sapiens. Indeed, evidence of genocidal

practices have been found to be more prevalent in Neolithic times. The discovery of 200 skeletal individuals (3,800 – 3,600 BC)17 at Tell Brak18 provide chilling evidence of mass murder. As populations expanded, conflicting ideas became more prominent, resulting in occasional acts of extreme violence. The Neolithic Revolution, therefore, wasn’t entirely beneficial as it can be held accountable for influencing humanity’s genocidal behaviour.

Alongside its influence in establishing a feudal system that accentuated economic differences between class groups, the Agricultural Revolution saw the rising demand for produce. Excess grain – taxed from the working populations – became the initial standardised currency for early civilisations. This, however, was later discarded for other monetary forms which could be stored and handled more easily such as beads, cattle, salt (Roman Empire)19, tea bricks (Chinese Song Dynasty)20, and shells (14th century west Africa.)21 Additionally, The Revolution’s formation of currency enabled efficient valuing of commodities and the inauguration of capitalist systems, focused on obtaining profit. This proved to be beneficial as surrounding kingdoms connected via trade, allowing civilisation to flourish through the widespread exchange of goods, produce and knowledge46 – creating potential for the modern capitalist societies prevalent in The Western World today. However, the introduction of such a system greatly reduced the average person’s social and financial security. Before The Revolution, a hunter-gatherer could rely on the support of her small, close-knit tribe, knowing that she would be provided with food and shelter in exchange for her contribution to the

group. The average Neolithic farmer, however, is solely responsible for supplying his own necessities, - a pressure introduced by the Agricultural Revolution which would have been absent from the preceding hunter-gatherer lifestyle.42 Did humanity, therefore, trade a simpler life for a more complex and less beneficial one?

This query became prevalent in 1966 when American cultural anthropologist, Marshall Sahlins22, proposed The Original Affluent Society concept. A theory which argues that the lives of hunter-gatherers were somewhat enjoyable and secure – perhaps even more so than the lives of early farmers.23 This therefore opposes the aforementioned ‘metamorphosis’ conclusion (that edification is linear). Receiving much scholarly dispute, Sahlins’ work drew data from existing hunter-gatherer groups, specifically the !Kung people (Northern Namibia)24 and the Arnhem Landers (Australia)25, whom he used to challenge pre-existing notions that such communities lived in dire conditions. The !Kung people - and other surviving huntergatherer groups (such as the Hadza people of Tanzania26 or the indigenous Awá tribe of the Amazon27) – exercise primitive communism, meaning that the hunter-gatherer gift economy structure oversees the distribution of goods and resources which are then in collective ownership of the group28, effectively entitling all members to equal possessorship of necessities which Sahlins argued was beneficial. Critics, however, combatted this by highlighting that pre-Neolithic humans experienced remarkably high infant mortality rates, exposure to harsh climates, various diseases and perpetual warfare23 – though many of these

factors applied to Neolithic farmers too and, as previously stated, foraging intergroup conflict was scarce. The Revolution, therefore, did not prove remarkably beneficial for mankind.

Sahlins’ other point of argument – that the typical adult hunter-gatherer enjoyed far more leisure time than both the early farmer and modern Westerner (only undergoing a 3-5 hour “highly intermittent”23 workday on average) – is also dismissed by scholars. David Kaplan, American philosopher and author29 of The Darker Side of the Original Affluent Society, points out that Sahlins’ data (gathered by Richard Borshay Lee 30) only considered food gathering to be ‘work’. Other activities – such as food preparation and cooking – are not included in this statistic despite them being labour-intensive, which undermines the physically taxing huntergatherer lifestyle and consequently discounts the theory that the Neolithic Revolution was counter-progressive.31

When considering this argument, modern historians must question whether modern-day foraging groups (in “artificial circumstances”31) are entirely reflective of pre-Neolithic tribes. Though customs and traditions may overlap (whether they are ritual or social), both periods have witnessed differing environmental impacts and varying degrees of ‘outsider’ influence. Foraging groups today, for example, risk losing their long-standing cultural practices and conventions because of exposure to Western or more globally accustomed implementations. J. L. Kohen, when writing Aboriginal Environmental Impacts (1995), notes that many surviving hunter-gatherer groups he encountered relied on shop-bought comestibles (usually sugar and flour) and hunted using shotguns rather than the self-made tools utilised by ancient

communities.31 Therefore the concept that hunter-gatherers were happier just because modern foraging groups have more ‘leisure’ time can be disregarded.

The Neolithic Revolution is also held responsible for the emergence of gender inequality. Despite the physical dissimilarities between genders, the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods witnessed little cultural bias that either degraded or prioritised women within huntergatherer groups.32 Biological differences, however, were accentuated after the Agricultural Revolution as a sedentary lifestyle with a higher calorie intake enabled women to reproduce more often – providing extra aid in the fields and a rapid increase in population density.42 With women confined to the domestic sphere, farming became male-dominated, and this breadwinner role gave men an elevated status in society, coordinating symbiotically with the rising importance of income and economic status. So, though the origins of gender inequity remain largely elusive, residing in a multitude of other factors that vary throughout civilisations, it’s evident that the establishment of a rigid social structure – as implemented by the Agricultural Revolution - provided agency for a sexual bias, one with disadvantageous widespread influence that is still embedded in various modern societies today.

Ethnocentrically, it has been assumed that the Neolithic Revolution’s developments in agriculture proved immediately beneficial for homo sapiens, with many early farming techniques – such as the Ancient Egyptian utilisation of river-bed silt (gathered from The Nile) to aid crop growth (8,000 BC)33 – have proved so advantageous that they are still exploited today. Despite this, however, agriculture (in its early stages) did not yield immensely

satisfactory results immediately. Compared to the ambulant ways of the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic groups, early farmers were confined to their settlements, meaning that all crops, therefore, were subject to whatever weather patterns affected that particular area. Peasant farmers, suddenly finding their income (initially “bread, beer and butter oil”) 40 reliant on the success of their harvest, developed anxieties for the future.42 If, for example, a disease afflicted all crops and significantly reduced a farmer’s produce outcome, that farmer became susceptible to starvation and poverty. Hunter-gatherers, who migrated alongside their prey (buffalo, reindeer, bison etc)34, had no fear of the future – providing another reason why many historians approve of Sahlins’ Original Affluent Society theory and believe that The Revolution was indeed unfavourable.

Additionally, the Agricultural Revolution brought about the emanation of a new diet. Promising efficiency (somewhat misleadingly), settled societies prioritised the Neolithic founder crops (basic cereal grains and grasses such as barley, emmer, and einkorn35) which – despite generating grain surpluses – greatly reduced the varied diets and healthy calories consumed by early civilisations, consequently shrinking the average lifespan and supposedbeneficial nature of the Neolithic Revolution. Regardless, farmers managed to finesse selective breeding – propagating only the largest and most substantial produce for maximised food production. Though this process inevitably narrowed biodiversity and brought about the extinction of other, less desirable plant species, it was immensely effective in securing large quantities of the calories required, and remains a major agricultural technique implemented today. While this has proved to be beneficial for humanity, the reduced variety of plant life

combined with increased levels of deforestation (prompted by the construction of settlement buildings and farmland) drove numerous animal species into extinction. Traps and enclosures – such as the desert kites (funnelled walls that led to an enclosure) 36 of Dhuweila, Jordan – succeeded in capturing animals for domestication and farming purposes. This subjugation of animals to slaughterhouses not dissimilar to modern abattoirs and hatcheries, was accomplished in a manner that, arguably, isn’t ethically progressive, despite its useful efficiency for humanity.

Animal domestication, a significant component of the Neolithic Revolution, introduced an “important way of new life” for the early farmers; one that was not entirely desirable. Animal bones, such as the 9,000 – 8,500-year-old pig, goat, sheep and cow remains unearthed at Knossos (Crete),37 and early records of sheep and goat farming (Iraq and Anatolia, dating to 10,000 BC) have provided substantial evidence to suggest that the homo sapiens’ reliance on and valuing of livestock was immense. This would have been disastrous in the event of drought, disease or even ransack from neighbouring settlements, akin to human dependence on the limited early domesticated grains. Furthermore, the close proximity of farm animals to the early farmer mud huts and food supplies triggered the transmission of zoonotic viruses42 such as tuberculosis, smallpox and measles which left settlements rife with disease and increased mortality rates. The aforementioned advancements in selective harvesting - as seen in the initial breeding of young, male goats (“reared for their milk, meat and hides”37) – intensified these repercussions, resulting in an increased human exposure to brucellosis which is, globally, one of the most common zoonotic diseases to date.38 Overall, it’s evident

that – despite the general consensus that the Agricultural Revolution’s introduction of farming livestock was wholly beneficial – there were prevalent healthcare issues that arose alongside this pastoral advancement.

The Neolithic Revolution is also held accountable for the numerous physical changes undergone by mankind during the Neolithic period. Sparked by the discontinuation of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle, human bodies experienced a decrease in bone density which made homo sapiens more susceptible to osteoporosis-related issues (such as fractures or breakages)39 – an infliction that doesn’t affect mankind’s primate relatives as severely. Moreover, additional struggles arose when the early civilisations began grinding grain. Using stone querns (equipment utilised for hand-pressing various materials) daily proved to be “hard work”40, damaging the backs, knees and toes of women in ancient Syrian civilisations as evidenced through the skeletal remains discovered at the Tell Abu Hureyra41. Additionally, tilling fields resulted in “a plethora of ailments”, including “slipped discs, arthritis and hernias”42 - all of which arose because of the damaging transformation of foraging groups into a farming species.

Despite these negativities, however, the Neolithic period witnessed a boom in artistic creations – therefore suggesting that humanity was content enough and possessed the time, resources, and skillset to do so. This boom in materialistic production inspired the expansion of key trade routes, including the Khurasan Road (linking Mesopotamia to China and the Indus

Valley, 3,000 BC)43, the Royal Road (connecting Lydia to Persepolis, 5,000 BC)44 and the renowned Silk Road network (reaching from Europe to China)45 which saw the transportation of desirable goods including “pearls, jade, lapis lazuli, […] pistachios and apricots”46. Many excavated commodities were found to be crafted from shells or turquoise which were rare and peregrine sourced materials40, ultimately confirming that the Neolithic period experienced a newfound desire for unique and valuable materialistic goods – a craving of the elite that was not expressed by the hunter-gatherers who possessed very few items (of sentimentality) because they had no permanent storage spaces.42 Miniature puppies carved from stone and ivory (found at Knossos) convey the importance of unessential items (with the carvings exhibiting such detailed engravings that the dog breed – a rare and much soughtafter “type of mastiff”37 – is decipherable) as well as the usage of a ‘new’ technique: metalworking. The process, which gained popularity at the end of the Neolithic period (5,000 BC for copper, 4,500 BC for gold)40, allowed for the production of metal novelties alongside weapons and tools. Pottery-making also experienced major advancements in Britain and Ireland during the Late Neolithic. An example of this is the introduction of Grooved Ware pottery (around 2,000 BC)47 – jars and bowls that had flat bases - which became revolutionary for storage and placement48. As the Neolithic period witnessed the emergence of such fundamental processes, it’s understandable to see why the Agricultural Revolution was accredited with this success – thus gaining a reputation as being beneficial.

With vast numbers of kingdoms having access to such extensive trading systems, those cultures and theologies began to weave together – effectively merging to birth new religions and practices. Logo-syllabic writing systems that “developed from earlier pictographic signs”, such as the Persian cuneiform script (invented roughly 3,500 BC)49 allowed for the release of “an explosion of creativity”, spreading myths and tales of legendary rulers - such as those of the ancient Mesopotamian hero, Gilgamesh40, whose eponymous epic was recorded in Akkadian at around 2,000 BC.50 Of course, early writing also had more practical usage. Surviving cuneiform documents – such as those displayed in the Sarikhani Gallery - have given historians insight into contemporary legal and social affairs. Mesopotamian scribe schools (established 2,900 – 2,334 BC) required scribes to train for 12 years51, cataloguing “astronomy, geography, mineralogy […] and architecture”51. Many invaluable texts we have today, such as The Legend of Sargon of Akkhad and The Legend of Cutha, only exist thanks to the creation of cuneiform and the copying of original texts. Many texts, however, were unfortunately lost during lootings in Iraq during the 1920s, these were then sold to collectors in Baghdad and have not been recovered since.40 Regardless, the Agricultural Revolution’s influence in developing widely-used texts was revolutionary for humankind – allowing for the beneficial formation of literature as a whole.

Overall, I would concur that the Agricultural Revolution was primarily beneficial – more so for humanity than for the environment or any other species. Yuval Noah Harari, professor of History and author of the celebrated Sapiens, provides a valid argument when he writes that humans “exchange[d] a rather good life for a more miserable existence” when they became

a sedentary species, dubbing The Revolution - quite strongly - as “History’s Biggest Fraud”42. This point is agreeable enough when concerning the short-term consequences on daily life (increased labour, limited diets etc), but doesn’t take into consideration the full impact of developments in literature, metalworking and laws that have proved so advantageous to the foundation of key technologies and principles in modern societies. Whether mankind is happier or not remains to be proven, though I would argue that the very presence of leisure and art in early settlements confirms that there was contentment, which allowed for creativity.

The prize-winning Mitchell Essay was produced by Magdalena Rodzaj. Magdalena explores the role that music plays in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, with a particular focus on Alzheimer's disease. A full list of works consulted, and references is available on request.

MAGDALENA RODZAJ, MVITH Cognitive and behavioural effects of music therapy as an intervention approach in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Revolutionary studies into the ‘musical memory’ and dementia.

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a chronic neurodegenerative disease characterised by cognitive impairment. AD is the most widespread progressive disorder involving the central nervous system among the elderly. However, according to the statistical prediction, the number of AD cases among patients will grow diametrically from 55 to 153 million by 2050. The burden caused by AD can be illustrated using data from the United States between 2000 and 2019 (Figure 1) as reported deaths from stroke, cardiovascular disease and HIV decreased, in contrast, the number of deaths from AD increased more than 145%. The prevalence rate of AD among elderly people is difficult to stop as the disease can begin decades before any clinical symptoms occur. It also seems important to mention that despite public’s perception of dementia (general term for a group of symptoms) it is not the same as AD. It is, in fact, followed by cerebrovascular and Lewy body diseases, the most common cause of dementia as it compromises 60-80% of all dementia cases with a current estimate of 55 million worldwide.

Figure 1 Percentage changes in selected causes of death between 2000 and 2018

-100

-50

0 heart disease

stroke

HIV

100 Alzheimer's disease

150

200

Figure 1 – Percentage changes in selected causes of death between 2000 and 2018 (based on data from the National Center for Health Statistics), therefore developing a treatment or a cure has turned into a global task.

Figure 2 rate of annual deaths from Alzheimer's disease in the USA (per 100 000 people) 09-Feb 04-Feb 30-Jan 25-Jan 20-Jan 15-Jan 10-Jan 05-Jan 00-Jan Year

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

deaths from AD

Figure 2 Rate of annual deaths from Alzheimer’s disease in the USA per 100 000 people between 2000 and 2018 (2018 (based on data from the National Center for Health Statistics).

Music as a mnemonic device is used across world cultures as an integral part of human nature and its power to evoke a diverse range of emotions underlines the idea of music therapy. Music is not only a cultural medium of expression, but it can also be recognised as a powerful treatment technique. People believed that music has a ’healing’ effect on the body and state of arousal. Historical trace leads to early civilizations such as Mesopotamia reaching 5-6 thousand years ago when the development of written communication began. Then, the first evidence for musical notation was found. In Antient Greek, early references to the role of music in life occurred in of Milet’s work. It was then perceived to be a sign of sophistication and indicated higher social stratum origins. The father of medicine, Hippocrates, used music as a tool in the treatment of physical and mental illnesses. It was believed that healing the soul through music also helped physical health and the body. . The research has also shown that recall is easier with an emotional component to it rather than the lack of it associated with the memory and their ability to recognise melodies seems intact. Music ’encouraging’ retrieval of episodic memories is known as music-evoked autobiographical memories (MEAMs) and the mechanism behind it fueled the idea in scientists to use musical therapy in AD patients. Specifically, the theory of MEAMs postulates that melodies can act as cues which activate memories by producing a psychological connection between our environment and associated memories. This can allow us to access memories that are difficult to consciously retrieve, such as memories of past events or people. In such cases, music acts as a perceptual cue to help retrieve information and trigger memory. MEAMs recalled this way are highly detailed and more specific than memories recalled without them. Ej Haj et al compared recall between two groups of participants – one consisting of healthy adults and the second one of AD patients who took part in two different conditions (recalling information with music - condition A or in silence - condition B). Chosen

results (specificity, emotion and mood rated on a 5-points scale) obtained by El Haj et al are presented in Figure 3. They only include AD patients, however research also included participants classified as young and old as two respective groups taking part in both the silence and music condition. Interestingly, there is no group and category where the result did not increase as in all three specificity, emotion and mood an increase in points given was observed.

Figure 3 Ratings obtained on a 5-points scale in the silence and the music conditions including specificity, emotion and mood as categories mood

emotion

specificity

0.5

1.5

music condition

2.5

3.5

silence condition

Figure 3 Ratings obtained ed on a 5-points scale based on results from two respective conditions (silence and music) including three separate categories – specificity, emotion and mood based on El Haj et al findings. The findings support the idea of MEAMs as memories recalled during the musical condition were more specific, generally retrieved faster and moreover, were accompanied by greater emotional content. Furthermore, MEAMs were also shown to be of an involuntary nature and play a crucial role in association retrieval where a cue is sufficient for the recall. This theory suggests that memory is activated via an involuntary, automatic process (in this case music

perception) characterised by an interaction between the cue and the memory trace. The concept of associative retrieval offers an explanation about how memories are retrieved. A further case study was conducted with Marta Cinta González Saldaña, a former ballerina diagnosed with AD. In 2019, Internet was stunned looking at a video of a frail with age woman in a wheelchair gracefully moving her arms to the ballet music. She was able to not only recall previously well-known music from Tchaikovsky’s ballet Swan Lake but also retrieve dance moves from almost five decades ago when she was performing professionally. Despite severe physical and cognitive impairments caused by AD, the music she has known and been practicing choreographies to for years seemed to have sparked music-evoked autobiographical memories of hers. Given the intensity of ballerinas’ trainings and many emotional moments in the career such as important performances, stressful practices, Tchaikovsky’s ballet Swan Lake was encoded with both musical and emotional components. The ability of M. González to retrieve the memory of the music but also a procedural memory of dance moves suggests that musical memory remains, at least to a certain extent, intact in AD. And although case studies by nature hold different limitations such as non-replicability or relatively low internal validity due to potential gaps in medical records, this study indicates a strong emotional component that encoded with a melody in musical memory (the idea of MEAMs) can be intense enough to overcome atrophy caused by neurodegeneration in the brain which provides a great strength to MT. To allocate musical memory, the concept of music-evoked memories and emotion in the brain, a method of functional neuroimaging fMRI was used. An activity change was indicated in anterior hippocampal formation, amygdala as well as auditory cortex and structures of the reward pathway in the brain such as ventral and dorsal striatum, anterior cingulated

cortex52. Scientists concluded that the anterior hippocampus is largely involved in musicevoked emotions and plays an important role in autobiographical memory. This location of music-evoked emotions and episodic memory might be one reason why episodic memory recall can be facilitated with music. Moreover, the activity changes registered by fMRI underline the rewarding nature of music as it usually triggers positive emotions (increased dopamine neurotransmission) and feeling of happiness (e.g., endorphins release). Along with ‘discovering’ the effects of music on cognition, research into possible explanations of the efficiency of MT has begun. Outlined mechanisms include neuroplasticity mechanism alongside stimulation of neurogenesis and a dopamine release mechanism. Furthermore, some sources also mention inflammatory processes as a possible explanation. The first one, including formation of new synapses and structural changes occurring in the brain particularly in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampal formation stimulates neurogenesis and neurons’ migration to the hippocampus. Research shows that MEAMs can also ’encourage’ neurogenesis in this area of the brain which suggests that potentially, neurodegeneration of hippocampus could decelerate, sparing this brain area from atrophy.. The second explanation implies that music activates the reward pathway in the brain increasing dopamine release. The main structures of the mesolimbic system creating complex dopaminergic pathways are the ventral tegmental area (VTA) and nucleus accumbens alongside amygdala, prefrontal cortex and striatum. Specifically, MEAMs create a sense of reward, and this has been shown to increase dopamine release in the striatum53. An additional benefit of greater dopamine

release is potential motor skills improvement as the reward system was shown to also play in motor function54. Thus, progression of age-related cognitive decline could be slowed down. To remain relatively objective and present findings about MT in full spectrum, it seems worth mentioning that research into this technique might be not sufficient to draw conclusions about MT’s efficiency just yet. Research on the effects of MT on cognition involves patients at different stages of AD and, the pre-disease medical records vary significantly between each one. Although many findings indicate a positive effect of this non-invasive intervention, because of low internal validity, individual differences and past experiences between patients (family history, environmental factors, lifestyle, diet etc.) it can be difficult to draw conclusions from such studies. Furthermore, previous research has identified a genetic component to AD. It is not a deciding factor but a predisposition of developing this disease. This suggests that also environmental factors play a role in AD being physically expressed and becoming a person’s phenotype. A limitation of studies into MT is that a comparison between a control and experimental group can only be made when patients are willing and are able to take part. Patients’ engagement in studies of MT is crucial as its effect can only be measured with their cooperation (when they complete a spatial-temporal task, test on cognition etc.). However, people with AD might be reluctant towards doing such activities or simply find it too difficult and frustrating that they will refuse to do so. For instance, AD patients at severe stage might not cooperate to complete MT trials because of physical or cognitive problems55. This weakens the internal validity of MT and leaves room for a debate about its efficiency.

In conclusion, music therapy is a non-pharmacological intervention that is currently beginning to be implemented, alongside medications, in the treatment of neurodegenerative conditions such as Alzheimer and dementia. One of its great advantages over drugs is that no side effects occur which can be a limitation when using pharmacological interventions. Especially in elderly patients as they are statistically more likely to suffer from AD, a possible range of undesired effects needs to be considered as e.g., tolerance for toxicity decreases and functioning of organs is significantly worsened. Because of that, music therapy holds a good prospect for patients with AD and is supported by scientifically obtained results. Evidence supports the hypothesis that this technique can lead to slower rate of AD progression and positively impact cognitive and behavioural functions in patients. Given AD complexity and multicausality, it seems that we have barely scratched the surface of understanding this disease and developing an efficient treatment. Although knowledge of cognitive and neurological basis of this disease points us in the right direction, still, only a small proportion of studies focuses on non-invasive methods such as MT and so efforts need to be better targeted to achieve satisfying effects. MT does hold a great degree of promise with good prospects for patients, but the full potential of non-pharmacological techniques is yet to be realised. I believe that people will perceive the value of non-invasive methods differently as when shone a light on, MT appears to be a prospective revolutionary method and is worth exploring further.

KAMILE BALNIONIS, MVI Drawing on the dramatic lighting in Caravaggio’s work and the collage work of David Hockney, Kamile took photos of people in different lighting. After picking the reference photo and making a sketch, using acrylic, she painted pieces of paper with different tones., using these for the collage.