The Columnist 10/11/14

ISSUE ONE

ARE WE LIBERATED?

ALSO

Just what is it that makes today’s homes so different, so offensive?

Capitalism’s new old shoes ‘Homosleaziality’

Editorial

2

Welcome to your magazine.

At the University of Edinburgh there is certainly no lack of originality. You see it in tutorial discussions, during extracurricular activities and (ironically) at the Big Cheese. The problem that the editors of The Columnist saw was that there was a very visible gap in our University’s sundry student publications: relatively short opinion pieces on topics relating to current affairs, social commentary and culture. The brief is deliberately encompassing. More than anything this is general interest magazine, and one that we believe is generally interesting.

In our opinion, ideas, beliefs and grievances widely and openly shared in conversations needed a fresh outlet to spark debate in a more sustainable, constructive way. The Columnist aims to serve as a forum for these discussions, creating a stage upon which the real discourse can be engaged with, picking out the undercurrents from the tide and challenging perceptions.

A place where the most demanding and hot-button topics of today, and more importantly tomorrow, can be tackled with equal precedence.

Students are by their very nature on the cutting edge; constantly learning, discovering and innovating. Contained in this edition of the magazine are an array of human experiences, ponderings and reactions. There are things we disagreed upon but are important. Questions are raised, and some are answered. If you read this and feel the need to shout at us, then good; that is what we were going for.

All articles are the opinions of individual columnists and not those of the magazine.

We thank all the writers for our inaugural issue who have set the bar so high. As we editors have learned over the last few weeks, creating a new magazine from ground up is not the easiest feat. However, being lucky enough to work with such a creative, intelligent, opinionated group of writers has made our experience that much more fulfilling.

We cannot achieve our mission without you. We urge you to comment, rant, draw, write— whatever your talent is, share it with us.

Let us help make your voice be heard.

The Editors. columnistmagazine@gmail.com facebook.com/columnistmagazine @thecolumnistmag columnistmagazine.com

Cover Story

3

Are we liberated?

By Olivia Evershed

Visiting my doctor last month, I expressed a concern that I might have an alcohol intolerance. He replied that it was unlikely, and with a chuckle and a knowing look, added that he wasn’t sure how I’d manage without alcohol anyway, being a student. My initial response was indignation that he could be so presumptuous. However, as I couldn’t deny that I drink, I let it slide: aside from which, I couldn’t help feeling a little flattered that he thought I looked like a party animal.

A few weeks later, I went for an early morning swim with a flatmate. ‘Hangover cure, eh?’ enquired the receptionist, apparently under the impression that teenagers don’t swim for innocent recreational pleasure. An experienced swimmer, my friend crossly corrected him. Such incidents hardly seem worth acknowledging other than with an affable chuckle or guilty shrug. But coming to university and being immersed in a community comprised of students and their neighbours, it’s hard to ignore the generalizations made with regards to young people.

Today’s youth are meant to be the luckiest generation yet. Education reforms, increased university acceptance, provision of youth facilities and a rise in support networks all say so. Thanks to the tireless campaigning of our predecessors, sexism, homophobia, racism and class snobbery are, if not entirely vanquished, at least diminished, leaving a young population that is arguably more tolerant than ever before.

“Why do I always get the feeling I’m missing something?”

The 1960s hippie, free love and Beatnik movements promoted the growth of a new, liberal youth identity; the rebellious minority that had always eschewed social restraints became the majority and young people were able to experiment with drugs, sex and alcohol without judgement.

4

Since then, young people have become known for their rebelliousness, promiscuity and rowdiness. The ‘tradition-breakers’ are representative of youth culture as a whole in the eyes of the public, while those who live quietly and chastely are overlooked. Society saw young people behaving recklessly so came to expect it; because society expects it, young people behave recklessly, perpetuating the cycle.

Freshers’ week is an example of socially advocated recklessness. Coming to university and attempting to make friends amidst the social chaos of freshers, the temptation is to follow the crowd.

It is particularly difficult for those with definite or conflicted religious or moral beliefs: on one side, an extensive network of religious support groups preach abstinence, moral awareness and sobriety, while an even greater social scene compels freshers to get wasted, get laid and suffer the resultant hangover with the triumph of a soldier returning from war. Club reps stand on the corner of every street with discount entry codes and flyers promising free shots.

Nationwide movements such as ‘neknomination’ and popular television series like Made in Chelsea portray casual drinking and sex as the accepted norm. Those who are on the fence about the student scene often end up acting against their instinct in order not to be ostracised.

We are liberated in the sense that as emancipated citizens, we are masters of our own free will. But peer pressure, or rather, the pressure inflicted by the expectations of society, is a phenomenon that is felt and spoken of in indirect terms by many. Society may have abolished the rules, but the way in which its expectations manifest themselves in the attitude shown to young people still dictates how we should behave.

We cannot avoid judgement from all quarters no matter how we behave. We face pressure to comply with the expectations of society and always will. So are we liberated? No more than we ever were, I’d say.

Current Affairs

5

The scandalous rise of the scandal

By Laura Brook

‘Scandal’ has become one of those words that has worked its way into the everyday lexicon with a whole new meaning. In the dictionary its definition is simple: an accusation which causes disgrace to a person’s reputation.

Nowadays scandal, more often than not, goes hand in hand with sensationalism, and is frequently appended to stories about celebrities. A disappointingly large proportion of news outlets, both in print and online, are quick to label news stories as a scandal, regardless of whether disgrace is involved or not.

One of the main problems with the word ‘scandal’ is not just its rampant overuse but the connotations which misusing it brings. In the case of the leaked naked celebrity photos in October of this year, the use of the word ‘scandal’ in the media did two things.

Firstly, it shifted the blame onto the celebrities themselves rather than the hackers. Fox News in particular came strongly under fire after one of their contributors suggested that the best way to prevent pictures being leaked was to not take them at all, suggesting that “there’s this thing called a mirror” if people wanted to look at themselves naked. The problem with these comments is that they suggest that the victims should be disgraced for having these pictures distributed.

The real scandal here is how technology companies allowed these private pictures to be accessed, especially since some of them had been long deleted.

Frequency of occurrence of the words ‘sex’ and ‘scandal’ in the New York Times, since 1981.

6 The other problem with the label ‘scandal’ is that it reduces the suffering of the victims into nothing more than a ploy to sell more newspapers or get more clicks online. Jennifer Lawrence made her stance very clear in an interview with Vanity Fair, expressing incredulity at how ‘the first thought that crosses somebody’s mind is to make a profit from it’ and condemning anyone who looks at the pictures.

With tabloids and online news websites inundated with the latest rounds of hacking, the media repeatedly embrace a thinly veiled excuse to use celebrities’ names and faces in conjunction with sordid details.

Ironically, some of the most accurate uses of the word ‘scandal’ have in fact been applied to the activities of the media themselves, particularly the tabloids. The phone hacking scandal, which was made public in 2011, was a prime example where certain news corporations were disgraced due to their morally dubious, and in places criminal, actions, and with good reason.

The extent of the bribery and corruption which permeated the industry resulted in a public inquiry into the conduct of the press. The recommendations made have yet to be implemented into legislation, allowing for the continuation of morally reprehensible behaviour.

What is important to consider is how we respond to this type of thing. The sensationalising of the media is nothing new, but nowadays this form of exploitative reporting is ubiquitous.

Scandal is not a word which should be banned from our vocabulary but we should be discerning so we do not unknowingly facilitate, or even encourage, this kind of negligent and damaging behaviour in the press.

As for the celebrity naked pictures ‘scandal’, we must show empathy for these individuals; as much as they live in the public eye, they are human beings with their own private lives. We must remember exactly where the blame lies: with the hackers, the distributors and the tech companies responsible.

Phasing out fascism

By Josh Stein

Across Europe, political extremism is all the rage. And this makes me nervous. In fact, it is enough to make you quiver in your seat.

Marine Le Pen has done one on her father, getting two seats in the Senate and clinching top position in the European elections in France. Other results in Sweden, Germany and Britain have sent mainstream parties scuttling back homes with tails between their legs.

7

Headquarters of the National Fascist Party (Rome, 1934)

Realistically we have a situation where Front National are challenging for the French presidency.

Any denial of this is superficial. It’s something we have to accept, it’s something we have to deal with.Whether or not they actually do have the capacity to make it into the Élysée in 2017, more established, less extremist parties will start having to make concessions.

In the UK, we have seen it with Labour suddenly proposing “restrictions on workers from any future countries joining the EU” in their manifesto for the European elections. Let us not sugar coat this, this is a direct appeal to people who have been swayed by UKIP, a plea to come back to Labour. The Conservatives have done it too. The Greens and the Liberal Democrats decided to stick with their guns as it were, and the result? Both parties have lost a great deal of support.

The media is partly to blame for the rise of UKIP, as the constant stream of news about Farage and his party ultimately gives him greater influence in the country. The fact that we see his face leering at us from The Guardian every day means that we are bombarded by his views and principles, a process that undoubtedly ends up increasing his popularity.

Although UKIP are something we should be concerned about, what I see as more worrisome is the increasing influence of more openly racist and ‘neo-fascist’ groups, such as Golden Dawn in Greece and Jobbik in Hungary. The leader and various members of Golden Dawn were recently arrested for being involved in the murder of Pavlos Fyssas, an openly anti-racist activist last year – how can this be ignored in countries like the UK, where racism is regarded as unacceptable?

8 We need to see an effective rise in anti-fascist movements through groups like Unite Against Fascism. I took part in their march on the 22 March earlier this year during UN Anti-Racism Day in Glasgow, and while the speeches were made by various well-known participants, including Humza Yousaf from the SNP, I felt there was something lacking. There seems to be a popular fear of anti-fascists, almost on the same level of the fear of actual fascists. This fear arises from a flawed stigmatisation of anti-fascist groups. However, this kind of mobilization is the only step forward if racism is to be met with strong resistance.

Parliament may not bring up the issue of racism, as politicians have realized that a strong stance against immigration is required if they are to remain in parliament. It is very easy to see a tough stance on immigration, coupled with outright condemnation of racism, as being hypocritical. It is for this very reason that anti-fascist groups are the current best answer to racism.

There are two possible outcomes of the rising extremism we are facing as Europeans. Number one, that our parliaments get taken over by these groups continent wide, and this is a realistic possibility. Number two, that we stop simply leaving the job of tackling this threat to our politicians, and start doing something about the rise of extremism ourselves.

We, as Europeans, have to wake up and see what is really happening in our continent. Appeasing UKIP by adopting their principles and ideas is not the way to limit their influence, rather this just increases their confidence and ultimately their power as well.

Rape and gender neutrality in Scotland

By Shona Warwick

It was meant to be a landmark restatement of the law surrounding rape and sexual assault, but legislation passed in 2009 failed to achieve this aim, and today reinforces outdated gender stereotypes surrounding sex.

The Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act reinforces gender stereotypes about the perpetrators of sexual assault. It is undeniable that the vast majority of rapes and sexual assaults happen to women, and are usually perpetrated by men, however, the act specifically reserves the “worst� type of crime, rape, exclusively for males.

Under the Act, a rape is committed if a person with their penis penetrates any amount into another’s anus, vagina or mouth without their consent or without any reasonable belief of consent. This definition specifically excludes females of being able to commit rape.

Any sexual crime that a woman commits will be charged under a seemingly less serious category. By limiting the offence of rape to men, the legislature has ultimately reinforced the gender stereotype of aggressive males having an increased sexual desire to the detriment of submissive females. In today’s society I find it almost ludicrous to suggest that males always have the highest sex drive, which leads to a second criticism of the Act: It undermines the gravity of sexual offences not involving penetration by the penis.

9

There is no doubt that a women could force, through threats or other means, a man to have sex with her. The Act somehow suggests that this type of action is less serious, but how is being forced to penetrate really any different from being forcibly penetrated? Are these males somehow less abused in such a situation? I would argue they would not think so. All are being seriously sexually abused. Again, the act is subliminally suggesting women do conform to their stereotype of always being forced, never forcing.

I struggle to comprehend the distinction given when penetration with another object or body part may in fact be more damaging both physically and emotionally. Under this Act a homosexual woman may be “raped” by her female partner, but somehow this act is less serious than if she had been raped by a man, and indeed, by the word of law, she is not even a victim of rape.

Other legislatures have dealt adequately with this problem by removing gender completely from their sexual assault legislation. For instance, Canada’s sexual offences legislation at no point mentions the word rape – all are equally guilty. Instead, it has an all-encompassing idea of sexual assault, which is an assault which violates the victim’s sexual integrity, involving at least touching.

Although perhaps not the ideal route to have one concept covering an offence which has such varying degrees, our legislature would do well to arrive at an equally gender neutral law, perhaps with varying degrees of severity, with all sexual assaults by penetration being defined as rape.

The goal of gender neutrality in rape and sexual assault law has definitely not been achieved so far. Not only is it not currently gender neutral when it comes to perpetrators, but it is also not gender neutral to victims, with the potential of heterosexual males and homosexual females being what they feel is “raped” by their partners but not being able to secure a rape conviction for their assault. In a time where society strives for equality, legislation should avoid reinforcing outdated gender stereotypes.

Social Commentary

10

Capitalism’s new old shoes

By Pablo Pérez Ruiz

Since the rise of modern consumerism, people have defined themselves in terms of property. The rhetoric of ‘I am what I own’, deeply embedded in the roots of capitalism, fostered individualization through consumption.

The unfulfilled promises of consumerism, the fulfilment of all our needs, have made mass consumption a self-defeating practice, leading to excesses and waste beyond imagination. The craze of the consumer society could not be better represented than by the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, one of the world’s biggest landfills, located where barely anyone can find it.

However, the impact of the 2008 economic crisis on the daily lives of the majority, and on many small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) through austerity measures and limited lending and investment opportunities has triggered a growth in what has been coined ‘collaborative consumption’. Born in the mid-2000s, the term refers to a socio-economic system built around the sharing of human and physical resources, whether material products, services or skills.

Surrounded by terms such as ‘social capital’, ‘global village’ or ‘shared economy’, collaborative consumption is a new way of doing things. Share, swap, barter. Examples of collaborative consumption such as Blablacar, a car sharing platform, are increasingly questioning the common way of doing things: why would I pay for a product I only want the service of?

11 Looking more closely at collaborative consumption as a societal phenomenon, it may appear as old as humanity. The main elements of collaborative consumption have existed in most societies for millennia; lending something to a neighbour, selling unwanted goods at local markets or sharing skills in community centres.

What is new and revolutionary about the system then? First of all, people are becoming increasingly aware of it. The growing awareness of community momentum, facilitated by the previously unimaginable platforms presented by technology and the internet, has allowed collaborative consumption to flourish, to get a name, to become a real alternative to top-down, individual consumerism.

Networks have also expanded radically, with the whole world becoming one network society.

Your ‘collaborative consumption’ pool is not limited to your neighbourhood, not even to your town. It is a global in scope, while remaining personal in treatment. Secondly, cost-saving is no longer the single motivation behind it. People want to define themselves along new lines. I am more than what I own and produce. I am also the interactions that I have with my surroundings, the impact that I have in my community and so on.

The best thing about collaborative consumption is that doing the ‘right thing’ is becoming increasingly attractive. The sharing economy empowers consumers and addresses worrying environmental issues, as less waste is produced through sharing and swapping. We are reinventing the way we live in ways that we could have not imagined a decade ago.

Is collaborative consumption all good news then? Not exactly. There is a risk that the opportunities brought about by collaborative consumption, mainly consumer empowerment through the creation of their own identity, are co-opted by the beneficiaries of current consumerism and become a flawed version of what could have been a true reinvention of the capitalist system. Big companies like Nike are increasingly endorsing the ideas of collaborative consumption. Nike+ connects runners from different places and allows them to share their routes and comment on them. Although this initiative is praiseworthy, and there is nothing inherently malicious about a big company like Nike being behind it, consumers should be careful.

Collaborative consumption offers an opportunity too great to miss, and risks becoming a mere ‘nice’ addition to the hyperconsumerist structure that is alive and well. Collaborative consumption should be recognised as a system in its own right, because, as thousands of small entrepreneurs are showing all around the globe, an alternative approach to unsustainable capitalism is feasible right now.

‘Homosleaziality’

12

By Lewis Robertson

According to the Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry (CARM), 28% of all homosexuals have had more than 1,000 sexual partners. While grandiose statements like this can be debated alone, in reality there are probably few among us in the gay community who would deny that homosexuals have a reputation for promiscuity. However, the impact and origins of this behaviour are seldom discussed. In fact, the topic itself is disregarded and swept under the carpet because everyone in the community seemingly accepts the behaviour as something that is inherent to being homosexual.

After conducting a small survey on this issue, I found the same theme continuously arose; the question of gender. Simply, there is a belief that men, especially homosexuals, are by and large more sexually driven than other people. But what sets homosexual males apart is our openness and directness regarding sex. Some believe this has been distorted by certain groups of the heterosexual populace (like CARM for example) in order to portray the idea that the gay community is sex crazed and therefore promiscuous.

Moreover, it is also crucial to remember that gay rights have only evolved significantly over the past few decades. Not so long ago homosexuals living in western countries feared discrimination and even imprisonment and thus had little other choice but to hide their sexuality. This is still the case today in many countries such as Russia and Saudi Arabia, where the underground gay communities have expanded due to the LGBT community having no voice and few rights. While over time our rights in the West may have progressed, many homosexuals have not been able to grow out of the stage of secretive promiscuity.

New York Gay Pride 2011

13 For us, social networking and dating apps have given people the ability to find sex discreetly, and such services have exacerbated the amount of men having one night stands with multiple partners. Nine out of every ten men I have asked have used apps such as ‘Grindr’ and ‘Gaydar’, half of whom had used them to ‘hook up’ with other men. However, this being said, one has to remember that some people do simply use these apps as means of socialising. ‘Grindr’ originally started with the intention of being a dating app, but today’s reality suggests otherwise.

So there are evidently many explanations as to why we homosexuals have been deemed promiscuous. But the real question is why should we even care? After all, our community has developed in the face of adversity and criticism for many years. But three quarters of the men I surveyed believed that this branding is preventing us from developing further socially. While sex and sexuality have clearly been a springboard for the gay community, perhaps it is time we attempt to develop past this perceivedly sleazy behaviour.

This having been said, there is a small part of me that believes that although this promiscuity damages the reputation of the gay community, it is very much ingrained in our culture. No matter how much we try to move past it, our promiscuity will always exist in some form or another, much like it does within the heterosexual community. However, what I believe is paramount among all of this is the need for us to redefine the stereotypical image of a gay man to something that extends beyond the size of our sexual appetites.

Politics gone plaid

By Franziska Putz

In our modern fast-paced society, few things remain constant and individuality blends into the human canvas that is the global community. Throughout the generations this fear of becoming simply part of the crowd has driven the subculture phenomenons of punk, goth and hippy. Today, we welcome the hipster.

Perhaps most notable for their apparel (mandatory abundance of plaid or paisley combined with oversized eyewear, preferably vintage) the hipster values independent thinking, creativity, witty banter and appreciates indie-rock and art.

Like the countercultures by which it is influenced, the hipster sub-group identifies with distinct politics, namely the progressive liberal movement. But unlike its predecessors, their form of engagement with these views profoundly differs and captures the essence of the criticism it attracts.

14 They do not riot in the streets for their cause, but instead protest against titans of commercialism by drinking fair trade coffee, urban farming, buying local and engaging in all sorts of sustainably conscious living practices. Of course there is nothing wrong with this on the surface, and it can also be seen as a form of political engagement that tackles issues from a different point, perhaps a more pro-active and effective one. That being said, the issue arises when these actions are superficial; when they depend less on actual passions and concerns, and more on whether these affirm their identity as an anarchist.

The issue is expounded on when considering how social and political reforms have been heavily driven by student initiatives throughout history, from May ’68 to current events like the Scottish ‘Yes’ movement and demonstrations in Hong Kong. The hipster’s obsession with image makes them the generational roadblock of this great trend.

Are hipsters a mere reflection of the superficiality of mainstream society? Social media promotes identities based on ‘likes’ and often provides an overload of information, making it difficult to focus on a single issue. This nearly ensures that youth engagement is condemned to be superficial and transient.

Hipster politics brings attention to issues through social media and then move on to the next project. Instead of participating in movements, pictures are Instagrammed of them. It is a culture of ‘Passive Activism’; of posers protesting government decisions because it is trendy, without understanding the basics behind the alternative they are promoting- they are consumers of political ideology instead of its driving force.

15 This attitude isolates politics, making it one-sided. As seen in the U.S government, this impedes progress to the point where it stymies government action as a whole. In a world that depends on the cohesive interaction of differing actors, this attitude is detrimental.

Human difference is the seed of politics, and negotiation is the art of the practice- it is about serving all people, not to construct opposite camps unyieldingly pitted against another impeding all social progress. Government actors, the public, and yes, hipsters, must not neglect the basic equality of people by advocating special rights for certain groups, and instead find a way to change how differences are perceived.

There is more to sex education than sex

By Chris Belous

The majority of people schooled in the UK will have their personal experiences of sex and relationship education (SRE), whether they were good, bad or non-existent. For many, the extent of their SRE was a lecture on the mechanics of reproduction and how babies happen. Some may have been lucky enough to put condoms on various fruit or vegetables, and I remember one lesson where, strangely, the boys were sent out of the room while the girls were told about menstruation as if this was a dirty secret we were meant to keep.

LGBTQ issues, if at all discussed, might be glossed over only briefly; healthy relationships, the effects of pornography, the nuances of consent and many other important topics under the SRE umbrella seem mostly ignored. This is not to say that some schools don’t get it right, but generally, according to personal testimonies, Ofsted reports and more, SRE in the UK is delivered inconsistently and often inadequately. Improvements need to be made.

Some action is however being taken. For a start, some politicians, campaign groups and teachers are pushing for statutory SRE to be made law, which is a vital step to ensure inclusion and that all schoolchildren can get the information they need when they need it. Organisations such as Sexpression work across the country to try and bring what they call ‘judgement-free’ SRE – on topics from the ins-and-outs to body image – to more schools. Services such as the charity Brook and the C:Card in Edinburgh and the Lothians work to provide a range of accessible tools and advice regarding sexual health. Yet all this can only go so far if services and information provisions are not improved on a more comprehensive level.

SRE needs to be statutory in all schools across the UK at least from secondary school age, and it needs to be judgement-free. The first issue is a question of law which needs to be debated and fully considered, and to an extent is easily achieved; the second is a more difficult question of human nature.

16

Before the plans for the Death Star were delivered, Rebel strategists had to train their troops in other matters.

We are judgemental creatures: it is hard to expect someone teaching about the personal and intimate issues of SRE not to have their own spin on them. Nonetheless, judgement-free SRE is still achievable: the key is to ‘facilitate’ rather than ‘teach’. Give pupils information, give them a safe and encouraging space to think about and discuss their views, but do not attempt to instill a certain subjective viewpoint on personal issues.

Of course, some aspects of SRE must be factual and instructional, such as how birth control works or how an egg is fertilised by sperm, but the flipside of this is not to advocate one type of birth control over another, or to suggest that you absolutely must be having penis-in-vagina penetrative sex in order to have children. Either all teachers must be trained to deliver proper SRE in this kind of style, or we should support outside organisations with specially-trained staff to go into all schools. Otherwise, SRE can never move forward.

Culture

17

Just what is it that makes today’s homes so different, so offensive?

By Felix Carpenter

1956, British artist Richard Hamilton produces an artwork representing modern society. His collage, created from magazine cut-outs, “Just what is it that makes today’s homes so different, so appealing?” was revolutionary. Portraying an idealised perception of the American dream home, featuring the latest mod cons and the grotesque ‘perfect’ couple, a bodybuilder and a glamour model, it became instantly iconic, and later recognised as the first work in the ‘Pop Art’ style.

Hamilton was the first to synthesise post-war mass-consumption culture into a single image, and at that one roughly only ten inches squared in size. I was fortunate enough to visit the recent Hamilton exhibition at the Tate Modern in London, and was instantly struck by the irony of the tiny artwork with its huge and testosterone fuelled and silicone filled subjects. In a consumer society where bigger is better, this remains a smart juxtaposition.

‘Just what is it that makes today’s homes so different, so appealing?’, Richard Hamilton (1956)

18 Pop culture is a form of collective consciousness, a mixture of images, phrases and ideals that permeate societies throughout the world. What Hamilton’s artwork shows is a snapshot of pop culture at one particular place and time.

When we admire the American society of the 1950s and 1960s, we are looking back at the period through Hamilton’s distorted spectacles. The image we have of the period, characterised by the work of artists such as Hamilton, as well as Andy Warhol with his Campbell’s Soup Cans, and Roy Lichtenstein’s comic book paintings, is optimistic, bright and clean. But what was it about homes then that made them so different to ours, and so much more appealing?

In short, because our demands are higher. Comparing the approach of more recent artworks offers a powerful insight why. Tracey Emin’s proudly unmade “My Bed” or the graffiti art of Banksy, tackle the ideals of society in a very different way to artists fifty years earlier.

Condemnation of cultural institutions is no longer in the form of ironic admiration as with Hamilton, it is spelled out explicitly, placing pop culture itself under attack.

This phenomenon is not limited to elite artists though. Even in ordinary conversation, whatever the topic is concerning, focus soon becomes thrust upon negative societal issues such as inequality, sexism and racism. Often this is reasonable, these are of course important and pervasive issues, but occasionally it is fairly random or arbitrary – becoming a new, social justice orientated version of Godwin’s Law (the positive probabilistic correlation between length of a conversation and a comparison involving Nazism being made), which inevitably ends up proving correct in itself as well.

Having an overtly critical cultural mindset is partly a result of having things too good for too long. For many people in the UK, the daily drudgery of #firstworldproblems is too common.

The notion that having all the latest mod cons is an aspiration is gone, it has become par for the course. Ideological decadence has overtaken ambition. Sometimes, and this is used as a vague catch-all, it is difficult to see how you would change your life for the better, even if you could. Recently I heard a tellingly accurate aphorism from a friend, “Happiness is so fauxcore, unhappiness is normcore now.” While all this is based on generalisation, perpetual satisfaction without real gratification is probably the ultimate ‘first world problem’, and leads to a questioning of our fundamental cultural ideals.

Simultaneously, pop culture is expanding beyond, even if it is still dominated by, the ‘West’.

People are consuming more ideas than ever, and for new and different reasons, all in a world that is demographically larger than ever and reacting to an age of relatively new-found hyper-connectivity. Pop culture is gradually becoming broader in scope and more culturally diverse, and the tone of how we think about the world slowly changing in the process. It is difficult to deny that the ideas of ‘sustainability’ or ‘feminism’ are a part of pop culture across the globe, even in places where these ideas may have little practical currency.

19 Today popular culture is a global language and not just for art galleries. The growth and development of popular culture should be celebrated and revered as one the great of achievements of humanity, and we should try our best to regain some of Hamilton’s ironic optimism, appreciating the many positive aspects that pop culture and society have to offer; ‘look how good things are, but we can still do better.’

Streaming ahead: classical music at a crossroads

By Fiona Russell

The past few years have seen the ascent of digital music libraries, with the advent of the iPod and more recently, the increasing popularity of internet-based streaming services such as Spotify which allow people to browse, discover and share music of every genre on almost any electronic device.

However, Spotify has been subject to a great deal of controversy since its release in 2008, mainly due to the way it affects artists in terms of royalties paid out. Classical music particularly has been affected by it due to the large number of performers often required. And yet, when I polled fifty-odd students at some of Europe’s top conservatoires, the majority do use Spotify and acknowledge the part it plays in their interest in classical music.

Jeremy Wilson wrote in The Telegraph last year that “the loss of ownership cheapens our relationship with recorded music.” To an extent, this is true: the nature of a one-click programme means that one is less likely to listen to full works, but instead to pick out highlights. A bit like reading a single monologue instead of watching the whole of Hamlet, which is designed to be experienced as an entity; similarly, the experience of a sports game isn’t as great if you only watch the winning goals.

But as young students, who travel and live off very tight budgets, it is far more practical to stream your music collection from the cloud. Not to mention significantly cheaper. The social element and the ability to publicise what you listen to allows for much wider audiences. Suddenly, traditionally elitist musical genres like classical or jazz are available to all, as long as you have speakers and an internet connection.

20 There is however an element of truth to the idea that platforms such as Spotify are much better for the listener than for the artist, especially where classical music is concerned.

Spotify only takes 30% of their earnings from subscriptions and advertising, which is the same amount iTunes takes from downloads. Since its foundation in 2008, the company boasts at having paid out over $1 billion in royalties, $500 million of which were in 2013 alone. But they received considerable criticism earlier on this year for only paying out $0.007 per play of a song directly to record companies, and thence to the artists.

This is pretty abysmal, although it can be argued that this will increase significantly due to the fact that the streaming market is likely to continue to grow, allowing them to have a bigger budget for royalties. Also, in a world where music piracy is a major issue, they at least ensure that artists are paid something.

However, the royalties paid to classical music could be considered an even greater issue.

For example, imagine the Berlin Philharmonic record a version of Wagner’s Ring Cycle, comprising four operas which span approximately 18 hours, played back-to-back. You need to account for the immense cost of an orchestra of 100+ players, conductors, directors, singers, producers. If you were recording this to sell as a CD, the box set would often cost £100. This is a large sum, but it makes sense when you compare it to the cost of recording a short album on an acoustic guitar in a studio. Suddenly, earning 0.7 cents per play per movement seems ridiculous and performers are at a real loss.

The debate surrounding the ethics of Spotify and other streaming platforms, such as Soundcloud, Pandora and Google Play is therefore such a grey area. While it encourages social sharing and therefore increases listenership, it may simultaneously be the demise of classical music because of the financial instability with which it presents its artists.

That is unless these services rethink the way in which they help artists.

For readers interested in using Spotify to explore new and slightly lesser-known Classical music, I have compiled a playlist entirely made up from suggestions from musicians and music-lovers alike, which can be found at http://tinyurl.com/p7zy6na (Spotify account required).

The Great British identity crisis

21

By Andrew Howarth

With an English father and a Scottish mother, I am absolute in one respect: British.

However, in recent years this term has started to lose the lustre that it once held.

It is 96 years since the end of the First World War, 69 since the end of the second. In both Britain emerged victorious, with the resilience of the British people playing a crucial role. Nothing can quite draw people together as much as a common enemy, and for the Brits this proved correct. Communities grew tighter through shared happiness and sorrow. Without pulling together as a population the country would have fallen apart.

When each war was won, national pride and identity of Britons went through the roof.

Lacking an equivalent major conflict in our modern era, it can be expected that there is not nearly as much patriotism and sense of identity as there once was.

But perhaps the people of Great Britain have just become less British than they were.

With the freedom of movement in Europe that being part of the EU brings, along with the ease of transport for people of nationalities outside the EU to come and work, British culture will have changed, not that that is a bad thing by any measure. Different cultures bring different boons, and this is great for Britain. The trend of globalisation is a cause not only of the dilution of Britishness, but a dilution of cultures all around the world; a quick glance at Japan shows how much they have embraced Western culture, particularly in terms of consumables.

However, does this really mean that Britishness is fading? Looked at from the opposite perspective, this could be seen as a reinforcement of Britishness. Few other countries around the world have seen such a seamless integration of both people and foreign traditions as Great Britain. It is cosmopolitan in the truest sense of the word. At the University of Edinburgh there are no distinguishable groups of students. People from America, Britain, Mainland Europe, the Middle East, the Far East, and Australia blend into a melting pot. They are taken in, completely unassumingly, and judged purely on their character.

Globalisation, although a prominent feature in our world, is not destroying what Britons consider themselves to be. An excellent reminder of this was a recent advert for the Jaguar F-Type car. It outlined the classic, if a little stereotypical qualities of a Briton: the accent, focus, precision, style, and obsession with power. The advert has raked in over 12 million views on YouTube, and has clearly had an effect on people. It stirs a sense of patriotism which is often buried down, and it has gone down a storm. A sense of Britishness still exists.

22

After the Scottish referendum, it would be fair to say that for certain 44.7% of Scots are disillusioned with Britain, and maybe more are too but voted ‘No’ for another reason.

An interesting question to ask Scots – particularly those who typically define British as solely English – is who their favourite James Bond is, fictionally son of a Scot and truly one of if not the biggest British icons worldwide. Whether it is the portrayal by Scottish Sean Connery or English Daniel Craig, there is a clear depiction in people’s minds of a character that is iconically British, and it is this symbolism, that proves that Britishness is in one way or another still alive in Scotland too.

Although Britishness may seem to fade away at times, it is always there. In defiance of the fact that many are disillusioned with the idea, the Brits are hungry for any sense of national pride: go to any sports match and you will see the pent up passion that they have for their country.

Britishness is not so much evolving throughout the modern era, but growing. It is producing wonderful new traditions, but all the while maintaining, rather than changing the historic foundations upon which Great Britain was built.

Staff: Editor-in-Chief – Felix Carpenter Deputy Editor – Riley Kaminer Contributing Editor – Pablo Pérez Ruiz Contributing Editor – Nishith Hedge Contributing Editor – Shona Warwick Illustration – Maddy Churchhouse

GET INVOLVED! Contact us: columnistmagazine@gmail.com facebook.com/columnistmagazine @thecolumnistmag columnistmagazine.com