INK Issue 2 - Summer 2014 by Marling INK

ISSUE #02 - SUMMER 2014

1-2

CHAIR - M SHIELDS

3-5

GOAL LINE TECHNOLOGY - J LANE

6 7-8

ISSUE #02 - SUMMER 2014 MARLING SCHOOL

9 - 10

SHIRE HORSE - O POLLARD ROBIN - B HORN ELECTORAL SYTEMS - G SIDDONS

11 - 12

ART - F WISE, J TURNER & C PIDSLEY

25 - 26

TRACKS - T MEADLEY

13 - 16

CINEMA - L WALPOLE

27 - 28

POETRY - YEAR 8

17 - 18

ART - F PANKS & H DAVIDSON

29 - 30

19 - 22

BRAVE NEW WORLD - T MEADLEY

REVIEWS - D GUTHRIE - R SIEBENALLER - G SIDDONS

23 - 24

THE GIFT - D PLASKITT

ART - S HINES & F PALMER

INK - THE STORY ‘But words are things, and a small drop of ink, falling like dew, upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think.’ – George Byron Although ambitious to make the ‘millions think,’ the first publication of INK magazine was an encouraging success to the INK team, who scrambled, perhaps slightly more than we’d like to admit, to get the project finalised in early summer of last year. With our vision solidified by the first publication, we came back from our summer breaks inspired to make this year’s edition even better. We could now look to develop the magazine. We were determined not to face the same difficulties in terms of collecting work that delayed us last year and launched a concerted effort to publicise INK. The campaign was a success and the work flowed in, presenting us with a new problem; with the design team which served us so well last year having moved on to university, the new team had to get to grips with INK’s image quickly. After a few frantic meetings with IT staff regarding metadata and the importance of bleed – two concepts almost completely alien to the editorial team – the design process could begin. Once again we were excited to watch the project come together, from the first drafts of work we had in all the way through to the formation of the final changes. It is with great pride that we present the second issue of INK. Many thanks once again to the editorial team, designers, contributors, and particularly, Ms Harris, our Staff Coordinator, without whose help, time and experience, this would not be possible.

CHAIR M SHIELDS Today I fell in love with Chair. I ADORE her; she’s supportive and sturdy and can stand on her own four feet. Not like the other one. I love the feel of her name on my lips: ‘Chair’. Soft and gentle and nice. I am lucky, upstairs cry and shout- their love isn’t good like ours. Why would you want to love something that’s always the same as you? Always eyes, always nose, always mouth, never good. I remember kissing the girl by the lockers; she smoked cigarettes and wore thick makeup, but I kissed her anyway because that was what happened. I don’t have to kiss Chair. Chair is made for me is made for me. The murmur of the world outside is the soundtrack to our love; nasal beeps and fading wails are cushioned by the thick polystyrene taped across my windows. As I lie on my mattress in the dark, Chair is illuminated by the immortal, lifeless glow of the city outside. Even bathed in light pollution she looks beautiful. Her curved, polished legs are lit up by the moon, rays dance on the grain of her skin. I sleep with a smile because I know she’ll be there when I wake. The door is bolted and it is a long fall from Level 12. I don’t mind that Chair doesn’t talk or touch me, because the last one talked and I didn’t listen. She touched, hugged, hit hard. I never had to forgive her because she was already gone. Mottled and hard and nailed into a cheap black box. It was good because she didn’t have to know why I did it and I didn’t have to say sorry. Just the clang of a hammer on a rusted nail and the metallic chime of earth against an old shovel. Loneliness used to ache, but it ebbed to a faint seeping, like blood behind a bruise. Love is selfish because it doesn’t care about anything else. I love Chair, and although she doesn’t say it back, I can tell she feels it by the way the impression of me remains after I’ve sat. I can make my mark on her, claim her. The first one told me she loved me, and I had bruises to show for it. I know I won’t be in love with Chair forever but it’s good now; love is best served quickly. Quality not quantity. I haven’t thought of an end for Chair yet, but it’ll be fitting because she deserves it. I might keep a memory of her: a shard of wooden leg, a shred of corduroy covering. Deliberating a conclusion for them is always difficult. Bed welcomed the breadknife and Table greeted the strike on the shower tiles, left splintered in the tub.

Next door’s puppy whines and it reminds me of Dog. Dog scratched my door and when I hit him and shouted he looked at me and I felt like her. He had a heavy round head and soft brown eyes, glassy and muted by a light film that made him partially blind. When I rested my head on his chest I could hear the dull thud of his life. If I pressed a thumb to the base of his throat I could feel his blood moving. Once I thought about all the blood and life in Dog and it scared me. I loved Dog and he loved me. He would sleep on my mattress with me and, as he slept, his eyelids would tremble and his dry nose would twitch. One day, light laced the darkness and it mourned on the contours of his ribs and the raw patches of skin he’d chewed. I left Dog where I found him. Now just an empty room and the scream of the ten o’clock cleaner. The glint of light against Chair has become disturbing in the heady darkness of the room; sitting as the core of my existence. It’s hard to depend on something so still and silent. The pattern of her skin is no longer luminescent in the moonlight, but thwarted and distorted by the shadows. Closer, I can see that the braiding is loosening and beneath, a stinking mustard coloured sponge is what has been embracing me. Finally a knife is in my hand and I’m slicing across the gross thick skin. Crumbling sponge spatters me. The knife whittles down her legs and there is a paler flesh. The elation I feel in the ephemeral slaughter is greater than all of our time spent together. Afterwards, I arrange the remains in a box and stack it on the top shelf along with all the others. I write on it, because I loved her. I push the cupboard shut and rest, breathless against it. The room feels emptier.

SHOULD GOAL LINE TECHNOLOGY BE USED OR AVOIDED? J LANE

On the night of Monday October 28th 2013, world football saw the reappearance of the nightmare debate which just doesn’t want to go away. This is, of course, the debate over the introduction of goal-line technology (GLT). In the Championship match between Brighton and Watford, the away side’s striker Fernando Forestieri took a shot which beat Brighton goalkeeper Thomas Kuszczak, and the ball appeared to have entirely crossed the line before the home side’s defender Gordon Greer cleared, but the referee waved play on. Had the goal been counted, Watford would have been 2-0 up, and would probably have gone on to win the three points, but it stayed 1-0, and Brighton managed to equalise in the 54th minute, leaving the score at 1-1 when the final whistle blew. Due to their lack of a second goal, Watford missed out on two crucial points, and the manager (at the time) Gianfranco Zola was left fuming, calling for GLT to be introduced into the Championship, leading to the re-sparking of the debate which creates a huge divide in opinion amongst football fans around the globe.

“A debate which creates a huge divide in opinion amongst football fans” The debate was most prominent after the 2010 World Cup, following Frank Lampard’s infamous ghost goal against Germany, which some people believe caused England to be knocked out of the tournament so early. Since then, Sepp Blatter (president of FIFA) has been extremely critical of the idea of bringing in GLT, with the basis of his argument concerning the ‘nature and value’ of the game. In 2010 he said: “One of the main objectives of FIFA is to protect the universality of the game of association football... If you are coaching a group of teenagers in any small town around the world, they will be playing with the same rules as the professional players they see on TV." Blatter is suggesting that the introduction of GLT would lead to the creation of a larger gap between the teams in the highest level of football, and local clubs worldwide. He believes that one of the reasons why football is such a popular sport is because anyone can play it, anywhere, following the same rules as professional players. Perhaps if GLT was introduced into the top leagues and local teams were unable to access the technology some of the sport’s appeal may be lost as fans might not be able to relate to sport in the same way. Another reason why many believe that GLT should be avoided is because they think that it could remove the ‘human’ aspects of the game. For example, something which makes football so special is the margin for error, which means that all fans can have different opinions to discuss with their friends, family, work colleagues, etc. Part of the game’s appeal is the way that it’s talked about, and if GLT was introduced, the margin for error would be reduced. This would, in turn, remove much of the debate within football, perhaps meaning the game could lose some of its charm. Another high-profile individual who opposes GLT is Michel Platini (President of UEFA). Platini believes that the introduction of GLT will lead to more and more technology being installed into the beautiful game, and he thinks that this will cause the game to become increasingly controlled by technology. Perhaps it could lead to the game losing its integrity and its magic. Despite the popular belief that GLT could lead to a bad future for football, the opposite opinion is equally held. Many believe that the introduction of the technology would be a smart move, because human error has too large an effect on the value and fairness of matches. In recent years, football has become one of the biggest businesses worldwide with huge amounts of money coming in through TV and betting companies. This means that the accuracy of refereeing decisions is crucial because companies rely on the outcomes of games, so if an official were to give an incorrect decision that allowed or disallowed a goal, it could have huge financial ramifications for certain businesses.

“Officials wouldn’t be on the recieving end of so much unfair criticism” Another thing which is important for many people is how fairly the officials are treated. When you are watching a football match at home, you are given multiple slow-motion replays of each incident, from various angles, giving viewers the time to study every single thing in the finest detail. This is the polar opposite of what the officials get. They have access to the few seconds in which an incident occurs, from only one, probably difficult, angle. Despite this, if they make an incorrect decision, they become the focus of a frenzy of criticism from the football world. Why should a referee be at a disadvantage when it is their decision which matters most? The introduction of GLT would mean that fewer incorrect decisions would be made, and therefore the officials wouldn’t be on the receiving end of so much unfair criticism. Also, simply having the technology in place could ease the pressure which is put on referees, and it could end up playing the role of a safety net for officials, because the reduced pressure may mean they make more accurate decisions. Finally, perhaps the strongest case supporting the idea of GLT is that teams unfairly miss out on points or championships which they deserve due to an incorrect goal decision by a referee. It links back to the incident in the Brighton v Watford match, where Watford were denied a crucial two points which would have thrust them into the promotion battle. In 2008, Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger said: “When you love football you like justice to be respected. You should use what is available in order to be right in decision-making. Why should a team be allowed a goal that wasn’t in?” Many believe that if Frank Lampard’s goal against Germany in the 2010 World Cup had been counted, then England would have gone through to the next round. The score would have been 2-2 at half-time. England would have been on a high and Germany would have lost the advantage. Instead, England went into the second half feeling cheated, and Germany went on to win 4-1. If GLT was in place, the goal would have stood, and the outcome of the entire tournament could have been changed. But perhaps more importantly, whatever the result, it would have been completely fair and justified. The emotional arguments against technology are clear and difficult to dismiss: football is a game of passion and remains a grass roots sport. But maybe it’s the time to accept that the big changes have already been made. The game is dominated by money and the stakes are huge. In such a world, who can afford to make mistakes?

POETRY: SHIRE HORSE O POLLARD (YEAR 7)

Hooves like hammers pounding The cracked mud track, Muscles pulsing under skin, a beating heart. His chestnut eyes, stretching endless into knowing, His tail falling perfectly, in strands of silk, The strain barely showing as he drags this cart of wheat. His driver sleeps, his tweed cap pulled down low over his face.

ROBIN B HORN "Once all of our personal information is stored, synchronised and available on a server, when all consciousness becomes a collective, how can we distinguish ourselves?" A rare and profound quote I found in one of the most peculiar places, an old paperback volume by German dramatist Nicholas Denker, a 2036 edition. One I had rescued from the redundancy pile, scheduled to be removed from the company library, along with all other deteriorating paperback works, while steel shelves were stocked high with silicon copies, all of which were deemed appropriate reading material. I felt sad. I knew that very few people would remember works such as this, and as time drew on, that number would grow smaller and smaller. Eventually reaching zero. I had been part of the company since my 18th birthday, as per the housing agreement my father signed. It was on that day, that I and several other people my age stood in line before our indoctrination procedure. Each of us was taken to the medical tower and it was there that we received our standard issue wet-ware, a barely noticeable neural implant, as well as the addition of four interface ports on the back of our necks. Initially, there was a slight burning sensation, but the HR officer assured us that this would slowly fade. It never did though. Not for me. My 18th birthday was the day I became part of the Aspari Corporation. The facilitation officers provided the necessities, namely our uniforms, corporate arm bands, our neural augmentations and our codes to access the net. My personal login was X-0579-CDR-R&D-H.RBN. Robin. My name was Robin. I spent three of my five years with the company in one of the four enormous monolithic glass structures, on the eastern side of Aspari Plaza. The civil quarters, near the consumer district, populated with smiling faces plastered onto video screens, which were themselves plastered on every surface in public line of sight, which bordered the Sariff sector of Mega City 017, otherwise known as "The Night City". The size of the Sariff sector, as well as the Aspari sector, had both recently receded, while the size of the Kusenagi sector expanded. Aspari's retreat was slow however, as some of Sariff's assets had been absorbed within the two months prior. In a way, I thought of each sector of the city as a nation, eternally caught up in an invisible war. I thought that the chips we carried in our wallets were our weapons, and anything new from the company was considered a badge of loyalty. An airship with "go-faster" stripes or something as simple as a cyber-arm prosthesis. On that note, another of Denker's theories was that the more parts of your body became the product of any corporation, the more loyal you were to them. His work amazed me. This being said, I had to retire such thoughts during daylight hours, only finding a fleeting window before the curfew protocol was engaged. As long as I had the company wet-ware underneath my skin, I was under someone's gaze.

The answer to Denker's question, if there was a singular answer, eluded me for the second and third years of my first term. I was not worried about thoughts like this, as I sat at my desk, with two white interface cables protruding from the ports on my neck. Something like the rescue of a book from the redundancy pile was only a level seven offence, punishable only by confiscation. For first offenders, the option of substitution from the company library was still open. I had never committed any level of offence of any kind and so that option was still open for me. If one of the officers called me to the upper levels of the Capital Spire, I would be able to choose any book I wanted. Any disc that had been accepted. But it wouldn't be real. The deteriorating paperback 2036 edition was real. The way the paper felt between my fingers was real. The discs were not real. Nothing is real anymore.

I began to worry slightly about these thoughts. Persistent expression of displeasure with company policy was a level four offence, punishable by "re-education". I kept on with my work, relocating Denker's question to the back of my mind. The answer, if there was one, was of no use to the company. It would be of no use to me. But, no matter how hard I tried, I found it impossible to abandon the pursuit. The chase. What was the answer? Why was I chasing it? Would it be worth it? And in that moment, I knew I had it. I had never felt so... hollow. I removed the cables from the ports in my neck, letting them recoil under my desk. I got up, took my bag and left.

FIRST-PAST-THE-POST: A LOSE-LOSE SITUATION G SIDDONS

In May 2011, the public voted ‘no’ in a referendum proposing the replacement of First-Past-the-Post (FPP) with the Alternative Vote (AV) for general elections. The message was clear; the British public are still firmly in favour of the tried and tested system. However, when examined in detail, it is clear that retaining FPP in the current political climate is harmful and the electoral system should thus be reconsidered. The first argument usually deployed by defenders of FPP is that it produces strong government. The basis for this hypothesis is the fact that, under FPP, a single party usually achieves a majority in the House of Commons, which allows it to pursue its manifesto more directly than would be possible in a coalition government. This argument, however, simply does not hold true in reality. The general election of 2010 produced a hung parliament, and there is little evidence that either of the two major parties command enough public support to be able to achieve a majority in the next election. If hung parliaments, and therefore coalitions, are to become the norm under our current system, then the argument that FPP protects strong, single-party majority governments is invalid. In addition, there is clear evidence that single-party majority government is not the only, or even necessarily the best, way of creating effective government. Germany – a country in which general elections are conducted under a proportional system – is swiftly pulling away from Europe in terms of economic growth and is a painful reminder to those who advocate single-party majority government that the system they so idolise often fails to be as effective as the supposed nightmare of coalition.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;FPP is failing to protect the UK from the disadvantages of coalition government.â&#x20AC;?

Another supposed strength of FPP, closely linked to the fact that it is likely to produce majorities, is the fact that it allows voters to directly choose the government. By following the logical progression that voters choose Members of Parliament (MPs) and MPs comprise the government, it can be seen that the composition of the government is the choice of the voters. This is the antithesis of systems under which hung parliaments are produced. In the event of a hung parliament, the elected parties engage in a series of negotiations until a coalition is agreed upon. The result is a government which nobody voted for and is therefore in the bizarre position of leading a people over which it has no mandate. The potential dangers of this system came to light in New Zealand in 1996; the New Zealand First Party campaigned upon the promise of forming a coalition with the New Zealand Labor Party and won a great deal of public support because of this. However, when the time came to negotiate a coalition, Winston Peters (the leader of New Zealand First) chose instead to form a government with the Nationalist Party. A new government was thereby created despite the fact that nobody had voted for it, indeed, many had voted directly against it. FPP therefore appears to have the huge advantage of protecting democracy where it may suffer under other systems. Having said that, this example serves more to illustrate the dangers of coalition government than the failures of specific electoral systems. As has already been mentioned, FPP has resulted in coalition government - and it seems as though that will be the norm for the foreseeable future - it is thus clear that FPP is failing to protect the UK from the disadvantages of coalition government. This leads the UK into the dangerous territory of maintaining a system which produces the disadvantages of both proportional and majoritarian systems.

To conclude, the two main advantages of FPP (that it creates effective government and that it protects from the dangers of coalition) only hold true when one party wins outright. The current coalition, and the waning popularity of the two major UK parties, demonstrates that single-party majorities are a feature of the past. With this in mind, our current electoral system is failing to deliver the advantages of FPP and at the same time lumbering the country with many of the disadvantages of proportional electoral systems. It is therefore obvious that if we are to avoid a continuation of the current lose-lose situation, we must reconsider the use of FPP.

ART: ART

Fred Panks Y13

ART: ART

Clockwise From Top Left: Freddie Wise Y13, Joe Turner Y13 & Chris Pidsley Y13

“If there’s one thing that is abundantly clear about cinema, it’s that it is a cut-throat industry”

CINEMA L WALPOLE

BOX OFFICE FLOPS: THE LONE RANGER (TOP RIGHT) & JOHN CARTER (BOTTOM RIGHT)

FORGOTTEN STAR CHRIS O’DONNELL BATMAN & ROBIN (1997)

It’s a strange thing that cinema asks of us. To suspend our disbelief for a few hours and to jump into the heart of the story is a compromise that we all have to make if we want to fully experience a film. Of course, we all grumble at the cost of the ticket and the eponymous salty or sweet snack that is popcorn; however there are occasions when we forgo our misgivings and come from the screening rooms so wonderfully fulfilled that we forget we paid any money at all. The most recent occasion that this happened to me was in December, after ‘The Desolation of Smaug’ hit our screens. The smouldering avarice of the Dragon himself amidst the glut of gold in Erebor is one of the most striking images I can recall at a cinema, and further confirmed my love for the spectacle of the big screen. However, could the proliferation of streaming websites and high-risk film-making bring forth a ‘Bust’ after the undeniable ‘Boom’ that Hollywood is enjoying? If there’s one thing that is abundantly clear about cinema, it’s that it is a cut-throat industry. It has the ability to send companies into liquidation and end careers. Just look at ‘Batman and Robin’; although it didn’t end the career of its leading man (George Clooney), its critical and public lambasting forced former Golden Globe nominee Chris O’Donnell into an obscurity that he hasn’t returned from. The same could be said for Brandon Routh, the lead in the underwhelming ‘Superman Returns’. It is not just individuals that suffer the brunt of this competition. Films such as ‘John Carter’ and ‘The Lone Ranger’ received budgets of around $250,000,000 each, but only just managed to recoup this monumental investment at the box office. Naturally, it is naïve to assume that all films can become box office hits, but when the stakes are so high it does place film-makers in a perilous position.

“The behemoth of streaming that is Netflix has the public in its palm” In spite of this balancing act, the film industry is indeed in a state of ‘Boom’. This year’s Oscar nominations are an indication of how strong the field is, and how the industry is flourishing. However, Hollywood now has to contend with streaming sites such as ‘Netflix’ in order to maintain its high standards. Netflix has become somewhat of a phenomenon in recent years, with the number of subscribers likely to reach 30 million worldwide very soon. The presence of original, high quality TV series made solely for the site, such as ‘House of Cards’, represents how important these sites are becoming. Couple this with Netflix’s ability to dictate when they release their material – such as releasing one episode of series 5 of ‘Breaking Bad’ each week – and it suggests that this behemoth of the streaming world has the public in its palm. Sites such as Netflix, Hulu and Blinkbox have one major facet in their favour over the cinema; accessibiity. The ability to watch the latest blockbusters on your smartphone or through your laptop at a time of your choosing negates the rigmarole of checking cinema times and having to clear your schedule.

NETFLIX’S HOUSE OF CARDS

THE EVER-POPULAR GAME OF THRONES

If watching a streaming site, or just television for that matter, is the easy option, then it may be expected that there would be a drop in quality when comparing the big screen to the world of television. However, in recent years the small screen has been thinking big. Series such as the magnificent ‘Game of Thrones’ possess the quality, and budget for that matter, to supersede many films at the box office. The ability to put plot lines onto a backburner and allow the audience to forge a link with a character over a longer period of time does give television an advantage over film. Moreover, the world of cinema seems to be fixated with franchises at the moment, perhaps an attempt to introduce more ‘Character Arcs’ into their work. The Marvel franchise is the epitome of this. There have been run-outs for Iron Man (X3), Thor (X2), the Hulk and an ensemble piece in the form of Avengers Assemble. Personally, I can think of nothing better than seeing a Norse God pulverising an alien with a magic hammer whilst sharing casual banter with a sociopath who utilises more iron than Stalin’s Russia. However, with Captain America’s second outing, as well as DC’s re-introduction into the game, it may just be that the average cinema goer will start to feel superhero fatigue. 14

THE MAN BEHIND THE MAGIC: JJ ABRAMS IS SET TO DIRECT THE NEW STAR WARS FILM DUE FOR RELEASE IN 2015

So is cinema digging its own grave? It is ridiculous to suggest that original scripts are a thing of the past, with films such as ’12 Years A Slave’ pushing emotional boundaries like never before. However, the seemingly endless cycle of reboots and origin stories does indicate that, in some circles, the barrel is perhaps being scraped. That’s not to say that reboots are not enjoyable. JJ Abrams’ re-imagining of Star Trek was both a critical and public success and breathed new life into a muchloved franchise. Abrams’ brilliant mind will also be presiding over the newest instalment of the Star Wars saga in 2015. However it seems almost immoral to try and resell a previously seen story, only this time with more bells and whistles attached. Producers will no doubt argue that doing this negates the risk factor mentioned earlier but, in my personal view, cinema’s greatest strength is that it can afford to be at the forefront of innovation and reflect the zenith of human emotion; it can only do this by being imaginative.

WHEN REMAKES GO RIGHT: JJ ABRAMS’ REBOOT OF THE STAR TREK FRANCHISE (2009)

So it seems that even hubristic Hollywood has to have a cautionary look over its shoulder. Now, this isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t scaremongering, nor is it my attempt to get all â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Nostradamusâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and foresee the end of the re-kindled golden years of cinema. However, with people across the world feeling the financial pinch and becoming more fleeting with their cinema visits, the stakes are certainly high. I myself will always see the cinema as the pinnacle of acting and of spectacle, but with sites such as the aforementioned Netflix becoming more and more popular, as well as introducing more enticing material, the game is certainly afoot.

ART: ART

Fred Panks Y13 17

ART: ART

Hugh Davidson Y13

BRAVE NEW WORLD The Changing Nature of Security and Defence in a Rapidly Shifting World T K MEADLEY

The dynamics which shape our world are in flux, ushering in great opportunity, but also great uncertainty. As the nature of threats to security change, so must the solutions we utilise. In 1914 Britain began fighting “the Great War”. Fought between empires to gain territory, influence and resources, it was played out with infantry, cavalry and trenches. One hundred years later the world has changed immeasurably, as has the nature of warfare. Now driven by different forces and different powers, globalisation has made the world more integrated and more interdependent, distributing power away from Europe. Technology, too, has advanced, and drones, cyber warfare and satellites are just some of the ways in which warfare is being revolutionised. Fundamentally, structures and attitudes have changed. The War Office has been replaced with the Ministry of Defence, and “security” has replaced imperialism. Emerging from the Cold War, the idea of territorial empires competing for power has diminished, and conventional wars between “great powers” seem unthinkable. New concepts of humanitarian intervention and peacekeeping are becoming increasingly important, and wars are fought less between nations on the battlefield, and more by non-state actors. Guerrilla tactics and terrorism, rather than conventional warfare, are now the norm, not the exception. Globalisation is a multi-dimensional phenomenon underpinning many of these changes. It can be a force for good; increased interdependency between states makes it counterproductive to attack other nations. The economic links in trade and technology foster strong diplomatic ties and encourage peace and co-operation. It can facilitate greater political freedom, through the sharing of information and ideas. It has also prompted the increasing importance of an “international community”, a significant factor in defence relations that includes the UN, the G8 and NATO. These bodies are vital in terms of co-ordinating defence strategies, sharing resources, and working together to ensure co-operation over conflict. 19

Within this community, helping struggling nations in their long term development is vital; failed states can become hotbeds for terrorism, drug trafficking and disease. Developing these countries is ultimately in our interests economically, as it increases economic prosperity, and thus opens up new markets. A more integrated world means there is more potential to work together and an incentive to help those at the bottom. However, globalisation also poses risks for international security. Interdependency creates greater vulnerability - a problem in one area of the world can create shockwaves everywhere. This is exemplified by the rise of militant Islam. Unlike previous wars, there is no particular nation state which can be negotiated with or confined; instead it is a pervasive ideology, carried out by individuals. 9/11 and other terrorist attacks have put the “war on terror” at the top of the global security agenda. In a YouGov poll, terrorism was ranked by the general public the most significant threat to Britain and one of the most important issues in foreign policy. The effects of terrorism are felt all over the world; the perpetrators are often from developed countries, such as Ibrahim al-Mazwagi, the first British jihadi to die in Syria; the soldiers intervening in Iraq and Afghanistan are mostly from Europe and the USA. The war is fought against civilian targets using guerrilla warfare. A similar campaign of terrorism was fought in Sierra Leone, where rebel groups and government-affiliated militias carried out atrocities including amputation, cannibalism and rape.

The victims of these wars are, increasingly, civilians rather than militants. War is seldom carried out by armies against armies, and as the nature of warfare changes, so must the methods of combating threats. Military force does not guarantee victory – Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq clearly demonstrated this. We cannot only rely on conventional means – the fight for “hearts and minds” is increasingly important. In this sense, legitimacy is vital, as developed countries intervening in developing ones can be seen as purely neo-colonialist. This gives the UN a key role to play, as a mostly neutral organisation. The plan to introduce a permanent UN force is a good one that would significantly reduce the time needed to put together a peacekeeping or intervention force, which would save many lives. To an extent, Sierra Leone guerrilla warfare

9/11: The terrorist attack on the twin towers contributed to the “war on terror”

The UN Building In New York City

it would help to liberate the UN from the political agenda of the more powerful military nations, making international law and peace a more important factor in intervention. It is vital that we realise the importance of peace-building, through means such as discussion, peaceful resolution and reconciliation. In light of this, the military has to work in tandem with non-governmental organisations, and diplomats. Equally, whilst these organisations should aim to remain as neutral as possible during war, they need to be willing to work with the military afterwards to build peace, instead of ostracising them. Given the far-reaching consequences of international threats, the question of military intervention is an important one. The idea of humanitarian intervention has only recently developed, after the end of the Cold War in 1990. The first UN intervention in Kuwait in 1991 was a relative success – the invading country, Iraq, having compromised Kuwaiti sovereignty and committed human rights abuses, was duly expelled. But the lines are much less clear-cut when we approach issues such as “liberation”, or regime change, or the support of the government or rebel side. The shadow of the Iraq war looms large over any debate on intervention. Widely considered to be an ill-thought out, illegal war, it was carried out effectively, but the aftermath was a bloody sectarian civil war, wider regional instability, increased hatred of the West, a weak and corrupt government, and the increasing influence of Iran in the country. The war was hugely controversial and millions of people marched against the so called “Operation Iraqi Freedom” on Feb 15th 2003, in the largest anti-war rally ever. Yet the issue of Iraq should not discredit the importance and usefulness of military intervention. In many ways it was an abnormal intervention, perceived to have been fought largely for the American agenda of regime change, oil and the “war on terror”. There was no civil war going on, no call to intervene, little international support or legitimacy. There was essentially no plan for afterwards, except one which split up oil fields between Western contractors. We must be careful not to come to the conclusion that, in light of Iraq, intervention is not an option. 21

“If a state fails to prevent mass atrocity crimes, the international community has a responsibility to step in” Similarly, the intervention in Somalia between 1991 and 1993 was largely considered a failure, discouraging the international community from intervening in the future. Then the Rwandan genocide began; 500,000 were killed in an ethnically driven massacre. There was no intervention, despite the fact that a limited campaign could have been enough to curb the mass killing. The idea of “Responsibility to Protect” is growing in significance. It suggests that sovereignty is not a right but a responsibility, and if a state fails to prevent mass atrocity crimes (genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing) the international community has a responsibility to step in. Thus, intervention can be justified, though not in the way it has been used in the majority of cases. An example of a successful British military intervention is in Sierra Leone, an efficient operation which facilitated not only a ceasefire, but lasting peace. The forces of around 1,000 soldiers arrived in the country with little fanfare, initially with the purpose of evacuation. Later, they trained the national army, rescued UN hostages and captured rebel leaders. The civil war, which had killed more than 50,000 and lasted over ten years, was over in a matter of months. Although it has not been an unmitigated success, there is a relatively stable, democratic government, and a growing economy. Without doubt, the situation is much better than if there had been no intervention – not just for Sierra Leone, but for the wider region. Paul Collier estimates that the benefits for the global economy from ending a civil war and avoiding a failed state are around $64 billion, as well as the huge humanitarian benefits , but these positives are given little media attention compared to the huge failures in Iraq. It is clear that, although military intervention is not the solution in many cases, it can have an important role to play in creating security, peace and development. A changing world brings opportunities to reduce security threats, and minimise the impact of violence. Now more than ever, the problems in Syria, Somalia and Afghanistan are our own. To preserve our own security, we need to think of long-term peace building and encouraging economic growth to reduce the risk of civil war and to increase the quality of life. Intervention can work. It is an important tool in some situations and there needs to be a plan for peace building as well as military operations. It means trade, as well as aid; it means a transparent system with checks and balances as well as just democracy; and it means investing in businesses in the poorest countries, not just providing humanitarian support. The world is changing, and so is the nature of security and defence. In the long run, the fight for legitimacy, long-term stability and co-operation is far more important than the fight against armies, terrorists and insurgents.

D PLASKITT

The Gift It was his fault really. If he had wanted my full attention then he shouldn’t have sat in front of the large bay window that looked out over the city below. A man as uninteresting and mundane as him should know not to compete with a busy street for my attention. I did try my best to look interested, at least when he first sat down, but there’s only so long I can spend listening and responding to idle chit chat without looking thoroughly bored. Luckily for me, the dumpy, bald little man was far too enthralled by the sound of his own voice to notice. Though I knew why he was here, the reason still seemed somewhat strange to me. Why would my long-standing and much hated rival leave something for me in his will? Then, as if he had read my mind, he said: “I’m as confused as you are as to why he would leave anything to you, especially this, considering how you were always arguing over the slightest of things.” Perhaps he’s more observant than he seems, I thought to myself, “But the will specified you by name, so I’ll leave this in your care.” He leaned forward, handing me a package the size of a thick book, which was wrapped neatly in brown paper and tied with string. With that he drained the last of his tea, and heaved himself forwards and out of the high-backed chair, throwing his arms forward to balance himself. I walked him out into the hallway, where he thanked me for my hospitality and left. I breathed a sigh of relief as the door closed gently behind me. I abhorred tedious people even more than having my time wasted, though the two things are often one and the same. I returned to my study, taking the package with me, and placed it atop one of the many piles of books scattered around the room. I then settled down into my most comfortable chair and picked up the book that lay open on its arm discarded in haste due to earlier knocking, and began to read silently.

Over the top of the book the package was just visible and drew my attention from the corner of my eye with each new page. Seven pages later, my interest in the words in front of me dwindled as my curiosity grew and I snapped the book closed and set it aside. Getting slowly up, I walked towards the package and grasped it in one hand, inspecting it from all sides. It was completely plain, nothing remarkable about it really; a simple brown package tied with string, yet I was apprehensive about opening it. There was no letter accompanying it, no explanation of any kind as to why it had been left to me. What could he possibly have hidden in this small package as his last act towards me? Had he been regretful of our rivalry and written a letter to tell of his respect for me and settle peacefully? Could it be his research, we both worked in the same field, perhaps he wished me to carry it on past his death? Though he was always quite aggressive. Perhaps as he had nothing to lose,he would attempt to end my life also. In that case it would be best to leave it. I was about to put it down gently, but quickly decided to settle my curiosity. I held the box up to my ear. No ticking. That was always a good sign. Walking into the kitchen, I picked up a pair of scissors, cut the string that bound the object and began to unwrap it. As I had thought, inside the packaging was a box, the same colour as the paper. It had no lock and was made of wood, maple by the look of it. I noticed my hands shaking and took a deep breath to steady myself. I gently pulled at the lid and it opened. Inside, on the plush padding of the box sat an unadorned business card, the words embroidered on it read very simply: â&#x20AC;&#x153;I winâ&#x20AC;?. Damn him, he always had to have the last word. I threw the packaging into the bin, card included. I made a mental note to burn the box.

TRACKS T K Meadley

She feels the breaking crunch of empty snow, The flakes still spiralling slowly all around, Floating; shimmering in the tender glow, Settling softly on the hardened ground. One boot is raised, then two and left behind; Two prints to testify that she was there, And any searching eye will surely find A littering of tracks, markers to where The early risers through the snow had run. The man, the bird, the deer, their movements charted, Their footfalls undiminished by the sun, The melting minutes, freezing where they started. As she walks on, the tracks she leaves behind Are memories of moments, on my mind.

POETRY: POETRY THE FLOOD J SHIRNIA (Year 8)

A lowering glowering tide of blackness surges like a threatening sea. Ravenous hound takes to the streets, the solitary hound packless but fearless still. As the storm rages you hear the screaming and the crying of the villagers, suddenly the smell of death intrudes. When the beast has finished, it leaves people staring at the wet baths of blood and the ruins left like old toys.

THE CITY I AYLWARD (Year 8)

Towering trees of brick & stone, looming, authoritatively. Ants, swarming, crawling, ignorant to the metropolis that surrounds them. Jewels of ruby, amber & emerald pulse, beating, pumping life in essence, through the veins of the awakening bear. By dusk, as the illuminating crescent rises high, the beast is restless. Ever-glowing embers, reflections, like mirrors, the roaring furnace, a curtain of iron on guard. Absence of light, darkness, nothing, yet the gates from slumber open, & the regal giants respire, release, emitting a radiating shimmer. Dawn cracks through the skyline, warping shadows, stretching clouds, the network, my city, returns from its recluse. 27

A GAME OF POWER T LEWIS (Year 8)

Smashing, banging, running, swerving, A sea of bodies everywhere Wallowing in the tar like mud. Squelch! A sudden turn, A slip of the hand, fumbling wildly Then, a sudden break Thundering through, lightning fast, One more obstacle, blocking the path, BAM! Sprawling in the mud A rush of bulldozers, Protecting the ball Forcing back the enemy. Deserved control, stampeding beasts Smashing through the human pillars Hoping for a reward. A flick of the wrist, the line in view Ultimate confusion, people shouting Try scoredâ&#x20AC;Śâ&#x20AC;Ś..

HILLS

B ROBINSON (Year 8)

Breaking through the skin of the Earth Pulsing, beating to the drums of the wind. Crowned with birch trees strong and proud The hills are rolling ever on. Morning dew cleansing the air like it's just been made. The sweet smell of pollen, The bitter taste of a sloe berry bush. Ever onwards, the hills stand strong. The pink, orange dawn tears away the darkness, Stretching shadows mile after mile. The wind strikes, the trees crash. The hills remain with pride.

REVIEWS A Clockwork Orange - Anthony Burgess R Siebenaller ‘Is it better for a man to have chosen evil than to have good imposed upon him?’. This is the moral question at the heart of Burgess’ critically acclaimed 1962 novel ‘A Clockwork Orange.’ The book follows the story of Alex as he narrates the unimaginable crimes that he and a gang of friends take part in, the attempts of the state to make him a law-abiding citizen in a not-so-distant English society, and the moral questions that this raises. Much of the book is written in a fictitious slang called Nadsat which takes its influences from altered Slavic words, school boy rhyming slang and some words invented by Burgess himself. The use of the language initially creates feelings of discomfort for the reader, which eventually fades as one becomes accustomed to the vocabulary. As the reader accepts such language, they are desensitised to the shocking ‘ultraviolence’ that is all too common in the society in which the novel is set. The use of this language is what makes the book such a different read and a daunting challenge for some people. It may even prove to be the deciding factor that puts people off either starting to read or finishing the book, as much of the understanding of the novel relies on a personal interpretation of the language. However, I do not feel that this should put potential readers off; on the contrary, ‘A Clockwork Orange’ is a novel of such importance and calibre that it should be made a priority in your reading list if you fancy something exciting, disturbing yet brilliant.

Boomerang: Travels in the New Third World - Michael Lewis G Siddons Pious Greek monks making billions on the property market, ex-fishermen turning to banking and Germans making mistakes. This sounds like the plot of a badly thought out novel. Terrifyingly, however, it is not: Michael Lewis’ account follows the shocking collapse of the global finance industry by investigating some of the main players in the crisis. He probes the darkest depths of the banking world, and reveals stories which leave the reader questioning how these people were ever left responsible for so much money. You might think that a 200-odd page book following the events of the financial collapse would leave anyone without a degree in economics both bored and confused, but this is not the case. Lewis manages to uncover stories that would put even the best of novelists to shame. Not only this, he manages to explain the more technical aspects in a way that is easy enough to understand but not at all patronising. Of course, there’s the odd word that needs looking up in the dictionary, but that would be the case with most books on a specialist topic. By far the hardest thing to understand about this book is the realities it unveils – something that is by no means the fault of the author. Given that we are emerging from the largest financial crash since the Great Depression, it seems apt that we turn our attention towards finding out why it happened. This book is a great first step towards understanding what went wrong. It provides a deep and comprehensive analysis of the crisis whilst still retaining enough charm to make it enjoyable. All in all, this is a great read for those who do have a keen interest in economics and an even more eye-opening experience for those who don’t. It will leave you laughing in disbelief, cursing the behaviour of bankers and desperate to find out more about the mess we are in. I thoroughly recommend it.

The Hundred-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out Of The Window and Disappeared - Jonas Jonasson D Guthrie “Things are what they are, and whatever will be, will be” Jonas Jonasson’s debut novel follows two stories: the life and times of Allan Karlsson from ages 0 to 99, and the adventure of Allan Karlsson, aged 100, with his companions Julius Jonsson, Benny Ljungberg and Gunilla ‘The Beauty’ Björklund. The overall story is highly entertaining, switching between the past and 2005, recounting Allan’s life, then and now. Along the way in his hundred-year adventure, Allan runs in to Stalin, Harry S. Truman and the illegitimate brother of Albert Einstein, Herbert. This story is amusing from start to finish, and will keep you enthralled until the last page. One of the funniest moments of the book occurs when Bucket, henchman of Per-Gunnar "Boss" Gerdin, falls for one of Allan's plans. He ends up being crushed to death between an elephant's bum and its fresh excrement. His final demise perfectly sums up the random nature of a plot which ranges from the near assassination of Winston Churchill to the arrival of 'Mr Two Hundred Thousand Dollars' in Bali. The character of Allan Karlsson is similar to that of Forrest Gump; he is always present in the background. He is there with Harry S. Truman when he finds out he is to be the next President of the United States, and he is there when Vladivostok burns down. The only unusual thing about Allan Karlsson is that he doesn't fall in love until the epilogue - a rare occurrence for the protagonist of a novel. The real star of the book, for me, is Rod Bradbury, the translator. Without him, I could never have enjoyed Jonas Jonasson's Swedish novel "Hundraåringen som klev ut genom fönstret och försvann", and I could never have understood how the life of a centenarian could be so funny.

Fred Palmer Y13

Sam Hines Y13

ART: ART

EDITORIAL TEAM:

DESIGN TEAM:

Max Gibson

Chris Pidsley

George Siddons

Seb Howells

Rich Siebenaller

SUPERVISOR:

Hugh Davidson

Ms L Harris

Tom Meadley

COVER IMAGES: Harry Oliver

SUBMISSIONS: Work or images for submission should be emailed to:

marlingpublications@gmail.com We reserve the right to edit any work or images submitted. Views expressed are those of the individual authors.

ISSUE 02 - SUMMER 2014