The Lion - Issue 2 Volume 3

ULU in Crisis

Elections called into question and Scandal over Rememberance

3

Obama Drama

5

JT White on four more years of Obama

The Volume 3 Issue 2 Friday 16th November theheythroplion.co.uk

Equal Marriage Heythrop Pride give their two cents

7

Lion

Students Vote Yes to 9k Tuition Fees An EGM held gives green light to College to charge Undergraduates the maximum amount.

Samuel English Senior Editor Fifty students attended the Emegency General Meeting (EGM) on the 12th October. After a presentation from HSU President Ashley Doolan explaining how College’s like Heythrop would suffer under the new Higher Education policy and a further short presentation from Director of Finance Martin Grundy, the floor was opened to Students and their questions. This EGM signals a distinct change of tone from the student body who just two years ago voted strongly against any rise in fees at an AGM held unanimously. With few questions asked at the EGM an air of uncertainty descended before the voting was opened, at which point it became clear that an overwhelming majority of students were willing to facilitate a change in the Heythrop access agreement, which could pave the way for fees to rise by £750 from £8250 to£9000 over a period of two years. The reason for this staggered rise is a promise made by College that fees would not be raised by more than the rate of inflation in the 2013-14 prospectus.

A student at the College said to The Lion: “Voting to increase the fees wasn’t too hard a decision, when I arrived here fees were around £3,000 that is a big difference to £9,000, £8250 isn’t though. After listening to the talks it seemed obvious that Heythrop has to charge the highest amount possible if we are going to survive as we are.”

Not all agree with the idea that Heythrop should charge the full amount

permitted by the Government, one student noted “For £9,000 I’d expect a lot more in the way of facilities than we offer, a pool table and dark room to watch TV in don’t really cut it.” HSU president Ashley Doolan said of the new agreement “Heythrop has been forced into a position by Government policy that makes difficult decisions, such as that made at the EGM, unavoidable to assure the survival and development of high standards of teaching and learning. I feel it is unwise to punish Heythrop when they have been placed in a new market economy, which I feel is at direct odds with the true worth of a University education, the chance to grow and develop into a better rounded individual that can contribute to society. I am keen to fight for the increase in funds to be seen feeding directly back into student financial support and better facilities for students. ” It does seem that many have accepted the rise in fees as necessary, the question of bursary reassessment however seems to be proving more contentious as the changes to the access agreement do facilitate a potential slashing of bursaries offered up by College, in a move that one female student described as “infuriating” the EGM vote didn’t include bursary reassessment, though this will also go ahead. Academic affairs officer Peter O’Neil said of the issue “we were told before the EGM that bursaries would be reassigned in line with the new fees, this full disclosure was good. However, it is a great shame we didn’t have a separate vote on the issue.” One student told The Lion “I survive in London thanks to my bursary; Heythrop’s

Fr. John McDade - Courtesy of Heythrop Archives

bursary scheme was a major draw for me. I hate to think that in future people will suffer higher fees and less financial support...” Another student who works and still finds

herself reliant upon her bursary added “My bursary really helps, it comes in at the most crucial time of the year, paying three months rent and providing a little extra for

transport.”

Director of finance Martin Grundy was approached for a comment by The Lion but at the time of going to press none had been received.

2

Friday 16th november | THE LION

NEWS

The Lion Office has moved!

Come find us next to “The Cave” in The Basement

Heythrop student Abs Hassanali is elected ULU Senate Chair

f facebook.com/theheythroplion t twitter.com/theheythroplion Y youtube.com/theheythroplion : flickr.com/theheythroplion

theheythroplion.co.uk

Samuel English News Editor

Please recycle your Lion at one of the many recycle bins around College

Heythrop student Abduttayyeb ‘Abs’ Hassanali has been unanimously elected as chair of the ULU senate. Abs will begin his post for the 2012-13 academic year.

Taking charge will render him responsible for organising and conducting senators around the University of London colleges.

The ex-ULU trustee and current research student at Heythrop is the first of our students to hold the position in the College’s his-

tory. In a speech focussing on the challenges facing ULU Abs noted “I have a vision of a ULU and a ULU Chair that serves you more than it serves itself.”

Abs said of the campaign led by him and his team across the various University of London colleges, “I am so proud of the campaign we ran together - it is a testament to each of you who believed in me and inspired me to keep going. There is still some unfinished business. For I do not run

The

Meet the New Lion Editorial Team Editor-in-Chief Gala Jackson-Coombs gala@theheythroplion.co.uk

Features Editor Zahra Al-Kateb features@theheythroplion.co.uk

Senior Editor JT White jt@theheythroplion.co.uk

Comment Editor Faye West comment@theheythroplion.co.uk

Senior Editor Joshua Ferguson josh@theheythroplion.co.uk

Culture Editor Daniel Tripp culture@theheythroplion.co.uk

News Editor Samuel English news@theheythroplion.co.uk The Lion is the independent student newspaper of Heythrop College, University of London. We distribute at least 1000 free copies during term time around campus and to popular student venues in and around Kensington.

The Lion is published by HackJack Ltd. and printed by Mortons Print Ltd. All Copyright is the exclusive property of HackJack Ltd. No part of this publication is to be reproduced, stored on a retrieval system or submitted in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the publisher.

in these elections just to be something, but to do something…”

ULU has often been seen as irrelevant to Colleges like Heythrop who are situated away from Bloomsbury but Abs has made his position as Chair of Senate clear, saying to The Lion “Make no question of it, Small & Specialist Colleges do matter – that’s what my election did display, and that’s what my term in office will display.”

Editorial Team

NEXT DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSIONS

25.11.12

Please send your submissions to: submit@theheythroplion.co.uk The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Editors or of the Heythrop Students’ Union. Every effort has been made to contact the holders of copyright for any material used in this issue, and to ensure the accuracy of this fortnight’s stories.

Founded by Alex Hackett and Gala Jackson-Coombs

3

friday 16th novEMBER | THE LION

NEWS

ULU Controversy: Election “a Farce” and WreathGate Scandal Samuel English News Editor Heythrop Students’ union President Ashley Doolan resigned his post on the ULU elections committee along with Daniel Cooper in recent weeks after branding the elections “a farce” and widespread malpractice was alleged. Doolan is understood to have left his position due to his disapointment with ULU’s decision over key complaints, whilst Cooper resigned to support far-left candidate and eventual winner of the ULU elec-

Heythrop Alumnus Matt Mclaren Addresses Lib Dem Conference

tions Michael Chessum.

As acting President, Cooper has come under fire from all quarters for choosing to endorse a candidate, and for breaking the election regulations by using email lists and his position on the elections committee. The QMessenger reported this month that “as of 12pm on the 8th of November his [Cooper’s] ULU blog maintains he is on the committee, something against the election regulations...”. This was acknowledged by the Elections Committee report. Much of the criticism has been focused on the fact that Cooper’s endorsement of his friend Chessum was “politically unfair” and gave Chessum an unfair edge at a pivotal last minute stage. Cooper further broke elec-

tion regulations by using his ULU email account to send a message stating his support for Chessum to all London Sabbatical officers, causing widespread discontent which has led to some branding the current ULU crop as “disgraceful and useless.” Doolan left a short message stating he was “dissatisfied with the returning officers handling of other matters and this one.”

Will Hall also expressed concern and may be seeking legal advice as he came a close second in the election, in a widely leaked document Hall argues that the candidate in question handed much of the necessary paperwork in late, and should therefore be disqualified.

Daniel Cooper has not commented upon the matter but has directed student reporters to Rob Park the returning officer. However Park also refused to comment and the student media were told to contact ULU once more.

This is just the latest in a string of bad luck for ULU this year which began with Sean Rillo Razcka resigning at the final hour, after being elected by less that 1% of ULU students, London Student Editor Jen Izaakson [formerly Jennifer Jones] allowing LSE student Jason Wong to compare transgendered people to sex offenders in an article published by London Student, of this incident Alex Hackett commented “It would be a great shame

for London Student to close, it is over fifty years old and should be the biggest student paper in London” and what is now being dubbed ‘wreathgate’ an incident in which Daniel Cooper refused to attend ULU’s remembrance day service or lay a wreath as he “disagrees with the memorialisation of war.” This in turn has left ULU in turmoil and led to the creation of a 1,707 strong Facebook group named ‘Daniel Cooper must resign as ULU vicepresident.’ At the time of going to press this group has more ‘likes’ than Cooper received votes in the election. No statement has been released pertaining to the complaints made by Will Hall, Gala JacksonCoombs or any other student.

Samuel English News Editor Heythrop Graduate and Haringey Liberal Democrat representative Matt Mclaren recently made a speech at the Liberal Democrats conference. Matt addressed five thousand delegates on the subject of sustainability and jobs. HSU Vice-President Alex Hackett said of Matt’s success “I am extremely pleased to see Matt progressing so quickly in his political career.

I wish him all the best.” Matt is perhaps best known for his active campaigning around college and the debate he had with Sir Malcolm Rifkind in 2011 here at Heythrop which is available to view on ‘The Lion’ youtube.

Matt has recently launched a campaign to become an MEP just one year after graduating from Heythrop which can be found at facebook.com/mjmclaren

Daniel Cooper, ULU Vice President

Heythrop’s UJS Candidate JT White Senior Editor The President of Heythrop’s Jewish Society Abigail Kay has decided to run as a candidate in the Presidential elections for the Union of Jewish Students. The election will determine who will lead the UJS team for the next year. Heythrop’s Jewish Society was founded last year by Natasha Mann and Abigail Kay, the J-Soc organised a series of large events including a Seder, various talks and a trip to the Jewish Museum. Kay is a third year Heythrop student taking the Study of Religion who was elected President of the J-Throp last year and

has since maintained the society’s record for events. The next event this term will be on Wednesday 21st November at 18:45pm. It will consist of a talk on ‘Judaism and Interfaith: A Personal Experience’ headed by Rabbi Sybil Sheridan, will feature refreshments and a Q&A session. Abigail Kay has also been involved in Jewish societies outside of Heythrop College and stood as Interfaith Officer at Imperial College J-Soc from 2011 to 2012.

Kay founded and coordinated the UJS Blood Drive, in memory of her late mother, which began as an effort to encourage students to give blood to help save lives and soon expanded to many other universities. As for the specific reasons for

running Kay states in her manifesto that “I want to see British Jewish students being empowered in whatever field it is which most interests them, unlocking the huge potential inside each and every student.” She went on to add “As UJS President, I would do everything possible in similar situations to ensure that the Jewish community supports its students in their achievements while expressing its valid criticisms in a fair and reasonable manner, so that we are empowering our students, not belittling them.”

Nominations for candidates have officially closed and campaigning has now commenced across numerous university campuses. Voting will be open on November 26th

and close by December 7th, the result will then be announced at the UJS Conference on December 16th 2012. The UJS President serves as a representative of Jewish students and has the opportunity to make a significant impact on the lives of Jewish students across the country. It’s a full-time paid sabbatical position, which comes with the responsibilities of managing the UJS team including the handling of the budget for UJS Programmes and Initiative Fund for Britain’s JSocs. This will require close work with Jewish societies across the UK, helping them form new ideas about how to engage and provide for Jewish students, enabling them to implement their own initiatives at the local level.

4

friday 16TH novEMBER | THE LION

HSU PAGE

Why I am

marching on the 21st November:

Ashley Doolan, HSU President I want to make it clear right from the outset that I do not ascribe to any political party nor will you find me insulting the “Tory” government. I am marching because I am unhappy with government education policy and the growing demonization of students and the unemployed that’s been happening over the last 10 years. Coming from a working class area that, to be honest, lacked any sense of motivation and drive for young people growing up, I was surrounded by people who believed that university was something that other people did; and that they would

be lucky to find a job working in a supermarket, let alone move to London to study a non vocational subject. I was lucky, I had teachers and family who supported the decisions I made and enabled me to get this far in my life, and for that I am grateful.

The policies currently being put through parliament, supported by all sides of the house in principle; increasing the cost of tuition, restructuring our secondary education, and removing support from those young people wanting to take a place in Further Education, I feel

are a direct stop on people from backgrounds like mine being able to reach their full potential. The rise in tuition fees (a result of a Labour endorsed review), though not causing any more upfront cost to students, will alienate many from poorer families going in to Higher Education (a 15% drop in applications was seen last year for example) as children raised in debt averse families are discouraged by the escalating costs. This along with the debasement of the creative arts in our education system, as they are deemed not to contribute to “reducing the deficit”, dam-

Katie Whiteley-Maguire, HSU Campaigns Officer The government’s cuts to education are based on a skewed idea that subjects can be priced according solely to the equipment they require in the lecture hall.

This completely disregards small and specialist institutions, like us, who therefore do not qualify for any funding and are hence taking a cut of £668,000 this year alone.

Thanks to these cuts, the college’s hand has been forced. Students are now facing fees of £9000 to keep

the college going into the future, at philosophy or biology, our degrees a time when we are all tightening are worthwhile. We need to be vocal, to remind the government that our belts. we are still here and we are still Over the past year, students have unhappy with their cuts. At a time regrettably become apathetic to- of overall indifference, we need to wards this very immediate issue, reapply pressure on the governmeaning that government think ment to change this situation. I they have won. It is for this rea- believe that the march, along with son I am marching. I march to other measures being taken by the remind government that we exist, student body, is a vital part of this we are the future of this country, movement, and hope to see you all and we matter. Whether we study joining me on Wednesday.

ages the chance of any child, whose for 10am on Wednesday 21st Nointerests do not rest in the very vember. narrow parameters of the STEM, We advise you to not dress in subjects from truly flourishing. black/wear a scarf that could be I would appreciate seeing as many pulled over your face as the police of you as possible marching with will be targeting people dressed us on Wednesday, standing togeth- thusly if violence breaks out. er with your fellow students and those aspiring to higher education The Heythrop Students’ Union themselves in later life, in defence does not condone violent protest of your right to study the subject and would discourage strongly any you love, instead of the subject student taking part in this. For further info email: campaigns@heyyou’re told is useful. throp.su If you are interested in joining us, we will be meeting in the Lounge If lost on the day call: 07540806858 (Ashley Hsu President)

Meet in the Lounge for 10am on Wednesday 21st November

5

Friday 16TH novEmber | THE LION

“COMMENT.” Edited by Faye West | comment@theheythroplion.co.uk

Four more years for Brand Obama

Josh White Senior Editor As far as I can see there are a hand full of important reasons for Obama’s victory that we should keep in mind. We should never kid ourselves that the US is a shining beacon of democracy atop a hill. In this election the American ruling-class had largely no reason to initiate a seat change. This was reflected by the pressure on the Republican Party to churn out a saleable extremist candidate, only to dress up ‘moderate’ Mitt as ‘reactionnaire’ Romney - it was a cop-out from the start. I think we’ll probably find from analysis of the campaign funding that Obama had a lot more institutional capital behind, while irrational types like Sheldon Adelson and the Koch Brothers poured cash into Romney’s doomed campaign. This may indicate that the composition of capital may be even more important than the actual concentration of wealth. Romney was chosen given his record for stable continuity and adaptability, if he lost it wasn’t a big deal - the real opportunity for the GOP is 2016 and I suspect that is well understood in the belly of the Republican beast.

There is some evidence to suggest that voter-turnout was actually lower than in 2008, with a difference of maybe 10 million votes give or take. I suspect that the majority of voters were mobilised on the basis of cultural fears of either candidate, while the liberal vote went automatically for the Democrats and the rest stayed home. This is the standard culture war theory of American politics. It’s possible that the Tea Party voters were even put-off by Romney, difficult to say at this point. It was a matter of continuity, of maintaining the status quo. Here we find the slim majority of votes converged with an enormous exercise of financial power on the part of the bourgeoisie to bloat Obama’s campaign chest, thereby enabling him to reach as many voters as possible. The lesser evilism of Michael Moore and Bill Maher triumphed as there was no perceived left-wing alternative to Obama. But it was more about the defeat of the Right, it was a negative victory and not positive in other words. Putting aside cultural issues, there is the materialist issue

of immigration.

Much has been made of the changing ethnic makeup of America, specifically the burgeoning LatinoAmerican population. It’s even been predicted that the US will not be a majority white country in a matter of decades. It’s worth noting that the impact this could have on the Republican Party, given that it’s share of the Hispanic vote collapsed from 44% for Bush in 2004 to 27% in 2012. It was partly due to Romney’s own inconsistency, his warming to the most reactionary positions on abortion and homosexuality could not reconcile the Catholic vote given his endorsement of racist policies on Mexican immigration. These votes eventually went to the Obama campaign.

Bush had managed to appeal to a broad Catholic base with socially conservative positions on gay marriage, abortion and stem-cell research. Notably Bush maintained a moderate position on immigration and even produced an absurd campaign ad in which he claimed to be

proud of his ‘Latino heritage’. So we’ve seen that this contradiction might only be resolved by burning a policy plank or two.

It remains to be seen whether or not the GOP will moderate it’s positions in order to appeal to a much wider base. It’s plausible that the Republicans will get crazier and crazier as their voters get whiter. But it is also possible that they will have to concede ground in order to gain greater influence.

After all that is the major priority of the Party’s primary constituent, namely the American bourgeoisie.

This is an instance of the capitalist system undermining it’s own interests ultimately. It was the US that has enforced an appalling economic programme on Mexico and Latin America, that has led to Hispanics migrating north just to earn a mediocre living. The militarisation of the border offers only a way to temporarily mobilise a shrinking white voter-base, but the question of Latin-American voter-base still looms large. It’s out of the realm

of the possible for the Republicans to seek to improve the economic conditions in Mexico in order to limit immigration. The same goes for the prospect of a unionisation of Mexican immigrants.

In either case these measures would improve the living standards of Latin-Americans, yet it’s also the case that the rising number of Latinos may be inevitable. To put it briefly, America will be skin deep for many years to come. I digress, I’ve already noted that it was the logic of the lesser evil that was behind a great deal of left-wing support for Obama, but there’s another angle here. The late Alexander Cockburn argued in 2010

that Obama may actually be more susceptible to left-wing pressure than Clinton, so the problem is that there’s not much of a Left left in America to push the Democrats around. There may be some hope in the charged discourse we now live with thanks to Occupy Wall Street. For a long time it looked as though the era of a lively culture of organised and disciplined politics is dead in the US. We should not kid ourselves that with Occupy Wall Street this era will be reborn.

We might hope that the discourse has been impregnated with a certain potential. Though there needs to be something more than a lively grass-roots base to win this thing.

Send your Comment articles to: comment@theheythroplion.co.uk

6

Friday 16th novEMBER | THE LION

COMMENT

Dishonored

Culture Editor Daniel Tripp takes a look at what critics are already calling ‘Game of Year’ from the unique perspective of the design team.

Daniel Tripp Culture Editor DanielDa

It seemed apt that, as I was about to sit down to hear a talk about a game that takes most of its cues from Victorian London, it was tipping it down as I ran from St. Pancras to the Guardian HQ. While the evening did cover what ‘Dishonored’, the video game in question, was about, it was easy to lose sight that we were actually talking about a video game. The pre-production done for the game, to my mind, could have been for any form of media. Such was its detail that the discussion jumped between back stories, concept art, characters and more - someone not in the loop might have assumed we were witnessing the beginning of a film or television series. However, the two men we were bearing witness to are definitely veterans of the video game industry. Sebastien Mitton has worked on Bioshock 2 in the past, and he lent his academic artistic upbringing to the foray.

Viktor Antonov is perhaps better known for his work in Half-Life 2, and also his experience in working on architecture and technological design. Antonov stole the show at the event, and it was a shame we did not hear more from Mitton, though in reality it was more due to the audience’s inability – myself included - to understand him behind his extremely heavy French accent.

One of the main artistic features that sets Dishonored apart was that everything in the game started as a drawing. Everything from the huge towering buildings to the smallest bullets started out as pencil on paper. Pre-production for the game spanned a whole three years; both of the men agreed that they had never spent that long before on a video game. This led to a great deal of material and a world as scoped-out and vibrant as you might find in any fantasy novel.

This might seem like a common thing in today’s media but in reality it rarely occurs. Antonov began the presentation lamenting the loss of the ‘crazy sci-fi’ world. He cited films like Metropolis and Blade Runner as examples. The way films are made today means that the need for great levels of expansion and exposition are unnecessary.

Shots can be framed, edit and cut; as Antonov quite sarcastically put it, you can cheat in films. In a video game, however, you can’t. People go round corners when you don’t want them to, they try to get to

the tops of buildings for no reason whatsoever – and when they get there they don’t want to see a blank wall. At the end of the day, the average film is two hours long and a game like Dishonored can last as long as twenty, probably more.

Antonov seemed in love with this idea of the fully fleshed-out fantasy world of the future, and while he describes himself as by no means a hardcore gamer, he saw that the only place he could create a place like that, with pencil and paper, was a video game.

Many people looking at the game immediately label it as ‘steampunk’, but Antonov was quick to point at that this was not the case, as there was ‘Not a single rivet, and no steam’. Very early on in preproduction the idea was for the game to be set in Japan, but this was soon changed to London in 1666. They liked the idea of a city that followed a river, and when comparing it to the other three big cities that they mentioned; New York, Los Angeles and Paris, London came up on top. They realised afterwards that they didn’t want to get tied down to a historical setting, and Antonov talked of the sense of freedom of leaving the London setting and instead embracing the freedom found from creating a purely fictional city. The city of London still heavily influenced the game; many of the characters are based upon people they took photos of around London who they referred (perhaps in hindsight not that humorously) to the ‘smashedin, nice strong faces,’ of Londoners. They talked also of stealing the idea of the London mist. When seen in-game the effect gives a definitive stylised tone of being constantly in twilight, until there is a sudden explosion of colour once the sun comes out. Co-incidentally, it probably also helps logistically when it comes to rendering long distances. The game’s art style strikes you as being uniquely balanced between cartoon and realistic; we’re not talking the cell-shading of Borderlands or the realism of Skyrim, but rather a washed-out watercolour theme that highlights the extreme difference between the dank, decrepit lower-class areas with the shining illumination and gaudy opulence of the rich ones.

The streets are filled with rats and damp and the only real illumination is industrial spotlights. One feature of the game is the ability to take control of both animals and humans, and a ‘rat’s eye view’ of London was a key part of the design process, leading to a game that embraces the idea of ‘behind-the-

scenes design’ in a very big way. In a gameplay video, we were treated to a luxurious mansion hosting a grand masquerade ball, a whirlwind of bold bright colours, fireworks and sumptuous banquet tables. Yet only a blink away we were in servant’s corridors, the attics, a rat filled basement, reminding again of the world outside again.

Having played the game in the comfort of my own room I can safely tell you that it is an extremely satisfying game, and it is great to see that the original artistic conception hasn’t been lost in translation from pre-production to full blown game. The short length of the game in principle, one of its low number of criticisms, is

made up for by the fact that there is so much to see in the game if you give it a second play through.

This, in reality, is mainly down to the artistic team behind the game, who have created a fully functioning and believable world. Though don’t spend too long appreciating the art; you’ve got revenge to take care of.

7

friday 16TH novEMBER | THE LION

COMMENT

On Equal Marriage...

John C. Ross Postgraduate Student Heather Doon Head of Heythrop Pride Rupert Everett, a well-known homosexual man, recently stated in an interview regarding gay marriage that, “It’s just a waste of time[…] and I find it personally beyond tragic that we want to ape this institution that is so clearly a disaster.”

Now, I am not particularly a fan of Rupert Everett to start off with.

I’m only even aware of these statements due to my being unemployed and him being on ITV1’s This Morning. But it reminds me of a number of things that I have heard recently on gay marriage from a few of my fellow LGBT+ friends and associates. There is an increasing number of people who, whilst politely giving their own opinion, are crippling the freedom of their peers.

Ok, I admit it, a little of an overdramatisation of the subject. But there are a multitude of issues regarding this particular topic.

Heather and I have discussed it at length in our free time, but were also lucky enough to give a short five-minute talk about it at the recent Philosophy Society event, in the Brinkman Room. If you were present, you heard the excellent speakers and probably partook in the thorough grilling of every last one of them (and such excellent questions and opinions).

Our main argument was that, as said above, that use of the term ‘gay marriage’ is misleading, when actually the campaign is for equal marriage rights. I must admit though, rights can be tricky. We no longer say “thou shalt not kill” so much, yet would defend a right to life. Occasionally, at moments of cultural change, new rights might emerge, such as a right to drinking water or clean air. Sometimes these can be contentious, such as a right to sunshine or a right to a sexbreak from your work or job (both true cases).

Non-LGBT+ individuals have in the past taken it upon themselves (the same way, perhaps that conservative middle-aged middleclass white men love telling women what to do with their wombs) to talk about human rights as though they are an abstract idea that only apply to themselves (the ones talking) and their direct ‘normal’ peers.

However, human rights, by definition, are inalienable and accessible to all humans by virtue of their being human; you cannot deny someone’s rights just because they seem alien to you, though of course rights (to freedom, for instance) can be taken away (such as from those who have committed crimes and are imprisoned). But as

it stands, we have a right to marriage. Unfortunately, it has been decided that this right entails only to heterosexual individuals. Why is it appropriate to deny the right to marriage to mutually exclusive individuals? Surely, by the basis of liberty and equality, all people should be free in this right, to marry whomsoever they wish?

Well you can imagine the initial responses. People love to say things along the lines of, “What, then, is to stop me from marrying a sheep or a horse? Or a child? Or the Eiffel tower?” Which is both misleading and condescending. You idiots who propose such a view not only clumsily throw in some real emotive hard-hitting suggestions about both bestiality and paedophilia, but you also forget the mutual exclusivity of being an homosexual person; as though two individuals who love each other are not consenting or one is being hoodwinked or coerced in some way, the way a poor sheep or child might be if you were wicked enough to try and wed it/ them. The key point is, as with a lot

of adult issues; consent, defined as the mutual agreement between two fully rational and emotional individuals (though of course, where there is full reason and emotion, there can be limited emotion and reason, both of which can always be subject to manipulation and exploitation).

One of the biggest arguments, and less contentious, regards marriage being, by definition of the state, about heterosexuals who can have children, get tax-breaks, yada yada yada. What irks me is that these same people will also quickly defend the fact that marriage is almost a strictly religious, or Christian, affair. To both of these defences I offer this response.

Firstly, homosexuals can have children and as such promote the flourishing of a society. Silly Rupert Everett up there thinks that being raised by two dads would be monstrous, but studies show that the incidences of developmental problems or abuse towards children raised by same-sex couples almost do not exist (findings show

they actually don’t at all in studies of lesbian couples, though there is a miniscule percentage for homosexual men). So give the taxbreaks to LGBT+ lovers who want to get married too. In terms of the Church, generally the sanctity of marriage has to be between man and woman because they ‘complement’ (nb. NOT compliment) each other, they hold sacrament together, they can have babies together, and so on.

But can homosexuals not complement each other in a relationship, just as much as a heterosexual couple? Also, complement each other and society, in that they give us a broader understanding and awareness for what it is to be human?

Similarly, can they not love Christ and God to the fullness of their ability within their loving relationship (God is love, etc)? And finally, can they not still have children, even if they aren’t biologically their own (which, it appears, is a hella lot better than the irresponsible single mums who get knocked up twelve times and can barely sup-

port themselves let alone their spawn (nb. I said irresponsible.

You might be the product of an extremely responsible single mum, as I am).

A final word, and this is on virtue, briefly. There are religious homosexuals. They exist everywhere.

They are denied marriage by their own beliefs, and this hurts me to my core most (if you want my initial emotional response), as the Church is supposed to be all about fairness, equality, love, respect, kindness and understanding. To grow in these understandings not only in ourselves, but in the communities we represent and uphold, we can’t stand for something that inhibits the rights of others, and instead must be courageous in our defence of what matters. That’s what it’s all about, isn’t it? We have to support equal marriage, even if you’re of the opinion that it’s ghastly and you want nothing to do with it. By definition, that’s what marriage is. But you don’t have to get married, after all.

8

Friday 16th November | THE LION

COMMENT

Lance Armstrong and Drugs in Sport

Lance Armstrong

David Roberts 2nd year Undergradtuate It has been impossible to avoid the dramatic fall-out from the Lance Armstrong drugs scandal, as cycling’s favourite son was finally rumbled as running “the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen,” according to the official Usada (United States Anti-Doping Agency) report.

The picture painted of the former icon makes difficult reading for his dwindling number of supporters. The report claimed that Armstrong’s goal of winning the Tour de France “led him to depend on EPO, testosterone and blood transfusions but also, more ruthlessly, to expect and to require that his team-mates would likewise use drugs to support his goals if not their own”. It’s difficult to sympathise with Armstrong’s lawyer as well that it was a “one-sided hatchet job” as the Usada report was made from evidence which was described as “beyond strong” and stretched to more than 1,000 pages, including sworn testimony from 26 people, including 15 riders with knowledge of the US Postal

Service Team and the doping activities of its members.

Despite the judgement, Armstrong does still have his supporters, with Team Sky’s Alex Dowsett arguing that Armstrong is still a legend as he came back from cancer to win the Tour de France, illegally or not. Others have argued that all cyclists nowadays use these methods of self-improvement, meaning that the former seven time winner was still the best. This not only seems to be missing the point that Armstrong had lied and deceived so many fans for so long, as well as the fact that the lengthy report concluded that the magnitude and level of the system employed

by Armstrong meant that he even possessed an unfair advantage compared to those who were taking some drugs.

The effects will be felt throughout sport, as after the overwhelming success of the London Olympic Games, these shocking revelations will certainly not help quell suspicions that athletes setting new standards for sporting achievement could well be also calling on illegal help.

So is this method cheating here to stay? Drugs are against the rules

of sport. But we define the rules of sport, so if drugs in sport were made legal and freely available, there would therefore be no cheating. The World Anti-Doping Agency code declares a drug illegal if it is performance enhancing, if it is a health risk, or if it violates the socalled “spirit of sport.” This spirit is defined as the celebration of the human spirit, body, and mind, and is also characterised by the following list values: * ethics, fair play and honesty * health * excellence in performance * character and education * fun and joy * teamwork * dedication and commitment * respect for rules and laws * respect for self and other participants * courage * community and solidarity Would legal and freely available drugs necessarily violate this “spirit”? There is an argument that the introduction of legalised drugs could improve the spectacle, as more sportsmen could achieve remarkable levels of performance.

Virtuoso classical musicians for example are commonly known to use beta blockers to control their nerves. These are drugs which lower heart rate and blood pressure, therefore reducing the physical effects of stress, and it has been shown that the quality of a musical performance is improved if the musician takes these drugs, making these the equivalent of performance enhancing drugs in sport.

Although the level elite of classical music is arguably as competitive as elite sport, as well as the fact that rewards are also similar, there is no stigma attached to the use of these drugs. Should the audience judge the performance to be improved with the addition of the drugs, then the drugs are seen as enabling the musician to express themselves more effectively. The competition between elite musicians of course has rules attached to it; you cannot mime the violin to a backing CD, but there are no rules against the use of chemical enhancements.

There are of course differences between the two fields, but the foundations of the areas are the same. Indeed, it seems reasonable to assert that although the reasons we appreciate sport at its highest

- Flickr.com/goatkarma

level have something to do with competition, it also has a great deal to do with the appreciation of an extraordinary performance.

If it were merely the competition which interested us, Champions League football would interest us no more than the offerings found at any park on any given Sunday afternoon.

Clearly the application of this kind of creativity is limited by the rules of the sport. Rules are still of course crucial; riding a motorbike would not be a “creative” solution to winning the Tour de France, and there are still perfectly good reasons for stating this in the rules. If motorbikes were allowed, it would still be a good sport, but it would no longer be a bicycle race, it would be a motorcycle race. However, we certainly shouldn’t think that by allowing cyclists to take drugs such as EPO we would turn the Tour de France into some kind of “drug race”, any more than the different training methods which different athletes take on turn the event into a “training race” or a “money race”.

Athletes train in various, creative ways, but ultimately they all still ride widely similar bikes, and on the same course at the same time.

9

firday 16th novEMBER | THE LION

COMMENT The skill involved in negotiating the course will always be there.

Would this introduction make sports unfair though? People do well at sport as a result of the genetic lottery that happened to deal them with the best natural genes for sport. Genetic tests are now readily available to identify those athletes with the greatest physical potential. The possession of a certain version of the ACE gene will make a person better at long distance events, whereas the possession of another of these genes will be for useful for short distance events. For example, Black Africans do better at short distance events because of biologically superior muscle type and bone structure. Sport discriminates against the genetically unfit. Sport is the province of the genetic superior (or freak).

The most obvious example is the famous Finnish skier Eero Maentyranta, who in 1964 won three gold medals at the winter games.

After this unprecedented success it was discovered that the Fin had a genetic mutation that meant that he, entirely naturally, had 40–50% more red blood cells than average.

Was it fair that he had significant advantage given to him by chance?

A way to remove this advantage is by allowing everyone to use drugs such as EPO. The ability to perform well in sporting events is largely determined by the ability to deliver oxygen to muscles. As oxygen is carried around the body

by red blood cells, the more red blood cells, the more oxygen you can carry. This controls an athlete’s performance in aerobic exercise, meaning that having more red blood cells means you can train harder, for longer. EPO is a naturally made hormone which stimulates the production of red blood cells, and in the process raising the packed cell volume (PCV), the percentage of the blood comprised of red blood cells. So athletes could be allowed to inject EPO into their system in order to level the playing field.

Of course raising the PCV too high can cause potentially fatal health problems. The risk of problems escalates as PCV levels get above 50%. One study taken showed that raised PCV levels together with hypertension would cause increase the risk of a stroke by nine.

In endurance sports this effect is multiplied, as dehydration causes athletes’ blood to thicken, further raising the pressure and viscosity levels of the blood. The result is what starts as quite a low risk of stroke or heart attack can rapidly rise during any exercise. In the early 1990s, after EPO doping had originally gained popularity but before more modern tests for its presence were available, several Dutch cyclists died in their sleep due to inexplicable cardiac arrest.

These tragedies have now been attributed to the athletes’ high levels of EPO doping; the risks from raising an athlete’s PCV too high are

real and serious.

There are other ways to increase the number of red blood cells that are legal. Altitude training, a well known method, can push the PCV to dangerous and possibly even fatal levels. More recently, hypoxic air machines have been added to simulate altitude training. The body responds to these by releasing natural EPO and growing more blood cells, so that it can absorb more oxygen with every breath, and without illegal injections.

There is no significant difference between elevating your blood count by altitude training, by using a hypoxic air machine, or by taking EPO. But the last is illegal. Some competitors have high PCVs and an advantage by luck, and some can afford hypoxic air machines. Is this fair? Nature is not fair. For example, Ian Thorpe, the hugely successful swimmer, has enormous feet which give him an advantage that no other swimmer can get, no matter how much they exercise.

Some gymnasts are more flexible, and some basketball players are seven feet tall. By allowing everyone to take performance enhancing drugs, the playing field would be levelled, and we would largely remove the effects of genetic inequality. Far from being unfair, allowing performance enhancement arguably promotes equality.

Would this make sport only for the rich? Unexpectedly, allowing drugs in sport could in fact reduce economic discrimination. The cost

of one of the hypoxic air machines and tent is about $7000. Sending an athlete to a high altitude training location for the months required to be beneficial could well be even more expensive. It could therefore be argued that these costs put legal methods for raising an athlete’s PCV out the reach of most athletes. It’s left then for the illegal forms that level the playing field in this regard.

One popular form of recombinant human EPO is called Epogen. As of January 2012, the American chain Walgreens offers Epogen for $86 for 6000 international units (IU).

The usual dose of EPO is 20 IU per kg body weight, once a week. An athlete who weighs 100kg therefore needs 2000 IU per week or 8600 IU a month. Epogen costs the athlete about $122 a month.

Because of this, even if the treatment starts four years before an event, it’s still cheaper than the use of a hypoxic air machine.

Also, as there are limits on how much haemoglobin an athlete can produce regardless of how much EPO they inject. This means there is a natural, rather than imposed, cap on the amount of money they can spend on this method. If differences in available funds are a real concern in sport, then the enormous sums required to test every athlete could instead be spent on grants to provide EPO to poorer athletes, and PCV tests to ensure that athletes have not thickened their blood to unsafe levels.

Forget testing for EPO, monitor the PCV. We need to set a safe level of PCV. In the cycling world, that is 0.5. Anyone with a PCV above that level, whether through the use of drugs, training, or natural mutation, should be prevented from participating on safety grounds.

If someone naturally has a PCV of 0.6 and is allowed to compete, then that risk is reasonable and everyone should be allowed to increase their PCV to 0.6. What matters is a safe concentration of growth hormone, whether it is natural or artificial.

Another prime reason for potential legalising drugs such as EPO is that we would see even more phenomenal feats of achievement than we have ever seen, and the arguments, controversy and suspicion would be gone from sport forever. We would see athletes across a range of sports do just what they currently do, but faster, stronger, for longer.

The real point of elite sport, as I alluded to earlier, is to see extraordinary people doing extraordinary things, hopefully on the most consistent basis possible.

Lance Armstrong is not the first, and certainly won’t be the last, icon to be disgraced by association with drugs, but maybe this very high profile example is exactly the instance needed to kick start a change in the rules which, as long as appropriate safely precautions are placed, could benefit the whole of sport.

10

friday 16th November | THE LION

COMMENT

I am Amazing.

James Reily 2nd year Undergraduate I am amazing. There, I said it.

Something so frowned upon by British society that to utter it I am branded vain or arrogant. Yet in those simple words I have not made a claim about others. In fact, I must rush to point out that I am not claiming to be more amazing than anyone else. It is just a simple fact for myself. Something seemingly so simple, yet realising it has utterly changed my life. I would like, if I may, to take some of your time to help you see that you too are amazing. Before I start with that I would like to address that most pathetic and despicable custom of the British. The ban on being able to say you’re good at anything, self-deprecation if you will.

The very idea that in British custom if you claim that you are good at something, even in an innocent manner you are branded. Instantly. And very often without chance

of redemption. You become a selfcentred prat, someone who we love to hate for their smug ways and can all spend a good half-hour bitching about over a coffee or tea or any generic hot beverage for that matter. This tradition is crippling to our development as persons, or so I believe. It stunts our growth and means that we get stuck in a rut that we struggle to get out of.

We find that we can only think of ourselves in comparison to others.

“I’m good at this, but I’ll never be as good as so-and-so”. The instant self put down that we utter stifles us. How can we ever expect to truly excel at anything if we can’t admit our own greatness.

Until very recently the same mindset plagued me. Following to the view that no matter how hard I strived I would never truly achieve anything of worth, that I would live in mediocrity. Then I stumbled across the invaluable advice of a Youtuber. He put forward the view that we are all individually amazing. Speaking for myself, this thought had never crossed

Losing my Voice This article has not been edited in ay way by The Lion Editorial Team, due to the writer’s wishes. A statement from The Lion concering this article can be seen at theheythroplion.co.uk

Eleanor McIntyre 2nd year Undergraduate In the last Lion, I had my first article published. Like any young would-be-writer, I spent a good deal of time um-ing and ah-ing about my subject, how I presented it, whether the article was needed, what it argued, etc. etc. ad nauseum. Painstakingly, I penned my article. Imagine my surprise and horror then, when I excitedly opened my Lion– only to find my words changed about, littered with the Lion’s famous poor grammar, and espousing a view I did not support.

I was mortified. Yet this is the risk we all run.

Like it or lump it, everything is subject to editing. From Lion articles to event briefs to essay questions to anecdotes passed by word of mouth. Everyone thinks they understand what it means to edit, but few people, I believe, realise what a hard ask it truly is.

Retelling a story, we are not repeating what we were told but the story we heard, shaped by our own opinions and experiences. We use it to support whatever point we are making – whether that is to do with the story, the person who told it, or something completely different. We edit it to select the important points - however we see them.

When it comes to print, however, the task becomes that much more difficult. The text that has been edited will be in the original author’s

name, and it is important that it does not end up an article that would send turnitin spinning into a plagiarism coma. It is important to highlight the author’s points, and important that the editor doesn’t allow their own feelings on the subject to get in the way. Most capitally, it is important (and, I know, horribly difficult) to ensure that, despite editing, a piece retains the author’s voice. How many people, who would so readily claim to understand editing, would be sure they could do that with every article - no matter its stance, its voice, or how strongly they felt about the subject? Yes, it is an editor’s right to change an article however they see fit, but it is also a good editor’s responsibility to hear the original, be neutral, take time to edit, and make sure that every article that goes through them is an asset to both the paper and the author.

Naturally, there is some irony in writing such an article when it is so obviously subject to editing – what you’re reading is almost certainly not exactly what I wrote. But from speaking to other Lion writers about my experience, I know I am not alone in questioning how well the Lion’s editorial team does itself credit in this area. Are there lessons to be learned still, and are the team at Heythrop open to learning them? There is no question that we have many skilled contributors, but are the editors missing a trick in skilfully highlighting their talents and making our paper better?

flickr.com/photos/sharilynnephotography

my mind previously. How could I be someone amazing? I’m just average at the things I try, slightly above average at a push but by no means a genius. Not someone who could change the world. Not someone who could alter my own future.

But slowly the idea seeped into my brain. What if, by some strange twist of fate or some quirk of nature I could be good at something?

What if I was an individual, someone with the capability to change things? Then I started to believe it.

The idea that I can do things, that I in myself am thoroughly amazing. There will never be another me in the entire of time and space, no one who thinks in exactly the same way as me, no one who will have the same friends and experiences as me. Surely this made me unique.

But it doesn’t stop there. I am not the only person who there will only ever be one of. There will never be another you. Not in either direction of time, in no corner of the universe will there be another you. You are amazing. But not only that, you can change your future. You can

change the outcome of your life.

It’s something that takes a while to accept. That you can call yourself amazing and truly believe it. The thing to remember however is that within saying that you are amazing, you are not claiming that over and above anyone else. Because let’s be honest, doing that makes you a bit of a prat. I put forward the idea that We are all so unique and different from each other.

There will never be another us in

all of time. What I’m trying to say, and probably badly articulating is that it’s not wrong for us to say how amazing we are. If you can realise the truth. That you, whoever you are, whatever you do (chances are its philosophy), whoever you love, whatever you believe are undeniably, irrefutably AMAZING. You only get one shot at life, you might as well do it enjoying who you are and have a damn good time celebrating that you’re amazing.

In Defense of the Nation Rory Phillips 2nd year Undergraduate The reason the United Kingdom should stay united is a fairly simple one really, and there are two arguments for this. There is what I shall call the ‘Argument from Pragmatism’ and the ‘Argument from liberty.’ The former is as follows.

Government is a measure of control over aspects of the state, which is an aggregate of people, in such a way that if government were not there, the state would fall apart.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has one government which controls and regulates all the territories of it.

Were there to be one government per country, meaning four (or five, depending on whether the Ireland/ Northern Ireland dichotomy would be solved by this) independent governing bodies, it would cause a host of practical problems. Not least of which involves one of governments most important roles, that of the guarantor of justice. Say, for example, Scotland decided that (in order to cope with its share of the deficit and debt which would have to be divided up) it would privatise the prison system, an idea not unheard of before. If one then commits a crime in Scotland, whom is to be responsible for their punishment? One of the companies set up to enforce the law, or the Scottish government, or even the government of the home country? Whilst the free market is desirable to a certain extent, it is better, I believe,

on the whole, that the government controls the justice system, simply as to allow it to function better.

This would function best were it to remain as a function of the United Kingdom’s government, rather than as the jurisdiction of the independent states.

The argument from liberty is as such: the smaller the government, the bigger the society. Government and society are two symbiotic parts of the state, neither of which can totally dominate, but it is best, I believe, that the government occupies a smaller part of the state than society. Government is essentially that which tells the state what to do, whereas society is that which forms as a result of living in the state. It is, then, better to allow society to develop, more or less, on its own, with government as a largely non-intervening body (at least in economic terms) that goes about its business of protection of its citizens by legislating and

campaigning and the like. Clearly society cannot be left to its own devices, as the law cannot stand on its own, even though Aristotle once said that the outcome of philosophy, for him, was doing without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law. When the government should intervene is a matter which demands attention, but speaking in broad terms, it is necessary for government intervention when society does not function according to law which is there for the benefit of everyone in the society. Essentially, then, were the United Kingdom to no longer be united, what we would experience is the growth of government and the shrinking of society, something that would surely curb liberty. Such is the nature, I would say, of the current Prime Minister’s infamous dictum, the “Big Society”.

What it really stands for is “Big society, small government”.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/43454909@N00

11

friday 16th november | THE LION

Culture TV: The Thick of it Fr. Dave Stewart SJ College Chaplain Half a generation ago, politics junkies laughed at the machinations of senior civil servant Sir Humphrey Appleby as he ran rings round his hapless Minister, Jim Hacker, in the BBC series “Yes, Minister”, subsequently extended as “Yes, Prime Minister” after Jim got the top job. The basic narrative, accompanied by some memorable phrase-making, became part of the culture and is still there, currently resuscitated in a West End production. Sir Humphrey could deflate his Minister’s latest wheezes in an instant, naming Jim’s proposals “courageous”, to the latter’s alarm. We were told that the BBC series, genteel, witty and amusing, quickly became required viewing for the whole political class.

So that was then, and this is

now. “The Thick of It”, just ending its fourth and final series on BBC2, has been the “Yes Minister”denosjours; also a political satire, with a powerful and manipulative unelected official at the heart of its plotting, but most of the similarity ends there. The creation of Armando Ianucci, a Glasgow-Italian product of that city’s Jesuit secondary school, The Thick of It presents us, not with a wretched put-upon politician but with a whole cast of them; rivals in incompetence, insincerity and submerged anger at their own miserableness. The show’s characterisation is always masterful, even when its plotting is not so clear, although when you’re not quite sure what’s happening, it’s probably because the characters aren’t too sure either. The fourth series, subtitled “Coalition”, shows us both Government and Opposition equal in incompetence. Political parties are never named; we are not able to tell whether

it’s Tories, Labour or Lib-Dems who are in power or who is in coalition with whom. Clearly, we’re meant to draw the lesson that They’re All The Same.

At the rotten core of all of this is the figure of Malcolm Tucker; nominally the Media Adviser to the Leader of the Opposition but who spends most of the fourth series arranging the political demise of his Leader, the wretched Nicola Murray. We are not meant to like Malcolm; actor Peter Capaldi plays him as a sneering, foul-mouthed misanthropic politico with his own political agenda and the ruthless guile to see it through. The writing for Capaldi’s character is probably the sharpest of this edgy satire; effing and blinding is standard political discourse for Malcolm as it is for every politician we see, even those we might initially warm to. A hospitalised colleague is surprised to get a visit from Malcolm, who even brings a bunch of flowers.

“It’s one of the many benefits of

living near an accident blackspot”, explains Malcolm, just in case the patient or the viewer thought they’d detected a hint of compassion. Effortlessly, he subverts our current post-religious mawkish habit of tying flowers to lampposts just as he undermines any suspicion we might still have government is honourable or principled. And yet ... the character of Malcolm is more finely drawn that that.

There are occasional hints that he is indeed driven by a more altruistic political vision. He justifies his role in deposing his party Leader by his desire to “help people”; we get a glimpse of a hidden hinterland where principle does matter more than pragmatism and the possibility that even Malcolm’s aims are noble, if the means he adopts are anything but. Underneath the foul language and the viciously funny wisecracks, there maybe is someone who cares, who believes that politics can

indeed make life better for people. The Thick of It is terrific TV for today: edgy and coarse, fastpaced and clever. Some will find the language too crude, others will suspect no more than what actually happens. Shooting and editing is similarly edgy and sharp; frequently hand-held cameras are used , emphasising how practically every character is at the mercy of events, and nobody (other than, perhaps, the absent character of the PM in Number 10) is really in control. Even Malcolm Tucker finds himself emasculated in Episode 6, arraigned before the Goolding Enquiry (pretty much Leveson, which the show’s makers barely disguise), his wisecracking won’t insulate him, finally, from the scrutiny of the democratic process that he so often dismissed, when it finally catches up with him. The Thick of It has been superb TV; satire for our times, brilliantly observed, written and acted. It’s not to be missed.

12

friday 16th november | THE LION

Culture Tripp’s Top Tips Literature: Good Omens Daniel Tripp Culture Editor DanielDa

Project Gutenberg is an overarching project to digitalise books and put them into a format that can be read on a computer. Or a kindle. Or your phone. Quite a lot of places really. The number of times I’ve mentioned this site to people and they’ve never heard of it is amazing. Need to read Plato’s Republic? Discourse on the Method? Hume’s Enquiry? It’s all on there. And it’s all free.

And it’s all legal. Once a book is old enough it stops being in copyright, it is in the public domain and you, as a member of the public, are allowed to read it, print it off, maybe even make a hat out of it. It’s extremely easy to use, just type the name of the book or the author then search, click, and download. If you want to stay perfectly within the law make sure you double check whether the book’s release was just at the turn of

the 20th century, the site is built with US copyright law in mind, not UK law, and although the limits are very similar be careful when downloading these ‘newer’ books if you want to keep your moral slate clean.

Remember as well this isn’t just about academic books. Want to read the Importance of Being Earnest? Alice in Wonderland?

Treasure Island? They’re all on there and they’re all free. Happy reading.

One last thing just to finish off with is that The Bloomsbury Festival took place on the weekend of the 20th and 21st of October. This was a free festival taking place in Bloomsbury that seeks to bring together all the different cultures of London with an eclectic mix of entertainment not dissimilar the Edinburgh Fringe. If you attended the Festival then great! If what you saw was particularly good the Lion would love to hear your verdict on the festival as a whole. With God you can rely on your clear and distinct perceptions.

Literature: Flatland Peter O’Neil Academic Affairs Officer For the assiduous students who have already completed their required reading, or indeed those typical students who have no intention of starting said reading, I’m writing to recommend something a little lighter.

The novella Flatland, written by Edwin Abbott Abbott (two bs, two ts, two Abbotts!) in 1884 is widely regarded as a masterpiece of both science and satire.

Abbott’s book is divided into two sections. The first section entertains the idea of a world with only two dimensions, Flatland. By using geometric figures Abbott engineers a subtle critique of the Victorian hierarchical system, as well as engaging in a refreshingly interesting exposition of the mechanics of geometry. This exposition is narrated to us by the protagonist of his masterpiece, a square, who falls soundly into the middle of the hierarchy presented.

The second section is the one which commands the most scientific and philosophical consideration.

The protagonist has a number of dreams whereupon he enters worlds of less dimensions than his own, namely a one dimen-

sional plane and a singularity – and undertakes a number of fascinating dialogues with the inhabitants of those worlds, however he remains unable to convince them of the veracity of the second dimension. He is subsequently plucked from his own two dimensional plane by a three dimensional object, and the square is eventually convinced of the existence of the third dimension. Unsatisfied with this, he attempts to persuade a sphere that four dimensions exist, but to no avail.

These dialogues, which cross the boundary between good fiction, geometry and epistemology remain thought provoking to this day, and were recognized in the early twentieth century as an interesting precursor to the growing interest in the fourth dimension expressed in scientific and philosophical works.

Overall this book poses a simple and entertaining challenge to any assumptions the reader may have about the nature of space.

Standing at less than a hundred pages, Flatland offers the reader a concise and stimulating read.

Scarlett Goodwin 3rd year Undergraduate Having not read much over the summer, (who has?) I have decided to write my first book review on not the most recent book I’ve read, but one of my alltime favourites. Good Omens is the creative child of two of England’s best known authors; Terry Pratchett, known for his Disk World series, and Neil Gaiman, not only the author of Coroline and Stardust, now both major movies, but also the writer for the sandman comics.

The story is a comedy about the end of the world staring a demon called Crowley, an angel who did not so much Fall as saunter vaguely downwards; an Angel called Aziraphale, part time rare book shop keeper, and the anti-Christ, a ten year old charismatic trouble maker called Adam. Due to the arrival of Adam both Crowley and Aziraphale know that the end

of the world is nigh, but since they both rather enjoy earth and its inhabitants they decide to try to stop it. Naturally things aren’t easy when you’re up against the four bikers of the apocalypse, a mix up of babies, and cars that turn every tape into The Best of Queen album.

Aziraphale and Crowley are, in my opinion, one of the best double acts in literature. The way the play off each other is a pleasure to read and much of the comedy comes from the actions and interactions of these two.

One of the best things about this book is its way of presenting characters so that even relatively minor characters, such as the delivery man, are memorable. For a book with a large cast, this is very impressive.

If you have read Pratchett or Gaimen before and enjoyed them you should defiantly give this a read. Even if you haven’t even heard of the authors but enjoy quirky humour with a touch of morbidness then you

flickr.com/frogstarb

should definably give this book a go and remember “Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your own home.”

Art: Exhibition Roundup John Woodhouse 2nd year Postgraduate The Royal Academy Burlington House Piccadilly - Bronze is the outstanding exhibition this month and runs until 9 December. Students £9 but under 18s £4. As you enter there is the stunning Dancing satyr which is beautifully lit and in each room there are further marvels including an excellent explanation of casting techniques. Sculptures have been gathered from all over the world. I particularly liked the Greek horse’s head, the Ghiberti and Il porchellino (The Boar) You are unlikely to get such an opportunity to see so many fine sculptures together again so do not miss it!

Victoria and Albert Museum, Exhibition Road, has some fine sculptures by Tony Cragg R.A. linked to a series of sculptures by him in the road itself. Free.

Lovers of fashion will want to see the new fashion galleries and the Ballgowns exhibition (until 6 January) Students £7 and advance booking advised.

Film buffs will not want to miss the Hollywood costume exhibition (until 27 January) Students £9 Tate Britain Millbank has PreRaphaelites: Victorian Avant-

Garde (until 13 January) but I don’t think £12.50 for students is worth it but I don’t like the Pre-Raphaelites! There is one room which I did like which has a wonderful carpet and wall hangings matched by decorated furniture.

ing recommended) but you can find a special exhibition about Marilyn Monroe for free!

Worth visiting and free are the rehung 20th century galleries with 3 focus galleries. The Victorian sentimentality gallery made an interesting contrast to the Pre-Raphaelites. Also at Tate Britain The Turner prize One artist expects you to sit for 93 minutes to watch a film! Unimpressed!

Please complete the survey on The Lion page on Facebook about art you are interested in as this will make my task much easier!

At the British Museum in Bloomsbury there is a free display in Room 90 of Spanish drawings and prints including some wonderfully evocative Goyas. In the next gallery there is a fascinating display of Asian drinking vessels. On until 25th November is the outstanding Shakespeare: staging the world £12 for students but there is a 2 for 1 offer Mondays to Fridays from 14.30 (telephone 0207 323 8181 or walk up only) At the National Portrait gallery in St Martin’s Place off Trafalgar Square it will cost you £10 to see The Lost Prince the Life and death of Henry Stuart on until 13 January (advance book-

Starting at Tate Modern on 14th November will be A Bigger Splash: Painting after performance art.

Now is the time to sign up for the Royal Opera House student standby scheme! go to roh.org.uk/studentstandby - you will need your student and NUS card numbers. Once you are signed up, you will be sent an email offering amphitheatre tickets for £10. There are two Royal Ballet and two Royal opera performances per season. www. roh.org.uk/cinema has details of performances showing in local cinemas 18 November - Berlioz Les Troyens (stunning production and singing!) and featured at the Proms this year 13 December - The Nutcracker

13

friday 16th november | THE LION

edited by Daniel Tripp Film: Dredd Sartaj Singh 3rd year Undergraduate Coming after The Dark Knight Rises, Avengers Assemble and its trailer looking very similar to the earlier released foreign action film “The Raid” Dredd did indeed have an uphill battle in proving itself in a genre that has taken the world by storm. However, I am pleased to say that Dredd soared to the challenge and delivered a movie that delivers in more ways than one, as well as proving that the comic book movie genre is here to stay for years to come.

Penned by frequent Danny Boyle collaborator, Alex Garland, Dredd tells the story of Big Mamma, a former prostitute turned terrifying leader who has taken control of a two hundred story apartment complex, and it is up to Judge Dredd and new rookie Anderson to take her down and gain back control of the vast space.

Dredd’s greatest strength as a movie is that it delivers on exactly what it posits, which is a no holds action movie. However, it provides much more to raise it above the average action movie that one could see at least every week now. Its uniqueness comes from the fact that it approaches a way to do a comic book movie that has not been done before. What it does really well is that it does not fall into the trap that permeates most comic movies and that is a typical origin story that has the burden of setting up its hero, his universe, and an interesting antagonist; as well as tell a good story with enough action for good measure.

In fact Dredd feels exactly the equivalent of one going to a comic shop and picking up a one shot comic book; it tells its story without getting bogged down by an origin and through the course of the story it tells you of the universe its hero inhabits as well as something about its main character.

Talking of the universe, Dredd in its stylistic choices puts many movies that are twice its budget to absolute shame, from the dark rusty corridors to the great use of yellow lighting, Dredd feels in its visual tone a great homage to 70s films, which is an ascetic I prefer due to its real grit and grime. It always strikes me as far more realistic, which is in stark contrast to newer movies which feel far too polished - to the degree of sometimes feeling rather stale and artificial. However the film takes a very mod-

ern film technique that has been used a lot in the last decade and actually makes it work, this is primarily because it is very well set up in the narrative and the effects make for some absolutely stunning scenes that left me amazed and almost gasping for air because of their absolute beauty.

This was all combined with an uncompromising tone which never felt humorous or winking at the camera for any of its running time. The violence was unrelenting almost like an exploitation film of the 70s like ‘The Last House on the Left’ and ‘The Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ which is another aspect of the film that I greatly admired. Also it felt like a throw back to that decade of films with its subtext; it posits a world in which justice is one-way, and it’s so extreme that it never compromises.

Dredd represents this ideal perfectly; the act of him never taking of his helmet goes so far as to signify this idea greatly. This is in stark contrast to his rookie Anderson who is set up as psychic who feels like justice should be served on a case to case bases and that everything is not so black and white. So in terms of the real ethical principles that the characters are embodying, you are really presented with Dredd’s deontological ethic in competition with Anderson’s more situational ethic.

All the writing, subtext and visual flair is nothing without good actors who hold your attention throughout the film and fortunately Dredd has no short supply of great acting. The stand out performance for me is Karl Urban as the lead character. For all his time on screen, Urban exudes a great amount of authority which is primarily sold through his vocal inclinations.

This varies from a chilling calmness when delivering sentences to the criminals to anger ridden disgust - particularly when he talks about the main villain, Big Mamma. However he is also very good in his movements, almost moving like a robot with intense purpose but also selling the humanity of the character which is greatly seen in the film`s last few action sequences, where Dredd looks like he is in genuine peril.

The other stand out performance came from Lena Heady, who I have always been a fan of whether seeing her as Sarah Conner in the Terminator television series she did a couple of years ago or as the Queen in 300. She really shocked me here as she went far beyond the in-

boyce-d

tense demeanour she has portrayed in the past, and created a really terrifying villainess. The best thing about her portrayal was how razor sharp and serious it was. Unfortunately, I feel sometimes when women are cast playing villains in movies they are often written and performed almost comically, in particular I am thinking of

some of the Femme Fatales of James Bond pictures and cooperate work climbers who get to the top through sex aka Demi Moore in Disclosure. But here, it was refreshing to see a villain with no vanity but instead having a gun in one hand and intense look in her eyes towards an ultimate end. Heady particularly excels in her scenes to-

wards the end when she faces of with Dredd; she accomplishes a near impossible task by proving to be a match for him and keeping me on the edge of my seat.

Overall, Dredd is a movie I recommend that you see thanks to its achieving its primary goal while at same time surprising along the way thanks to its visuals, tone, screenplay and performance.

Read any good books recently? Seen a show that blew you away? Or did you absolutely loathe it?

Send us your reviews at:

Culture@theheythroplion.co.uk

14

Societies Sports and

societies@theheythroplion.co.uk

Heythrop FC: Match reports David Roberts Heythrop FC

Heythrop vs. St. Bart’s 5th A lethargic Heythrop 1st XI won their second successive friendly on Wednesday 10th October after a debut goal from George Taylor helped his side to a 4-0 win over St. Bart’s 5ths. The game was marred however by a bloody injury inflicted on fellow debutant Marcos Gowland. Having come on as first half substitute, Gowland was caught just above his left eye by a high boot as he bravely dipped to head the ball onto the St. Bart’s crossbar following a scramble from a Heythrop corner. The match was suspended for a number of minutes as the injury was contained, and Gowland was taken to hospital. Up until this point, he had been making an extremely impressive first performance, dominating the midfield and not giving the opposition players a second’s rest on the ball.

For much of the match, Heythrop played well below their best, especially after Jaime Tapia doubled his side’s lead midway through the second half, with two second half goals from Josh Todd needed to give the score more of a reflection of Heythrop’s dominance.

Heythrop started very much on the front foot, looking dangerous whenever they came forward.

David Roberts had a goal disallowed and a free kick tipped onto the crossbar by the St. Bart’s goalkeeper before a sweeping move culminated in Matt Holland’s weighted chipped ball finding Taylor in enough space to confidently stroke the ball into the net to give his side a deserved lead.

With a third debutant Ed Proctor looking particularly impressive, firstly on the right wing and then on the left, Heythrop continued to dominate possession and look very comfortable on the ball. This lead was doubled midway through the first half when Proctor’s inswinging corner was met by Tapia darting into the middle to meet the ball and volley emphatically home.

The defence was rarely troubled, apart from a 5 minute spell towards the end of the first half when concentration levels dropped and complacency seemed to set in, where St. Bart’s managed to move forward on a few occasions. Tapia and Rahul Prashar always looked control in the centre of defence once more however, meaning Sam English’s first start in goal proved to be a quiet one. Although continuing to go through the motions in the second half, tiredness

and lax defending from St. Bart’s meant Heythrop didn’t find getting wingers in behind the defence difficult in the latter stages, carving out a couple of chances with another debutant Stefan Fabien Drot-Troha close on two occasions to marking his first appearance.

This pressure eventually showed, with chances falling to Todd which were converted with aplomb.With tougher tests to come, particularly a friendly next Wednesday against a sde two leagues higher than Heythrop, this match was nothing more than a run out as Heythrop never needed to move into top gear.

Heythrop vs. Imperial 7th A depleted Heythrop College XI continued their unbeaten start to the football season with a hard fought 1-1 friendly draw at home for Imperial 7ths. The lack of players available showed as no substitutes could be named by Heythrop, who also had to call upon Yanick, a friend of Rahul Prashar to score the equaliser. This lack of replacement players hurt Heythrop, who were already fielding many players tired after playing a third match in a week. This coupled with knocks to a number of players meant that the draw was a fair and encouraging result, particularly as the opposition are the first side Heythrop will face in competitive fixtures.

Heythrop started an even first half in optimistic fashion, always looking to move forward and create chances with Matt Holland and the increasingly impressive Francisco Mota pulling the strings in midfield. A killer pass or shot couldn’t be found however, and Imperial’s increasing forward pressure told when a clipped pass into the Heythrop box was clinically finished, despite calls of offside from the on looking defenders. The half time score was perhaps an unfair reflection of Heythrop’s efforts, who had been passing the ball around patiently, as well as the hugely impressive debutant goalkeeper Peter Tampin-Copp, who looked assured and confident on his first appearance and was even awarded man of the match. An open second half followed, due to the increasing tiredness of both sides, but Heythrop eventually grabbed an equaliser.

A long clearance by Andy Swindley found Yanick in space, and the stand-in striker scored after seeing his first effort saved.

Heythrop vs. Queen Mary 5ths Heythrop 1st XI suffered their first defeat of the season on Wednes-

day 18th October, going down 3-2 away to a technically superior Queen Mary 5ths, a side who play two league above Heythrop. Due to the finishing times of some players’ lectures, Heythrop started with only nine men, but straight away didn’t look fazed by the strength of the opposition. Although Queen Marys dominated possession early on with Heythrop seeing little of the ball, the away side never looked too troubled defensively with Rahul Prashar and Jaime Tapia both having notably disciplined and composed games in the centre of defence, as well as goalkeeper Peter Tampin-Copp looking confident and assured.

The possession afforded to Queen Mary eventually paid though, as a hopeful chipped shot wasn’t dealt with by the otherwise impeccable Tampin-Copp. This was followed by much of the same pattern in play, which again culminated Tapia gifting possession to Queen Mary on the edge of the Heythrop penalty area who then duly doubled their lead.

Heythrop were undeterred however and continued to defend in a professional and efficient manner, occasionally coming forward when the opportunity presented itself. This eventually led to a cutting counter attack in which Josh Todd slid a perfect pass through to David Roberts, who was then bundled to the ground by a retreating defender inside the box.

The subsequent penalty was dispatched with aplomb by the eventual man of the match Prashar.

The second half saw a fantastic display from Heythrop, who dominated possession themselves, and were constantly moving forward and testing the Queen Mary defence, with Matt Holland close to finding the top corner with a driven free kick.

Despite this excellent play, Queen Mary grabbed their third goal on the counter attack and against the run of play, when a slidrule pass in behind the Heythrop defence was neatly clipped over the onrushing Tampin-Copp to give the hosts a flattering 3-1 lead.

This killer goal knocked Heythrop back somewhat for ten minutes or so as they then struggled to impose themselves on the game once more, but before long Heythrop had regain their composure and began attacking the tiring Queen Mary back line, Todd and Mike Holohan working particularly hard in defence and attack.

Heythop’s pressure finally earnt them the goal they merited when a quick counter attack saw Roberts cut in from the left wing and

drive a shot past the Queen Mary’s ‘keeper from outside the area.

This was an extremely encouraging and excellent display from Heythrop against a side that reached

the final of the ULU Vase last season. Should Heythrop perform in a manner similar to this during the league season, they will surely challenge the top of the league.

Open Mic Night In aid of Hand in Hand for Syria Friday 30th October 19:00-23:00 The Lounge

Katie Whiteley-Maguire HSU Campaigns Officer This month, the Open Mic Night will be raising money for the charity “Hand in Hand for Syria” who are organising disaster relief for families affected by the current Syrian conflict. Just £150 can sponsor a heavily afflicted family (those looking after orphaned children, or who have lost the breadwinner, etc.) for a month. This is our aim of the night.

We are asking for a minimum £1 donation for entrance into this

event. Food and Beverages will also be available to buy in the venue. All your money will go directly into our donation to Hand in Hand for Syria, so please give as much as you can! It’s always a really successful night with some very talented acts, so come along and have a great night.

Slots are 15 minutes long and we currently have quite a few available. Please e-mail Katie (campaigns@heythrop.su) to book a slot, or see the facebook event.

Live music, comedy, or poetry are all accepted.

Flickr.com/ rustysheriff

15

Friday 16TH novEMBER | THE LION

SPORTS & SOCIETIES Heythrop Thinking Society Stephen Bonnell Head of Thinking Soc Plato criticised the writing down of thoughts for the way in which it distorts the communicator’s meaning. Words become rigid and fixed. They lose their ability to be adapted to the context of conversation and to the questioning of individuals. When we speak in everyday life, we adapt our style of speaking naturally, we choose what to say and when to say it. Written works do not explicitly choose their audience, they are chosen by readers. However much works may restrict their audience, it can be the case that an audience develops for which the writing was not intended. Points that the writer did not think to address come to need to be addressed. Criticisms of sloppiness or incomprehensiveness easily fol-

low because written works are often understood to be in some sense ‘whole’, they require an ending, a rounding off, a conclusion, a point.

If a point is missed which somebody considers important, the work is considered “incomplete”.

It is surely rare to encounter somebody absurd enough to claim to have had a “complete” conversation. “Incompleteness” is ubiquitous in conversation, not least because of time-limits. The analysis that comes from conversation does not try to be whole. It is, in the proper sense, loose, free, incomplete, and becoming. In conversation, words render understanding through their sensitivity to those around and, in some sense, due to the privacy of these words, i.e. that they are recognised as chosen for that context.

Written works, however, can often be more precise, more exact, and

more incisive. They allow the writer to converse with him or herself over a period of time, they allow thought to refine itself so that the individual can express clearly what they are trying to say. Conversation does not always share this virtue.

We often speak when we shouldn’t have, we often talk on the impetus of nonsense and the spur of momentary emotion. Written works thus allow the individual to express more thoughtfully, more precisely his or her thoughts. (Note one of the virtues of private correspondence: that the context of reading is somewhat limited and yet it employs the freedom of shared questioning.)

We should not prioritise either writing or conversation, though.

They are both crucial aspects of the difficult process of coming to understand. They both play different, but overlapping roles. In using the

two together, in employing different methodology of communication as regards a problem, a more comprehensive understanding can be reached.

Heythrop’s Thinking Society looks to allow an opportunity for developing understanding in both written work and conversation. It has regular meetings, which are announced on our Facebook page, facebook.com/heythropthinkingsociety. It has a blog at heythropthinkingsociety.wordpress.com that is regularly updated and is open for new submissions. To submit, please email heythropthinkingsociety@gmail.com. (Whilst I have restricted this piece to dealing with conversation and written works, other media are also welcome. N.B. We accept “fiction” too.)

Philosophy Society flickr.com/photos/tikurion

Peter O’Neil Head of Philosophy Soc Last academic year the society went national, visiting conferences across the UK and having a jolly good time. For those of you who read our last article, I tentatively mentioned that we were looking into working with some national societies to co-host conferences here on our very doorstop, and we have succeeded!

Now, no doubt many of you are aware of how difficult it is to get Heythrop students to even attend their own lecture and can only imagine the challenge that organizing a visit some two hundred miles north of lovely Kensington, to the surprisingly pleasant Hull. I’m sure therefore that it is good news for everyone that we have penciled in two national conferences for the academic year.

The first of these conferences, looking to be set in mid February is with the British Undergraduate Philosophy Society conference.

This conference is twinned with the British Journal of Undergraduate Philosophy, and is aimed at providing a forum for undergraduate students to take their first steps into the academic world. Submissions are sent out to leading experts in the appropriate fields for review, and of those which pass and are published a number are selected to be presented at the conference.

A lot of the people entering submissions for this conference are presenting part of their dissertation - which is of course an excellent way to see if your dissertations are up-to-scratch and get some rather merciless critique from some of the UK’s most engaged thinkers.

However, don’t let the fact many people present their dissertations

dissuade you, as it is possible for undergraduates of any year to succeed, all you need is a good idea.

Papers for this journal/conference are required to be argumentative, rather than merely descriptive. So, we at the philosophy society do expect to see a large number of submissions from Heythrop students, who are especially known for being argumentative!

For those interested, the deadline for papers and more details are available on our facebook, and we’ve had an email sent out to everyone with the details. For those really interested, the Philosophy Society events manager, Rory Phillips who is also the Commissioning Editor of the Journal, and myself, who spoke at the BUPS Leeds Conference in June - will be hosting a specific discussion group in the next few weeks on how best to approach this.

The second conference we have

penciled in is with the United Kingdom Kant Society, set to happen next August here at Heythrop. The details of how this conference will work is currently being discussed, but those avid fans of Kant should keep an eye on our updates to see how this unfolds. Thus far, we have agreed that the joint conference will be on Kant and Religion, a subject appropriate to Heythrop.

This brings us to another exciting opportunity. The US undergraduate-focused journal, Stance, has released its call for papers. Similar to the British Journal of Undergraduate Philosophy, we at the society will be running a discussion group on how publication works and where to start. Additionally, those students who are interested in a particular field are able to apply to be part of the review team for papers - which of course requires letters of recommendation from Professors or Lecturers in that subject,

and those of you who have a strong or precise interest in an area of philosophy (such as Henry of Ghent’s metaphysics - huzzah!) should really consider applying.

With the invasion of a number of alchemists and other natural philosophers into the Alban Hall from Imperial College, no time could be more opportune than to present yet another exciting journal opportunity. Perfect for putting those scientists in their place, the new journal ‘The Ethical Biologist’ has emerged to cater for those students interested in the application of ethical and moral theory to the biological sciences and technology.

Further information about their call to papers is available through the Heythrop Philosophy Society facebook.

Join us on Facebook for more updates on our in-house events and discussions, as well as available prizes, conferences, & etc.