[THIS] Issue 3 by The Lion

THE HEYTHROP LION PRESENTS

[THIS] SPRING TERM, 2016

07 THE ABATTOIR

03 VLADIMIR

15 FASHION

23 BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY

21 RETRO FEATURE

27 POEMS

33 BIEBER

35 RECIPES

37 N.A.T.M.

Editors-in-Chief Megan Skingsley Katherine Johnson Managing Editor Katie Milne News Editor Jenny Moran Web Editor Terrence Sibley Editors-at-Large Ben Mercer Catherine Squibb Oscar Yuill

hello! w

hy ello, Guvnor, hello there, greetings, welcome back, top of the mornin’ to ya! Welcome to the RETRO issue of [this]! I personally am super excited about [this] one and hope you love being transported back to the good ol’ days. A necessary requirement is that you read [this] entire issue with rose-tinted glasses, you’ll thank us later for it! So, as always, go grab your cup of tea and enjoy the latest instalment of [this]. Megan Skingsley, Editor-in-Chief

To get involved with the next issue of [this], email your queries, articles, comments and complaints to megan.skingsley@yahoo.com or check out our social media facebook.com/theheythroplion

MAX LAKE THOMAS Second-year Undergraduate

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT VLADIMIR

Kremlin

n 1st November 2006 Alexander Litvinenko fell ill. Very ill. He had fled Russia, his country of birth, in the year 2000. He was living in London on the grounds of political asylum, though he had recently become a UK citizen. He was a former KGB agent who had recently become an MI6 agent and on the 1st he was poisoned by an old colleague who had slipped a dose of Polonium-210 into Litvinenko’s tea when they met for a meal. He died 21 days later. His autopsy was described as the most dangerous ever attempted and his remains were buried in a lead coffin. On the 21st the long awaited report on Litvinenko’s death and Russia’s involvement was published and the results were shocking. Except they weren’t. The report found that it was highly likely that Litvinenko’s death had been approved by his former boss, Vladimir Putin. I know some readers may find it distressing to have such a thing said about Putin, a man who rose through the ranks of the KGB, became a minister, then President of Russia for two terms, then Prime Minister, then back to President for another two terms. It takes guts to get away with having four terms as president when it is only legal to have three. But for Putin it is all about image, and this image has grown to be rather a scary one for us Westerners. What with the invading of former Soviet states, like Ukraine and Georgia, not to mention the seven times the Royal Air Force has had to scramble jets to intercept Russian aircraft near our air space. This image of a Russian Strong Man is exactly the image Putin wants, but it is not one tailored for the West. It has been cultivated for the Russian people. To make this point clear we need to remind ourselves of where we are in the timeline of Russia’s relationship with the West. After World War Two it became clear that ‘Uncle Stalin’ (as he was named in US propaganda posters) wasn’t going to allow the eastern European states to remain independent. Which made the USA rather angry. Russia created the Warsaw

Pact, a collection of Soviet states that would defend each other. Thus the USA created its own version of PACT, The Northern Atlantic Treaty Organisation, or NATO. After the line in the sand was drawn, the two sides sought to undermine each other. This was made more complicated and dangerous by the presence of nuclear weapons, which created the term MAD, or Mutually Assured Destruction, due to the predicted destruction of thousands of nuclear arms going off at the same time. (For those readers that don’t understand nuclear armaments’ destructive power, they are similar to being in a speeding car as it goes into a wall. Except when I say car I mean petrol lorry, and when I say wall, I mean another petrol lorry. That is on fire. In a petrol station. Now times that by a million.) Although, thankfully (and obviously), MAD has not become a reality, there are still plenty of nuclear bombs around for it to be possible. However, the point is that the perceivable threat of the cold war has subsided. East and west are no longer at each other’s throats with nuclear weapons. However––NATO remains after the dissolution of PACT. So why are we so afraid of Putin? Newspapers are running stories on what he will do next, how his aggression will affect us. But the reality is that we have come from a far more dangerous past and the future is unlikely to be as immediately threatening, especially when the UK is situated on the other side of Europe. Countries on the Russian boarder have a lot to be nervous about. Part of the reason for Putin’s actions is because of NATO’s actions. NATO’s 5th article states that an attack on one is an attack on all, which means that many former Soviet countries have joined NATO to escape Russian meddling, but the west is treading in the Russia’s back yard and Russia is not afraid to give us a warning shot. But why should we care? This sentiment may seem naïve in our globalised world, but allow me to explain. Russia has a three cards it can play: nuclear arms, energy, and

armed forces. However, they all come with certain reactions that can effect Russia adversely.

Nuclear arms are obviously out. They have never been used except as a threat, which is usually implied (as it was throughout the cold war).

Energy is the backbone of Russia’s economy. It has vast natural gas and oil supplies that make up 12% of global production, which has helped to finance its recovery from the Soviet era. Its state run company Gazprom received sixty percent of its income from Europe in 2009. This means that Russia is able to turn off the gas supply to Eastern Europe, which would have a devastating effect, but would also hinder Russia by reducing sales. But in the winter of 2009 Russia did, for a short time, completely halt gas supplies to Ukraine. Putin is not afraid of playing dirty.

The last card is the military. In the early 2000s the Russian military was remobilising. One of the agencies under threat was the GRU, a military intelligence agency. Hard power, guns, and troops on the ground seemed to be a thing of the past. Western powers had used them in the Middle East and were now bogged down in conflict. Russia could be slicker and smarter. But in 2014 the Ukrainian crisis loomed. The Russian puppet and Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych had been removed from power by a popular uprising. The Spetsnaz (Russia’s answer to the Commandos) were called upon to act as patriotic ‘Crimean’ insurgents, fighting a newly formed ‘fascist regime’ in defence of ethnic Russians. The real reason was to make sure that the massive Russian military port of Sevastopol remained in Russian hands and were not evicted by a new pro-European government in the capital Kiev. Out-maneuverered, the Ukranians held a referendum for Crimea to join Russia, resulting in ninety-six percent of the population in favour. The same men are photographed later that year in eastern Ukraine stoking the fires of separatism, causing

a conflict that continues to this day. This all seems rather alarming–– but only from a certain perspective. It may seem that Russia can do what it wants and get away with it. But that is only if we look at the headlines. The reality is that, when Russia medals with Ukraine, it effects the markets’ confidence in post-soviet Russia’s commitment to free market economics. After Gazprom halted gas to Ukraine in 2009, its stock value declined and has never recovered. In addition, in mid 2014 the EU and USA enforced sanctions on Russia for its support of Eastern Ukrainian separatists. These sanctions hit Russia particularly hard in light of the continually falling global oil prices (Brent Oil prices have fallen from approximately $115 per barrel in July 2014 to $29 per barrel this month). With Russia’s dependence on oil, its Achilles’ heel, the Russian GDP has shrunk by over four percent. Bear in mind that the 2008 recession caused the UK GDP to shrink by just over two percent. Putin is not playing for the world stage, for the UN human rights council or the nobel peace prize. Putin is playing for approval at home. The results of his actions have caused havoc in Russia’s economy and its global image, but not his domestic image. After EU sanctions were put in place his approval rating jumped almost 20 points to a high of eighty-three percent. Eighty-three percent after an economic crisis and the funding of a civil war in Ukraine is something unimaginable to other politicians. Part of this is to do with the way the news is reported, with the EU and USA getting most of the blame for economic trouble, but it is also part of the way that Putin has lead his country. His idealistic view of Russia is one that harkens back to the height of The Tsarist Empire––to Peter the Great in the 1700s. This is a Russia that is larger than it is today. A Russia that encompasses the Baltic states, Finland, Belarus, Georgia and eastern Ukraine. These are the many points of conflict in Putin’s Russia. The Baltic states of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia

were so afraid of Russia causing trouble they requested US troops to perform military training in their countries as a show of force. One of Putin’s close advisors Sergei Markov threatened that Finland joining NATO could cause world war three. And Russia already went openly to war in Georgia over separatist claims to statehood in 2008. However, because Putin is playing for the home approval that will keep him in power and to keep Russia stable, he will not risk open war. He would be a fool to try and stop Finland from joining NATO with force. Putin’s Russia is one that is looking for meaning by idolising the past, where Russia’s historical boarders lie. It is an image that Russians seem to approve. And it is one that will affect us in the future, but hopefully it is not one that anyone will go to open war over. I doubt that Putin will. For Putin does not want world war three. It does not benefit him. He wants maximum benefit with minimal risk. Anything that could foreseeably lead to a third world war is something he wants to avoid. That is why Putin’s current tactics involve covert operations, men in unmarked uniforms, proxy armies and, most recently in Syria, aircraft. He only openly reveals Russia’s involvement when foreign influence is at a minimal, such as in Crimea, for example. Once the referendum was conducted Putin later said in an interview of Russian TV that the men in Crimea had been Russian Spetsnaz. Putin’s strategy is to achieve the objective from a safe distance. This is in stark contrast to The West’s interventionism, where thousands of troops are moved around the world in front of journalists. That is why Putin can poison a Russian expat in the streets of London and get away with it. Putin knows what he can get away with and what is worth the risk. But Putin also knows that there are limits. He knows what he is aiming for, and he is committed to it. His goals are based on his domestic image that is the tune he plays to and it is a tune we should lend a careful ear to. Only then will we understand modern Russia and its feudal leader. PAGE

ADIB AMINPOUR Third-year Undergraduate

THE RISE OF DONALD TRUMP

Gage Skidmore

n the same day of a prisoner swap between the US and Iran that took place on January 18, which involved the freeing of 5 Americans from Iranian jails, the U.S. gave Tehran $1.7 billion in taxpayer funds. According to the White House, the $1.7 billion financial settlement was meant to end a 35-year legal battle that centered on the purchase of U.S. arms by Iran’s last monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, that were never delivered because of the Iranian revolution in 1979. But according to the Wall Street Journal, concerns are high that the transfer was in fact a ransom payment for the 5 American prisoners. Moreover, Gen. Mohammad Reza-Naghdi, commander of Iran’s paramilitary Basij force, told state media that the transfer

was a key factor in the decision to release the American prisoners. Earlier in January, Iranian naval forces captured 10 U.S. sailors after their boats drifted into Iranian waters due to mechanical difficulties. Iranian news broadcasters released images of armed Iranian military personnel boarding the decks and forcing the sailors at gunpoint to kneel with their hands on their heads. Another propaganda video showed one of the U.S. sailors speaking to an Iranian interviewer, admitting wrongdoing and apologizing. The Geneva Conventions, it should be noted, ban the practice of parading prisoners for purposes of insult and propaganda. But upon

their release, US Secretary of State John Kerry reacted by saying, “I want to thank the Iranian authorities for their cooperation and quick response”. Many have slammed the White House’s reaction to the incident. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy commented: “I was very concerned that he’s missing where the challenge of the world is with security - he sits and talks positively about Iran when they just took 10 of our Navy sailors”. It seems that Obama, and other members of Congress, are turning a blind eye to this callous treatment of their own navy.

The U.S. is a global superpower – or at least is supposed to be. A common theme that has run through Barack Obama’s presidency is the idea the United States must

“Only one candidate has promised to ‘make America great again’” atone for its policies, whether it is America’s application of the war against Islamist terrorism or its overall foreign policy. It seems to many that Obama sees America’s influence in the world as something to apologize for rather than to be proud of. President Obama even refuses to use the term ‘radical Islamic terrorism’; PolitiFact National, The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times have all reported that Obama administration officials try to avoid invoking Islam when describing ISIS, preferring to describe the organization’s philosophy in non-religious terms such as ‘violent extremism’.

In my opinion, a large and dangerous world should have little space for political correctness. In a recent report, The UN stated that ISIS has killed at least 18,802 civilians in Iraq, with 3.2 million Iraqis internally displaced. In the past few months we saw the horrific terrorist attacks that took place in Paris and San Bernardino, killing 130 civilians in the former and 14 in the latter. Now, some of us here in Britain struggle to understand Trump’s unprecedented success in polls conducted all over the U.S.; even unaware that, in a field of 15 Republican presidential candidates, Trump scores anything from 30% to 48% in virtually every Republican poll. Thousands upon thousands of people are attending each of his rallies all over the country. The UK’s ambassador to the U.S.,

Sir Peter Westmacott, said in an interview with The Guardian: “It is not accidental that on the front of [Trump’s] baseball cap it says, ‘Make America great again’. For whatever reason, there are people who feel America is not at the moment the world’s dominant power who snaps its fingers and the rest of the world falls into place”.

In my opinion, the ambassador is right. Many people feel the U.S. no longer wins at anything. When it comes to defeating ISIS, for example, they no longer have people like General McArthur or General George Patton – WWII heroes who most probably would have wiped out ISIS by now. Fighting a terrorist group is of course more difficult than traditional warfare; but nonetheless we’re speaking of a terrorist group that operates as a state. People are forced to listen to U.S. administration officials like John Kirby that talk about how “ISIS remains a very dangerous, determined, very, lethal enemy”,which in my opinion is not a smart way to speak about the enemy.

Perhaps under a Trump presidency, the U.S. would no longer make catastrophic mistakes like the Iran deal, where they handed over $150 billion to Iran’s radical Ayatollah regime. Virtually everybody knows that Iran will use that money to fund terrorist groups all over the Middle East, such as Hezbollah and the Assad regime. Secretary Kerry himself admitted in January, “I think that some of it will end up in the hands of the IRGC or other entities, some of which are labe-

led terrorists… You know, to some degree, I’m not going to sit here and tell you that every component of that can be prevented.” Trump has made fun of specific elements of the deal, especially the part where the Iranians are allowed to ‘self-inspect’ at the Parchin nuclear site, and are given a 24 day notice period before any inspectors are allowed access to suspicious sites.

Unlike the other candidates, Trump is not lobbied or controlled by anyone. For once we have a candidate who is self-funded; makes deals for a living, who builds, who does business. He is someone who is not a ‘career politician’, those who habitually run for congress and are all talk and little action. His self-funding makes it clear that he is running for persona passion rather than monetary interest.

I believe that the coming presidential election will have the biggest voter turnout in history. Some people might think that we don’t need low energy people like Jeb Bush. We don’t need a third term for Obama by voting for Hillary, which arguably it is. We need tone. We need energy. Only one candidate has promised to ‘make America great again’. People thus see in Trump a commander-in-chief, who will beat the hell out of ISIS, solve the problem of illegal immigration, and absolve our $19 trillion in debt. Whether this will be the case or not remains to be seen, but along with his unapologetic campaign strategy, it certainly explains his sudden popularity. PAGE

BEN MERCER Editor-at-Large

THE ABATTOIR TRIDENT: or How I learned to Ditch the Bomb I awoke from the experience and the view from my window was almost indistinguishable from the vision. I was in Newcastle.

It was Andrew Marr who would reveal to me the meaning of this vision. Marr, apparently party to the peculiar media strategy of proving Jeremy Corbyn is stuck in the ‘80s by asking him questions from the ‘80s, was interrogating the Labour leader on the subject of Britain’s nuclear deterrent. I found this extremely irritating, and so the quandary was settled. The subject is Trident.

was sitting late at night, in a strange house in a strange place, hosting a Socratic debate. The subject: What should be my subject?

For reasons I am perfectly capable of identifying I was later met by an almost Damascene fit; a blinding light and a searing heat. The vision that followed was one of a post-apocalyptic wasteland; empty roads under a grey sky, the smoking ruins and wrecks of civilization all around me. Sometimes a poor and desperate phantom stumbled past and away into the perpetual twilight of the world, muttering nothings in an unintelligible dialect. Sometimes they seemed to try to sing.

It is curious that Jeremy Corbyn’s critics should accuse him of being stuck in the past because the past furnishes those same critics with the arguments they use to defend Trident. That the pro-renewal faction is still so strong is a testimony to the politicians’ skill at myth-making and an indictment of a population that has worn its credulity as a banner for far too long.

There can be few better proofs of this contention than the fact that Tony Blair, the myth-makers’ high priest for whom public perception was often the first and the last consideration, opted to push for renewal despite seeing no merit in the arguments for its necessity. It was a decision made solely to perpetuate the myth and satisfy the credulous; because he saw it as an easy way to sell his own and his party’s foreign policy credentials. (That this fact is not better known than it is might be considered encouraging as it confirms that few people have bought or read his

autobiography.) In other words, renewing Trident would serve no meaningful ends in foreign policy save maintaining the illusion that we may independently render foreign policy redundant. And that – possessing the ability to instigate or to take part in the apocalypse – is supposed to be reassuring.

The myth of Trident, and the arguments for its maintenance and its renewal, can be neatly categorised. They are often presented as variations on five distinct themes that can be fairly summarised as follows: 1) It is a deterrent. 2) This deterrent makes us – and the world – a safer place. 3) It is vital that we have an independent deterrent. 4) It is a fantastic source of jobs 5) It is necessary to maintain our place at the ‘top table’. On the first point: the simple questions that must follow any statement based on the premise of Trident’s deterrent quality really are… well… simple. Who and what is it deterring and how?

It is generally acknowledged that the Cold War ended in 1991. The discussion regarding deterrent nuclear arsenals is, then, very different from that which took place during the decades when The Enemy – Russia – had its armies massed on and poised to cross the East-West border in Berlin and its navy shuttling missiles to Cuba. It is no longer the case, as it was in the Polaris era, that we stand as one tooth of a great beast that bares us against the nuclear gnash-

“They will not be deterred by the prospect of mutually-assurred destruction”

ers of its rival. The Soviet beast (or, to borrow from Auden, the Ogre) is gone and the Warsaw Pact dissolved, and the teeth of our beast have, like dentures, been placed aside and left to grow their own cultures.

So I ask again: What is this deterrent and who is it deterring? The Russia of today is not what it was. Our ‘deterrent’ did not deter its incursion into and subsequent annexation of the Crimea, or its involvement in the Ukraine; a ‘salami tactic’ which would undoubtedly be the modus operandi of any Russian government which sought to go beyond mere irredentism. When would you press the button, darling? Crimea, Donetsk, Kiev? What about Poland; Lublin, Augustow, Krakow, Warsaw? Or perhaps further west than that?

We have yet to ‘press the button’; we have yet, to use another anatomical analogy, to spurt the final response to Putin’s gentle rubbing of the Russian military phallus. No serious commentator has yet suggested that we take masturbation nuclear. Shirking national stereotypes: The Chinese will soon overtake the Russians, equipping themselves as they are with bigger and more destructive genitalia than their Slavic near-neighbours, and pursuing their own agenda in doing so. And neither would be deterred by the manner of deterrence presented by Trident; a continuous at-sea nuclear capability that relies on the un-detectability of manned submarines in an era where technology

is increasingly rendering such systems impossible to implement. The writers of the appalling Terminator: Salvation imagined a resistance movement led from a submarine that was hunted down and destroyed in a drone strike. If the writers of that film can imagine such an eventuality, do you really suppose that the Chinese – whose naval exploits have just forced the United States to increase their undersea military budget to over $40bn over the next five years – have been incapable of the same realisation?

There is no monolithic entity against which to show off our considerable balls. There are dicks everywhere, of various shapes and sizes and of differing levels of virility. The dicks of whom we should be most afraid are not deterred by our own penile ability. The most notable attacks on our soil, and on the soil of our allies – and I refer here to the obscenities committed in New York on 9/11 and London on 7/7, and to the recent attacks on Paris and the atrocities committed against our should-be allies in Kurdistan and Iraq and Syria and Turkey – have not been deterred by our deterrent.

In the nuclear theatre our principal threats come not from pseudo-rational Ogres but from irrational fanatics, and those fanatics are not likely to make our small island their

target. North Korea, whose nuclear arsenal is truly a deterrent in the sense that it prohibits us from making any serious humanitarian intervention on the part of its people; Pakistan, that almost-failed state with its largely Talibanized government and whose nuclear weapons, which we fund, are pointed not at us but at India; Iran, which may finally have been deterred not by our nuclear weapons but by the real and tangible effects of economic sanctions: None of these would be deterred from mounting nuclear attacks against us or our allies by the fact of our ability to respond in kind. The regime in North Korea is restrained only by its total reliance on China, the Iranians only by the fact that their regime could not continue under the sanctions imposed upon them without suffering a counter-revolution, and the Pakistanis only because their government has not yet totally succumbed to Talibanization.

Make no mistake: should the worst and most messianic factions in these countries take power they will not be deterred by the prospect of mutual-assured destruction; a doctrine written for another time and under the presumption that all actors are rational. Rational deterrence does not work against irrational actors, and the very real threats to our sovereignty and our people and our lands come not now from any rational opposition but from maniacal and messianic terrorists against whom Trident is an irrelevance. Indeed, a nuclear response to al-Qaeda or Islamic State would suit them just fine. Apocalyptic weapons are of no use whatsoever against those who desire the apocalypse. Meanwhile, the £100bn+ dedicated to the renewal of Trident comes at the expense not only of the tax payer but of the conventional forces on whom we rely to counter and

PAGE

defeat these parasitic, cancerous, disease-addled micro-cocks.

Now, you will doubtless have seen from the above the ease with which one category may slip into another. Surely it is apparent, from what has been written already, that our non-deterrent does not make us safe?

I need not then mention, or return to the mention of that apocalyptic vision I shared at the top of this piece. But I shall anyway, briefly; for such desolation (and I mean true desolation and not merely the usual, every-day Newcastle vista) could well become reality should one of the monthly nuclear convoys, which pass through the city in unmarked green lories on their way to or from Faslane or Coulport, fall victim to an accident or an attack. The worst case scenario, following such an event, would be a full-scale nuclear detonation. Marginally better than that would be the detonation of one of the conventional explosives contained in the convoy rupturing one of the warheads, causing radioactive dust to spread for miles around which, if inhaled, would all-but guarantee cancer for anyone within the vicinity and render the earth on which it fell unusable for a mere few thousand years.

too. Not least the fact that, were we to take as a premise the attack of a significant state-actor, or perhaps a Cold War-esque exchange, the likelihood of the United Kingdom being made a prime target of our enemies is only increased by the fact of our membership of the United States’ (or NATO’s) missile defence screen. And, whilst it was not my intention to make an argument in favour of complete unilateral disarmament (and I do not intend to do so now), this is a point that is just as valid now as it was during the Cold War: What, precisely, would be worth targeting except our missile and air bases; except those facilities that enable a nuclear response? Without the conventional forces that Trident prohibits, the only thing worth targeting in this country – unless you hold to the view that we ‘punch above our weight’, and then I would have to ask ‘How?’ – is Trident itself. So it can hardly be said to make us safer in that respect.

“Peace,” they might ask, “What peace?”

(It’s almost enough to make you feel better about the fact that the United States has almost destroyed several of its own cities accidentally; about the fact that Bill Clinton once lost the nuclear codes for a period spanning months; about the fact that lorries carrying nuclear payloads have had numerous accidents on British roads and our Trident missiles lack many of the safeguards built into their American equivalents.) But there are other considerations,

As regards the world: The Cold War (and I am not sorry to keep returning to it) only made the world a safer place in the sense that the weapons it invented were never used. It raised the level of threat and the potential of doom and we now congratulate it for not visiting on us the destructive potential it enabled. Meanwhile it allowed the proliferation of the same technology (thus making the threat much more severe, to the extent that a treaty was require to prevent any side from establishing missile bases on the moon) it is now considered to have restrained. What’s more, it allowed the principal actors to outsource

their grievances to regions we call the third-world, thus solidifying their decrepitude by installing unand even anti-democratic governments and forcing upon them the weight of a conflict in which they had no interest. Ask a man from Vietnam about the peace brought by nuclear stalemate; ask someone from Laos or Cambodia, from Korea or from Chilé, from Iraq or Iran or Afghanistan how thankful they are for the peace brought about by mutual assured destruction. “Peace,” they might ask, “What peace?”

Even granting that it may one day be necessary to take part in the apocalypse (and I contend that there is never a situation in which taking part in the end of the world can be considered a moral act) the notion that we may be able to do so of our own volition is disproved both by the present facts and by extension of those described above. Trident is not an independent system. The missiles are manufactured in the United States, their maintenance is conducted and carried out in the United States, and the targeting systems and satellites used to guide them are owned and controlled by, yes, the United States. The last significant military act undertaken by this nation without the explicit approval of the United States was Suez. That did not go well. Even assuming that we were capable of launching an independent nuclear strike (and we’re not), and we did so without the approval of the United States, the reaction would be that of Suez but in the Megatons. As regards 4): The relationship between Trident and employment has been touched on already, but I

shall endeavour to make it as clear as I can and as briefly as I can: Trident costs jobs. It does not create them. Even taken in isolation, jobs in the nuclear weapons industry have been cut by almost 60% in the last 20 years whilst the costs incurred by the state have increased beyond all reason. This coincides with even more drastic cuts to jobs in the conventional (and usable) armed forces. Renewing Trident will not reverse this trend. In the case of conventional forces, it will speed up the rate of decline that has already put is in the absurd position of having aircraft carriers with no aircraft to carry, a badly underfunded and underequipped and overstretched army and not enough money to spend on modern defence needs like cybersecurity. And if we were to redirect the budget for Trident renewal into the budget for conventional defence we would create vast numbers of jobs, increase our ability to defend ourselves and to ‘project power overseas’, and still have billions left over to plug the black hole in other state

finances; the NHS, for example. All of this renders the claim that Trident renewal guarantees us a place at the ‘top table’ of world politics even more bizarre and unfounded. The notion that we must spend more than £100bn to secure our position is undermined by the fact that there are a great many nations with more power and more influence than ourselves despite having no nuclear weapons of their own. Germany has no nuclear deterrent. Brazil and South Africa, both of which are more relevant today than we are, gave theirs up a long time ago. Israel and France maintain a nuclear arsenal which costs less than our own and have seen no need to spend lavishly on replacements or upgrades. The Japanese maintain the ability to obtain and to use nuclear weapons in dire circumstances but keep no stockpile of missiles and no continuous programme. The vast majority of

NATO countries have no ‘independent’ nuclear deterrent, and only a few are a part of the nuclear sharing agreement that allows the US to place its missiles in their countries.

“Trident costs jobs. It does not create them.”

The only nations currently scrambling to join us at our table are those we should not like to have as dinner guests. Trident renewal confers us no status other than that of profligate idiots with delusions of grandeur, and actively hinders our ability to protect ourselves and our allies. We spend a fortune on the pretence that we may independently use the weapons, and even if we could (and we can’t), their effect on our enemies would be miniscule compared to their attacks on us. Trident is an expensive and dangerous myth, and it would do us all good to dispel it.

DAN TOBIN Second-year Undergraduate

GETTING BY IN THE TEMPLE OF IRON Everybody knows what the oldest profession in the world is, but the second oldest must be running a gym. As one of the biggest industries in the the world and fitness industry, be it supplements, gym memberships, personal training, military fitness courses etc., the world is going crazy for keeping fit. From die-hard bodybuilders to those just keeping in shape, those wanting to lose that stubborn belly fat and those looking to lift Pluto alike, make up a whole host of characters in the gym. If you are one of those who jumped on the ‘New Year, New Me’ bandwagon, then I say ‘good on you’. The hardest part is sticking with it, and part of the reason most give up on their resolution is out of fear of actually going to the gym. So, here is a handy ‘Do’s and Don’ts Guide’ for those looking to get in shape.

1. DO BE PREPARED: GO IN WITH A PLAN

If you wander into the gym and jump on the nearest piece of equipment you can find and start going at it, your progress will be frustrating. That is to say, there won’t be any. Having some kind of plan is immensely helpful, even if it is just ‘stay in the gym for half an hour and do three different exercises’. Sometimes just going somewhere to do something helps you to divide and compartmentalize: library for study, home for relaxing, gym for working out. It doesn’t work for everyone, but going to the gym to do your exercises helps you to divide your life and makes balancing your time easier. I’m not explaining with dissertation-level research into how exactly to do the hex-bar variation of the hack squat, but even a few minutes googling different ways of doing ab crunches (e.g. Spiderman Plank, Stability Ball Rollouts, Medicine Ball Russian Twist) can go a long way in terms of keeping you on track.

2. DON’T BE AFRAID TO FAIL

If you’re unsure of what to do and are feeling out of your depth, that’s OK. In fact, it’s more than OK––it’s necessary for growth. Once you get to that plateau of not knowing where to go next, it means you’ve come far enough along on your journey to have found the spot where your next step begins. Revisit the basics, find where you are and start moving again.

For some, failure is not an option––it’s a requirement. Planning to a certain amount of reps with a new weight level, and not reaching it because of fatigue, is known as ‘failure’, but it’s not as negative as you might think. It shows you where your limit is and what you need to work towards.

3. DO HAVE GOALS

Set down in writing what you want to achieve. This doesn’t have to be ‘beat Brian Shaw to become the World’s Strongest Man’, but hav-

ing set goals can help you achieve what you want to achieve. Having them in front of you will push you towards them. When you feel like giving up, think about why you started in the first place. Vocalising your goals––telling another person––can help as well. It can feel like a tacit promise: I told you what I’m going to do, so I now feel responsible for making sure I do it. Even if it’s your flatmate, your mum, your dog or that person standing behind you in the Post Office, letting someone know about your goals can help you on your way (be prepared, however, for them to let you know how annoying your incessant talk about the gym is. No pain, no gain!).

4. DON’T BE AFRAID TO ASK

If you see someone doing an exercise that you haven’t seen before or think will help you progress towards your goals, don’t be afraid to ask them how it’s done, what it’s called or if they could show you how to do it. Everyone started in the same place as you: new to the gym, unsure of what to do and where to go. They will understand and will often be more than happy to assist.

5. DO PRACTICE

If you are just starting a new routine/regime/plan, make sure you get to grips with the exercises before you start doing your proper workout. This can help to prevent

injury, keep correct form and ul- to change your life for the bettimately allow you to make big- ter. Nothing can take that away ger leaps towards your goals. from you, not even that hideous neon yellow pair of shorts. Warm up. If you are lifting weights, practice the movement with a light DON’T CURL IN weight so you can get used to the 8. motions and the feeling of the ex- THE SQUAT RACK ercise. If you jump straight in without warming up, the worst-case The squat rack is for squatting–– scenario is a bad injury that will it’s in the name. Bicep curling can keep you out of the gym for weeks be done literally anywhere else. at a time, and nobody wants that. Why take up that one piece of equipment, which is the only place 6. DON’T COPY YOUR GYM you can do that exercise, for an exercise possible to do anywhere? BUDDY’S ROUTINE If you’re lucky enough to have a gym buddy, good for you. But jumping on their coat-tails and doing every exercise they do, rep for rep, is not a good idea. If they’re knowledgeable enough to show you the ropes, chances are they’ll have picked a routine suited to them. Unless you have the exact same goals and are the exact same body shape, go your own way.

9. DO CLEAN UP AFTER YOURSELF

You’ve annihilated that workout, but it’s left you sweating more than you ever thought possible. The courteous thing to do is to wipe up after yourself, leaving the machine clean and breezy for the next person.

Seriously, we don’t want an impromptu bath. If you’re just getting started, and you want an idea of some basic exercises, following along isn’t a 10. DON’T USE YOUR bad thing at all, as long as once PHONE TO TALK IN THE you’re able to head out into the wilderness of the gym for your- GYM self, you take your own path and pick a routine that’s right for you. Scrolling through Instagram between sets? Fine. Using it for muFine. Tracking your workout? 7. DO CLEAR YOUR MIND sic? Fine. Sitting on the bench-press

OF WORRIES

talking to your nan for twenty minutes with a mile long queue behind you when it turns out you were never using it in the first place? Not cool, dude. Not cool.

11. DO STICK WITH IT

All jokes aside, one of the hardest things to do when keeping fit is keep going. You’re pushing your body to its physical limits, making it go further and for longer than it ever has before. You are intentionally breaking your body down so you can grow back stronger than ever before. And it hurts. But with every inch, you climb closer to your goal. You edge forward, one rep at a time. And with each step forward, you take a step away from what you were before. Taking progress pictures can help––a picture before you start, one week in, two weeks in etc. And if you ever feel like you can’t go on, look at the pictures and see how far you’ve come.

Once you make that choice to step into the Temple of Iron and devote yourself to becoming the strongest, fittest and toned-est version of yourself, the only thing holding you back is you. If you are willing, if you are dedicated, and if you can summon the strength to carry on when everyone else has given up, then your battle is already won.

Gym-goers couldn’t care less if that top you’re wearing doesn’t match your trainers, or if your earphones are not the best ones available. In fact, that guy that turns up with all the equipment, gunning for the coolest person in the room without actually working out, is less dedicated than you. You’re there. You’ve made the decision

PAGE

here are few occasions on which the United Nations is able to disgrace itself more effectively than when it comes to making appointments to committees and sinecures. Iraq, for example, was due to take the chairmanship of the special committee on disarmament in 2003; a move prohibited not by any common sense on the part of the U.N. but because the USled intervention in that same year made such an appointment impossible. Iran has recently been re-elected to a seat on the U.N’s Commission on the Status of Women. Robert Mugabe, the subject of a wide-ranging travel ban, was asked to be an ambas-

BEN MERCER Editor-at-Large

It should come as no surprise that the U.N., which makes no firm commitment to anything save the moral imperative to create ever more useless, ever more profligate committees, will express no opinion on the matter of Saudi Arabia’s chairmanship. Rather more depressing, though, is the silence on the part of our own government (which, by taking part in tac-

sador for tourism in 2012, and the Human Rights Council which counts amongst its membership such bastions of human rights as Pakistan and Uganda and the Holy See – is currently chaired by Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom’s recent history – and by recent I speak of the past few months – is a hideous collection of sundered heads and bloodied bodies. The execution of the prominent Shia cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr was at least granted some coverage in the Western media, though the Obama and Cameron administrations declined to condemn it in anything but uncer-

tical vote-trading with Saudi Arabia, ensured that country’s elevation to its current lofty position) on the crimes against humans and human rights being committed almost every day by the head of the UNHRC.

But whilst the first example can be understood in the context of Saudi Arabia’s prosecution of its not-so-cold war with Iran, and both cases can be seen as the desperate actions of a regime seeking to re-establish sure-foot-

tain terms. The sentencing of the human rights blogger Raif Badawi to 10 years in prison and one thousand lashes (a punishment that has had to be staggered given the very real chance that it might have killed him) has received less attention than that, possibly due to the fact that it did not cause embassies to be closed or burned, but it, too, has been covered.

It serves no purpose as an act of geo-realpolitik. Nor is it part of a wider attempt at suppressing political dissent. The sentence of death in this case, for the related but distinct crimes of apostasy and ‘spreading blasphemous ideas’ in his art (charges he denies), are symptoms of a deep-rooted loathing of art and

ing following the death of King Abdullah and the destabilizing effects of Islamic State (and how sharper than a serpent’s tooth it is to have a thankless child!), it is the impending execution of the Palestinian poet Ashraf Fayadh which speaks most clearly to the character of the House of Saud.

IN DEFENCE OF A POET

PAGE

I cannot attest to the quality or beauty or insightfulness of Ashraf Fayadh’s poetry. I cannot read his works in the language in which they were written and I am increasingly of the opinion that poetry can never be properly translated without suffering some essential loss. I cannot even support Ashraf’s claim that

(And it is no coincidence that the same aversion to aesthetics and thought can also be found in wide swathes of Pakistan, in Taliban-controlled areas of Afghanistan and in the territories in Iraq and Syria governed by Islamic State. But, of course, it has nothing to do with Islam.)

music and freedom of thought and expression; a loathing which is a necessary consequence of Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabi or Salafist iteration of Sharia. It should be of great concern to all of us that that is the iteration which we in the West are made to import into our own countries, often through Saudi-printed and Saudi-approved copies of the Quran with which we stock our prison libraries, and also in the form of ‘generous’ donations to mosques and madrassas made by the Saudi state. The exporting of evangelization and religious coercion, often in radicalizing forms, is one of the largest and least spoken-of facets of Saudi trade policy.

It should be beholden upon all of us, and not just those who claim to speak for us, to combat the forces who prefer and

But there is undoubtedly a case to be prosecuted, and every passing day on which the wider international community remains silent is one in which our supposed commitment to support human rights and values is side-lined by spreadsheet morality; by concerns over arms deals and oil exports. Remember when, following the attacks on the offices of Charlie Hebdo, the streets of Paris were treated to a parade of world leaders, all of whom voiced their commitment to uphold the rights of freedom of thought and expression? Well, where are they now? Where is their support now?!

he is innocent of the charges levelled against him. Fortunately, I do not need to. For it should go without saying that apostasy and blasphemy are not considered crimes under any sane system of justice, and the decisions by the Saudi authorities to deny Ashraf anything like a fair trial, not to mention access to a lawyer, are so obviously in contravention of international law and of human rights as enshrined by the UNHRC – yes, again, the very body now chaired from Riyadh – that there really is, on our side, no case to defend.

But the second might perhaps require something more by way of explanation. Indeed, its inclusion here caused me to think and think again, but I have concluded that it is right to include it and the point it makes is more than salient. For the ruin of Oscar Wilde, like the attack on Mr. Fayadh, are both proofs that can be used against W.H. Auden’s fatuous claim that ‘poetry makes nothing happen.’ And both are examples of individuals sent down by forms of love. To quote from Alfred Douglas’s fateful poem: a love

The case of Ashraf Fayadh bears the hallmarks of the affairs of both Salman Rushdie and Oscar Wilde. The facts of the former should be so well-known that they need no restating here – the sentencing to death of a writer for the crime of writing is abhorrent to us, isn’t it? Laws against blasphemy and ‘offensiveness’ are loathsome and infantile, are they not?

who act in the hopes of achieving an unfeeling, unthinking, beauty-less world. But it should be particularly important for us, we subjects of this disunited kingdom, to speak more loudly and with an especially firm commitment to purpose in matters such as this. For we have known its antithesis, and it has cost us dearly in the past.

I have penned a poem – The Ballad of Burning - which shares its sentiment with that expressed within this piece. I had thought to close with it. But as there is a place set aside in this august journal – a poets’ corner, of a kind - for works of rhyme and rhythm and metre (and sometimes those that lack the same, but that is an argument for another time), I have decided instead to close with the words of another.

The ‘Shame’ spoken of and felt (and, yes, acted upon) by the likes of Wilde and Bosie, which was a crime (and remains a crime in places like Saudi Arabia), is just as natural and vital to us as the ‘crime’ for which Ashraf Fayadh has been condemned. It is natural to us because it is of our nature! The dignity of our species, in other words, demands that we use and are able to use, free from fear of punishment, our ability to think and to write what we think, and to portray beauty, and to practice it and feel it with all the pain and reverence and hard work befitting any fundamental Love. To deny the freedom to think is to deny the freedom to love. They are, in that sense, two forms of the same virtue. And it allows one to accuse the House of Saud, and religion, as being opposed to love. Which it is; which they both are.

‘that dare not speak its name.’

The point, if I have done my job, is clear. And I hope that you will join with me, and with the good people at PEN International, and Amnesty International, and the innumerable poets and writers and musicians and ordinary human beings in doing what our government is too cowardly to do on our behalf: condemn this sentence, condemn this crime, and work for the freedom of Mr. Ashraf Fayadh.

“Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration; the mirrors of the gigantic shadows which futurity casts upon the present; the words which express what they understand not; the trumpets which sing to battle, and feel not what they inspire; the influence which is moved not, but moves. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world.”

Part of the title of this piece is taken (and then reworked) from Percy Bysshe-Shelley’s polemic, published posthumously, entitled ‘A defence of Poetry.’ It is amongst the most eloquent cases ever made for art and for the meaning and the importance of art. I encourage the reader to peruse it in its entirety, but it closes as follows:

T I F FA N Y - JA N E B AT E S Third-year Undergraduate

The Fashion Week Update

denim forever

lace on sat in

an of the moment, Peter Pilotto, embraces prints like nobody else. With Chantilly lace delicately placed on tiered satin skirts, finishing crayon coloured outfits with crisp white accessories, prints have never looked more grown up. Patterning from the designer realm doesn’t stop there, Cavalli missed the memo about mixing prints, and the outcome is everything fashion should be, fun, refreshing and experimental.   Head over to And Other Stories for a wide selection of prints, whatever your style, from sporty digital designs, to floaty floral midi dresses. Alternatively, recently launched philosophy-graduate-founded brand De Mouilpied has edgy, eccentric statement jumpsuits and bomber jackets in vibrant hues inspired by Indian and Japanese prints.  Fusing folds, flounces, and frills, fashion celebrates femininity. If Latin dancing were to ever meet Victorian England, this is what it would look like. The more intricate and fussy, the better. Artistry and creativity through ruffling detail was seen, from the likes of Oscar De La Renta’s romantic designs, Mary Katrantzou’s hip accentuating material gathering and AlexanderMcQueen’s high collared lengthy dresses.  Expect highstreet stores like Zara to step up to the challenge of offering similarly elegant and whimsical pieces for a tenth of the price. Mango’s new season stock also offers plenty of frilled items but opts for a seventies theme, toughening things up with mid-wash denims and brown

suede accessories. Want something a bit more fancy? NastyGal has just unveiled their highly anticipated Courtney Love campaign collection. Inspired by rock stars of the nineties and french lingerie, there’s a mixture of both contemporary and nostalgic elements. With everything from tutu tulle skirts, to ornamental, low-cut, lacy evening dresses, it’s totally worth checking out.   Denim just got a whole lot more versatile. Be it in the form of a printed longline trench coat seen on the Alexander McQueen runway to channeling your inner nineties skater girl through distressed, patch-work, or raw cut shirts and culottes. Key designer inspiration for the multi-faceted denim craze include Diesel Black Gold’s androgynous take on the trend, Suno for all things full-skirted, feminine

and streamline, florals in the form of Versus Versace, and patchwork from renowned fashion house Yves Saint Laurent. Taking inspiration from the runway, your top three go-to high street stores replicating such styles are as follows: Cos for raw-edging, ASOS Market Place for reworked vintage pieces, and Gap for girly and lightweight holiday-ready denim shirt dresses.   Love the denim, but strapped for cash? Update the denim you have. New brands such as Caine London find denim jackets in charity shops, oil paint canal-art-type portraits of nineties icons onto the jacket and mark them up for over a grand per jacket. Who’s to say you can’t do the same at home? Personalisation is not just a fun process, it makes your garment unique, it becomes a talking point.

Psychedelic tie-dye was centre stage during New York Fashion Week’s runway shows. The trippy technicolour trend strongly resembles all things seventies, but it’s a marked shift from the ways the decade has been done before. Releasing your inner bohemian gets a ladylike revamp, it’s no longer hippie-centric, but focusses on softer pastel shades, with materials like suede still apparent in shoes and bags, but taking a back seat while chiffons, silk and satin take centre stage for the hotter months.   Fans of the swirly pattern include Paco Rabbane, Baja East and Emilio Pucci. Pucci, season after season reels out his signature kaleidoscopic mixtures of colours and this years Resort Collection is not an exception. SS16’s brushstrokes of blue, yellow and pink see a cuter, play-

ful identity, with the pastel palette screaming spring.   For tie dye, look no further than our beloved H&M, with the globally recognized brand already doing some tie dye homeware pieces, they’re sure to implement a little bit of their tie dye love into their clothing line too. Be sure to check out French Connection stores in March, Spring/Summer showrooms featured the ‘mineral pool‘ print. Full of turquoise, blue and pink, the tie dye pattern resembles precious stones like Tourmaline often found in Moroccan markets.   Sports luxe gets an upgrade. Gone are the days of flared and knitted tracksuit bottoms. Instead, opt for leisurely cuts, showing shoulders (another huge spring/ summer trend) in soft cosmetic hues. Mix tight fitted crop tops with baggy utilitarian trousers. Layer up

in the early autumn months with bomber jackets, or pair a loose fitting boyfriend coat with trainers.   Cult brands for the leisure trend include Alexander Wang, opting for pocketed boiler suits galore, Eckhaus Latta whose crisp whites result in a fresh, futuristic feel, & Balenciaga which had a strong focus on layering and incorporating a wide variety of texturing and pinstripes to classic racer-back cuts and slim fitting trousers.  Alternatively, to find a cheap buy, head straight for Offspring or Office for killer trainers which, when paired with a maxi dress or slitted midi skirt will scream feminine, fashionable and effortless. Be sure to check out the ‘ASOS insider’ page too, as the online stylists can’t get enough of the relaxed street-style.   Galactic silvers prove not to be just for the festive months. Whether you’re brave enough to embrace a fully silver silhouette like the models on the VB runway, or only ready to inject a small amount into your wardrobe in the form of a clutch or flatforms, it’s a metallic must-have. In the high-street stores, check out accessories from Whistles, River Island for something cheap and cheerful, or Glamorous.com for a fast fashion pick me up.  Avid followers of the space-grey colourway include Emporio Armarni, and Louis Vuitton. Be sure to pair your greys with pops of lilac, sherbet pink and aqua marine for a runway ready look similar to the ones found on the catwalks.

n prints o s t n i r p n o s t n i pr

PAGE

MERLE DÖHLING Erasamus Student

thank you I

f I were to be totally honest I would have to admit that I didn´t come to England to do a semester abroad because it was something I always wanted to do, but simply because I was required to go somewhere for my English studies. Nevertheless, in the end I am glad that I had to do it, as my stay turned out to be totally worth it. Unlike my university, Heythrop is a very small place and everybody knows each other. So when I arrived people started coming up to me in order to find out about me and what my story was. That is probably the best thing that can happen to someone doing Erasmus. At Heythrop everyone was really open, friendly and started to include me right away, which made it really easy for me to get to know people. If I imagine people coming to Göttingen, they would have to make the first step and come up to us. Not because we don´t want to have anything to do with them, but simply because we don´t even know everyone from our place and hence don´t even know who might be doing Erasmus and who might need some help. So thanks Heythroper´s, you really helped me get along well!! I mean seriously,

without you guys I wouldn´t have gotten to know all the pubs around Kensington, I probably would have never tried ale (which I really hate by the way...) and I would have never seen people become so competitive over a pub quiz. If it were up to you Brit´s I am pretty sure it would be a discipline in the Olympics! Likewise, you introduced me to the disgusting habit of putting beans on everything and actually made me like it after some time.

All in all, I can say that coming to Heythrop was a great experience. Living on campus is not really a thing in Germany, so I am glad to have tried this as well. It is like living together with a hundred people, as there is always someone around trying to avoid essays with you. Life really never gets boring in halls! The only things that drove me crazy, where the cold showers I had to take a few times. Really not cool! :D Moreover, the HSU events and the whole joining of a society thing in general were pretty cool as well. With Heythrop being so small it is really impressive how many things they pull together! So please Heythroper´s: Thanks for having me! Keep up the good spirit!

C A L E B A S S I R AT I Male Welfare Officer

FREEDOM TO BREATHE I

n October of last term ran the Mental Health Awareness workshops something which was invaluable to me, not only as a welfare officer but personally too, as someone who has previously encountered mental health issues of my own. In one session statistics were given and one in particular troubled me at the time and still continues to; 3/4 suicides are accounted for by men. During the session there was a polite discussion as to trying to reason why there was this serious imbalance. The resounding opinion of the group was that of the traditional notion of manliness could create a stigma. Afterwards I reflected on my own experience and found it to be somewhat true. It took a few years for me to seek medical help in trying to resolve challenges to my mental wellbeing, mostly due to a desire to adopt a very British stiff upper lip, and get on with things. As much internalising my struggles did allow me to cope somewhat in the short term, and can too for others, nothing was solved for me in doing this. Furthermore my own stigma during the time of recovery was still apparent: very few people in my life at the time knew about me struggling or even that I was in the process of trying to recover. While I do not wish to discredit a desire to be independent in such things, a desire to be independent is very different to an internalised self-negation.

This is where, I think, an assumed traditional manliness can have the potential to be negative. Not necessarily in what that entails, but more the fact that it is a socially enforced criteria. Unwarranted stress and internal conflict I think are two effects of this. What has been quite groundbreaking for me post-CBT is an acceptance of feeling. The longer I bottled up emotion the more anxious I would become, for I felt like I had no outlet. The best way I experienced this was in art. It is strange how I could feel fight or flight in a packed tube train, but standing like a sardine in a sweaty venue would be cathartic to the point of relaxation afterwards. For a long time music was the best way that I could let out the frustration of not being able to express myself fully, partly from previous stigma to my own mental health, party in the nature of thinking the way I did. Over the last year or so this outlet has moved to film and visual arts. I find these to be extremely helpful in feeling empathy and being able to express emotion. It’s interesting with film, for I think this relation is easier because you can visually experience the emotion of the characters as portrayed by its creators. One of my favourite Christmas films is ‘It’s A Wonderful Life’, which I was lucky enough to see again this year at a special Picturehouse screening. The impact of

this film in me is astonishing and remains the only film to make me cry every time I see it. It reminds me every year how lucky I am to be living the life I am and to ignore the stigma of mental health. It’s of my opinion that everyone could struggle at some points, but we should be more open about mental health and challenge the stigma. The best way I believe that we can challenge the stigma of mental health is to have discussions about it, in the same way we would for physical health. I find it difficult to accept that a stomach bug can warrant time off work, yet periods of low moods don’t. If GP appointments are dominated by patients presenting with mental health issues, an imbalance of this seems unjustified and should be challenged. One of the best ways I have coped is to accept that sometimes everyday tasks can be more difficult because of my mental health, but that this is part of who I am in a similar way that I’ll get the flu every now and then. Unfortunately the stigma surrounding mental health still exists. We should feel more comfort in talking about our mental well being with others. The simple reason being that it can be invaluable help to those in need, in much the same way as continuing to explore art in the vision of self expression is, for me, one way that I can happily go about my day to day life.

PAGE

OSCAR YUILL Editor-at-Large

Style merit is not bestowed on the presence of a particular quality or effort alone. Minimalism can also be unspeakably ugly and impressively useless. The knaves and vaults and flourishes in a cathedral—not all cathedrals—are beautiful and impressive because they have succeeded on their own terms, not merely because they possess those terms, complex as they are. Since Hemingway, and Strunk and White, and the inheritors of this kind of prose minimalism—I’m thinking of Elmore Leonard, Kurt Vonnegut, Steinbeck (arguably, in his shorter stuff), Orwell—conscious literary minimalism has been the prevailing style, and indeed the prevailing style guidance, in Britain and North America (I’m not sure about Europe but I think the compound absurdities of German and the endless excursions of French are safe for now).

Minimalism is not a solely utilitarian religion. In architecture, prose, music, logic, philosophy and oratory, brevity and starkness and sparseness also have the potential for stunning beauty. Chopin said that perfection is attained, not when nothing more can be added, but when nothing more can be subtracted. Wittgenstein’s house, Mozart’s sonatas, Cato’s speeches, Wilde’s aphorisms—each possesses an impossibly beautiful simplicity. But like all works of art and all styles and periods and genres,

In primary school we are encouraged to develop as complex a style as possible, if only to get a grasp of how compound and complex sentences, prefixes, suffixes and adverbs actually work. ‘The wonderfully fluffy charcoal cat sat comfortably on the hazel-brown mat’ is preferable to ‘The cat sat on the mat.’ That is, until secondary school and adulthood, when, apart from the encouragement of a ‘sophisticated’ style, clarity and simplicity are generally preferred. Hence most newspaper and publishing house style guides demand short, simple sentences; the positive over the negative (‘she stayed’ rather than ‘she did not go’); a

forceful, muscular lexicon; short words over what Hemingway called the ‘ten dollar words’; Saxon over Latinate; ‘he/she said’ over any other speech qualification; and an almost fanatical hatred of adverbs. The above is the kind of sentence I’d be shot for writing; it’s also essentially George Orwell’s guide to writing (‘Politics and the English Language’) or Hemingway’s paradoxically written ‘eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation’.

I want to wage war on arbitrary simplicity. It is true that the not un-formation is ugly, and that simple language can attain a special kind of profundity the verbose may never approach: ‘In the beginning was the word’; ‘to be or not to be’; ‘in the valley of the shadow of death’; ‘I have a dream.’ These words are as great to the scholar as to the ten-year-old and that is what makes them great. Sometimes simplicity is all that will suffice. Shakespeare, Wordsworth, Hemingway and perhaps every other literary genius knew this. However, Orwell said that the key to good writing (political writing at the very least) is clarity. The job of writing is communication, and so the job of the writer is to let the meaning choose the words and not the words choose the meaning. That being said, surely it follows that not every message is the same and not every message will necessarily want to be simple. I’ll say it clearly, shall I? Sometimes complexity is preferable. Sometimes length and semicolons and ten-dollar words and run-on sentences—and innumerable parentheses—and

Latinate invocations and purple paroxysms of masterful magic are just what’s needed and, what’s more, just want the reader wants.

An exaggeration perhaps. Nevertheless, I think it’s an insult to the reader to assume that a certain dazzle will confuse them or frustrate them. On the contrary, incessant and arbitrary simplicity is just as likely to piss one off. I should make it clear (or is that perfectly clear?) that when I speak of dazzle and complexity, I do not mean confusion (though it should be granted that this is sometimes the desired effect—one need only read, or at least attempt to read, Eliot for that). Clarity is, I contend, always an object of good writing. When I say dazzle, I mean flourish, I mean delicacy, I mean Dickens and Nabokov and Capote and Amis. The point is that the minimalists have set up a false distinction, have created enemies out of friends. They’ve tried to make out that dazzle is necessarily opposed to good craft and clear expression when, really, the only enemy of good writing is missing the mark. Provided you have something to say, and provided you have said it as best as you think it can be said, then it doesn’t matter whether you’ve said it in five words or fifty. Dear reader, do not reclaim purple. Purple is an ugly colour deserving of derision. But for god’s sake put on your coat and your hat and your scarf and stop prancing about naked. There’s really no style in it unless you’re fucking and, as fun as that may be, unless you have a respectable package to proffer, desist.

PAGE

the good ol’ days The past is a strange and peculiar place. Without taking you to the rubbish parts we’ve hopped in our time machine and brought back some of the best bits of those bizarre days without wifi, cronuts and Great British Bake Off. So, here’s our info packet on how to bring a little bit of retro into your life.

top 5 vinyls

Vinyls are the essence of retro, and they, like retro things, are making a comeback. If you didn’t know this then you really must be living under a rock or you have switched so far into the digital age that you haven’t stepped into a shop in forever. Records are making their way back into shops (not just charity shops) with the likes of HMV now stocking newly released albums on vinyl. About a year ago I purchased a record player from an auction (yeah I also wrote the auction guide article as well!). Not a table top one, but I managed to get a whole freestanding unit, complete with cassette player and radio. I must confess when I bought it I was buying it because I liked the unit, and not because I had a particular desire to switch back to records. But... vinyls sound AMAZING! There are no two ways about it, they really do sound better. I am a huge rock/indie fan and these genres in particular sound brilliant on vinyl. It gives it a more authentic feel when listening and is just far more enjoyable. So my advice to you, if you don’t already have one, is go buy a record player. They are actually pretty reasonable nowadays. After that you may be thinking, oh no what record should I get to play on it. Don’t worry I got you covered. Here are my top 5 records from my (potentially limited) collection - you’re welcome!

ANY OF THE NOW ALBUMS They are actually pretty decent. I own quite a few now and they are good albums - especially the earlier ones. Also makes for a great game of guess the song without having to keep changing your records! Some songs sound better on vinyl than others so I will leave it to you to pick wisely - Range in price from about £5 - score 3/5

MEG SKINGSLEY Editor-in-Chief

ARCTIC MONKEYS - AM This a great choice of record. The kinda washed out sound of the album goes really well with vinyl. It sounds as if it was designed to be played on a record player. Really worth checking out, nice relaxed feel about it. Songs include ‘Why do you Only Call me When I’m High?’ and ‘Do I Wanna Know?’ (not all the songs are rhetorical questions...) Good album, is just a bit repetitive. - £17.99 HMV - score 3.5/5

KINGS OF LEON ONLY BY THE NIGHT GREAT ALBUM! Love this so much, loved it when it first came out, love it even more now on vinyl. The album is beautiful, the songs blend so well it really is a great investment. You remember the songs, ‘Sex on Fire’ and ‘Use Somebody’ - yeah it’s that Kings of Leon album. If neither of them ring a bell then you should stop reading this, it will only get worse. The album artwork on vinyl is really cool as well, makes a nice display - £14.99 Amazon - score 4/5

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY SOUNDTRACK Easily the BEST record I have ever bought! If, like me, you love 80’s music then this is for you. Seriously stop reading and go buy it. If you need a bit more convincing then it’s a mix of 80’s soft rock music. And it’s epic, from hits like ‘Oooh Child’ by Five Stairsteps, to my personal favourite ‘Come and Get your Love’ by Redbone. It also sounds awesome on vinyl. I’ve watched the film a million times and genuinely think I have contributed to about half of the YouTube watches for the album. Vinyl just give it something which the others never could. Really, really worth buying. £13.99 HMV - score 5/5

QUEEN - MAGIC TOUR So this was donated lovingly to me from someone who went on t h e tour. And I love it! It’s as close as you could get to a Queen tour now (excluding the newly reformed tours - sorry it’s not the same without Freddie Mercury), but you do feel as if you’re there. It opens with a helicopter descending and the clarity is just epic. Hits include ‘A Kind of Magic’ (obviously) and ‘One Vision’. As epic as you think it would be, it doesn’t disappoint! Loses marks only because listening to it makes me upset remembering that I will never get the chance to see them live - On Amazon from around £50 so maybe just scour your local charity shops for this one! - score 4.5/5

PAGE

VICTORIA WARD Gaming Correspondent

BACKWARDS

COMPATIBILITY

ashion, music and art have always recycled and reused old trends in order to put a modern twist on a past style, and now so to has gaming with Xbox One’s backwards compatibility feature. In 2015 at the gaming event E3, Microsoft announced that Xbox One owners would be able to play Xbox 360 games as of November 12th 2015, with over a hundred games to choose from and more coming every month or so. There are already some huge fan favourites available to play now on the Xbox One, including Halo Reach, Halo Wars, Black Ops I, Bioshock 1, 2 and Infinite, as well as other huge titles such as Gears of War, Fallout 3, Mass Effect and Assassins Creed. There are also a lot a games out there that have been remastered for Xbox One, including the Halo Master Chief Collection

allowing you to play the games in the Halo franchise on the Xbox One at 1080p with approximately 60fps (Frames Per Second). The ability to play previous generation games on the new generation console is not an original idea since there were many of the Xbox Original games available to play on the 360 when it first came out and was a much loved feature. This means that Microsoft offers a feature Sony do not, although they do offer a similar one called PlayStation Now, this feature allows players to rent PlayStation 3 games with prices ranging from £2.99-£7.99. But how does backward compatibility work on the Xbox One? Microsoft developed an emulator for the Xbox One, which means they put the Xbox 360 software into the One, and therefore you can run the Xbox One as if it were your Xbox

360. This feature is completely free to use as long as you already own the game you want to play either as a disc or you can digitally download it to your hard drive. However, you will have to use an Xbox One controller as the Xbox 360 one is not compatible and neither is the Kinect, and due to the differences in technology the Xbox One Kinect will not work with any of the Xbox 360 games, so games that need a Kinect won’t be useable, for example Guitar Hero and Rock Band. One of the most amazing aspects of this feature is while you are playing a 360 game on your One, you can still access the same features that you would be able to if you were playing a new generation game, for example, streaming live on Twitch, recording game clips and using party chat. However, screenshots and clip recording of Borderlands is turned off due to a licensing issue.

S A R TA J S I N G H Alumni

2OO1: A SPACE ODYSSEY P

retentious visual showcase or a powerful illustration of the cinematic medium? These are just some of the disparate and contrasting opinions, which have been expressed about Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 film - 2001: A Space Odyssey. However, the most pertinent question, which will be the central focus of this piece is why does 2001: A Space Odyssey still appeal to people in 2016? This line of enquiry has been inspired by a 70mm screening of the picture, which I attended the other night. Surprisingly, the film was sold out, which resulted in an unprecedented large queue around the cinema and surrounding area. Moreover, at the end of the film, most of the audience burst into sudden applause, which was encouraging, to say the least. From the reaction of the audience, one could gauge that the picture still resonates and engages beyond the mere curiosity factor of seeing the film in 70mm. The primary reason for this is because Kubrick has crafted a film that transcends the cinematic medium. In fact, one can liken it to a symphony that is about humanity and its place in the universe at large. Like a symphony, the film has four distinctive parts and movements, which achieve two things. Firstly, they show humanity at crucial

points in their development. Secondly, the movements chart the course of the Monolith, which is a tall black rectangular object that appears throughout the film. The Monolith and its connection to humanity are one of the picture’s most fascinating facets to consider as it calls into question how this potential extraterrestrial or possible celestial object perceives humanity. It sees us in our infancy and oversees our transformation into a new life form. But what does it gain by aligning itself with our species, this is one of the film’s most tantalising ambiguities and horrifying notions to consider. With this last idea in mind, my recent viewing surprised me because it made me realise that 2001 can be seen as a horror film in many ways. Kubrick presents some quite subtle moments of terror. The most memorable of which is laboured sequence which is powerful in its simplicity. The second act of the film depicts the American spacecraft, Discovery One and its voyage towards Jupiter. On board are two mission pilots and three other scientists who are in hibernation until they reach the planet. Moreover, a sentient computer called Hal 9000 is on board. His primary responsibility is controlling the systems of the

previously mentioned spacecraft. Hal 9000, after a series of cover-up mistakes, takes to murdering the hibernated scientists. Kubrick shows their death through a close-up of their vital signs on their life-support systems. The scene is harrowing as the progression of their death is depicted in real-time and is punctuated with eerie silence as the audience is left to wonder about their feelings of the ordeal. Hal 9000 is 2001’s most lingering aspect because he is a compelling character who represents Kubrick’s primary thematic exploration, which is that technology has dwarfed humanity. Kubrick not only conveys this in visual terms by making the audience marvel at spaceships with these balletic shots that see them in rotation and motion. But one gets the impression that Kubrick is being ironic with Hal 9000 by making him more human than any other character on screen. Perhaps the answer as to why does 2001: A Space Odyssey still appeal to people in 2016 is simple. It conceptualises humanity on a grand and cosmic scale while also being a film that has to be experienced. In this regard, Kubrick has created a film with monumental ambition that is only matched by the cinema.

PAGE

auction guide A great place to pick up quirky and often retro things is an auction. There are thousands of auctions being held all over the country, and I don’t mean ones on Ebay. I have been going to auctions for years now and have managed to pick up some amazing stuff. What’s even better is the price. I managed to get a free-standing record player for £18, which is my best buy to date and I’m not sure anything will ever top that if I’m honest. But that’s not to say you can’t grab yourself a bargain. With the revival of all things vintage and retro, auctions really are a great place to pick up some cool items at a reasonable price. They also happen to be an awesome shopping experience. There is nothing sweeter than beating off the competition in a bidding war to win your prized item for a bargain. But before you launch yourself into this brilliant lifestyle I shall impart the wisdom I have learnt with you: 1) Don’t look like you don’t know what you’re doing - everyone will know! This can be a bad thing as you may look like a weak opponent when you enter an inevitable bidding war.

2) Look like you have huge amounts of surplus cash, basically don’t look like a student. That way when you enter a bidding war your opponent may back 3 ) down earDon’t bid for lier saving you money things just because

they’re cheap - it is tempting, but ask yourself if you really need it.

4) REMEMBER THE COMMISSION FEE- this gets everyone and I really can’t stress the importance of taking note of this. You bid for something, think you get an amazing price for it, go to pay an they whack on an extra 12-17% (mostly within these figures sometimes can be even more). Find out what the commission fee is before you start bidding. Then bid smart and work out you limit with the fee on top so you can then work out you bidding limit, that way there’s no surprises.

5) Guide prices these are a great help for knowing where your limit should be. Also gives you an idea so that you can research to see if you can get it elsewhere for cheaper!

6) Look round the lots first. Many auction houses have an allotted time where you can go and view all of the items that will be in the auction. Make use of this time, on the day it’s usually packed with people, all of whom stand their ground in the room so you can’t have a proper look at things (well not without irritating everyone that is). Also many auctions now have the catalogue online so you can view it all

MEG SKINGSLEY Editor-in-Chief

7) Buy the catalogue, it really does save you time instead of jotting down all the lots that you are interested in. Also is the best indicator for how long you have until the next lot that you’re interested in comes up, so you can go enjoy a nice cuppa of course!

8) Ask whether you can place a remote bid. These can be really useful if you have to leave the auction early or you are unable to attend at all. This just means you place your maximum bid in advance and they will place your bid for you when the lot comes up. Don’t worry they won’t start at your maximum 9) Try to not add money to lat- they will play it out as if you er bids if you are unsuccessful were there yourself bidding. with earlier ones. You bid for a lot and are unsuccessful so you decide to add the money you would have spent on that item on to the rest of the lots that you are bidding for. Try to avoid doing this if you can, just ask yourself if the item is worth that money and why you set the limit that you did originally. It will save you money in the long run.

10) La s t ly , e njoy tions it. Au are q cuite experi uniqu ences e so ha w h i ls t ve fu y o u ’r e n there. especia ll y e n A n d joy th factio e sati n of w s innin ding g a bid war, so sat isfyin g!

PAGE

THE SPATULETAIL LULLABIES

TRAIN

WILLOW BRADY

BARCOL

I have a vision of the shapes and

An arrow in the dark

At stroke of midnight God shall win. He

words needed

Light sea lost in the night

with body waged a fight,

To say that I remember when we

Like Noah’s ark,

Innocence and peace depart.

perched on secret ledges;

No else in sight;

Then he struggled with the mind;

The edges of a branch never broken

A DREAM

His proud heart he left behind.

but bonded

Many lives sit

Then he struggled with the heart

By the pledges we made in the night

with stories and minds

But body won; it walks upright.

time,

that uniquely exist

Now his wars on God begin

To fly together.

individually unlike other kinds.

The sky saw us dance and sing a

I wish I knew

salute,

who they are

Farewell to solitude forever.

and how they’ll become anew and times now far;

With wings that broke, Sometimes we caught our fallen

I wish I’ve lived and will live

feathers

this newfound “I”

And learned to leave the valley of

what my future will give

stars.

and my times gone by.

To start,

light, We would make any flight now To meet on the bridge of our beginning. Spinning words and wings are things Designed to be defeated In the ashes of our flame. They say that birds bond for life; Our nest is woven I’ll wipe your wounds through any wind.

BEN MERCER I cannot say I miss the city streets That I have drifted, lonesome through the crowds, Weaving ‘tween the great industrial fleets Of hapless men beat down ‘neath leaden clouds.

Far apart from the feet that found us. On the days when darkness needs

SONNET XIII

Nor can I say I’ve longed for happy

A LONG POEM

days In the place to which I have returned;

STU PADASSO

Quiet village of my youth, I am to stay Amidst the wintered woods, to rest

POEM.

and yearn; And hide from loving eyes a want to weep, This peace is but a guise for discontent, And though I have a bed in which to sleep I linger in stilled time, and I resent; For this homely house no longer is my home, And my heart it knowest why, and it alone.

SONNET X

UNTITLED

UNIVERSITY

BEN MERCER

BARCOL

DR. ANN OHN

Let us speak not of Ampelos,

I can hear a rattle,

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

The intoxication of Dionysos;

sounds of a daily battle

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGG-

Though youthful yearnings may be

of wires, worries and voices,

GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHH-

sweet,

as I wonder about people’s choices:

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH-

You alone make mine replete.

why this stop and not the next?

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

Though Virgil spoke of lovers lost;

what are you sending with that text?

Of Nisos and his Euryalos;

Someone speaking Dutch

It is better to have a soul complete,

the unvoiced “Do you travel much?”

That for a time the two halves meet;

In this carriage we share

So should you cease to feel this way

“why should I even care?”

I’ll never think us friends unmade,

Alight here, this is a circle line and so

Nor harbour thoughts of vain regret;

on,

They’re always abusing the women,

Heart’s verdicts are no cause for

I know by now, or else I’d have gone.

As a terrible plague to men;

shame,

Then it hits me, it speaks my name:

They say we’re the root of all evil,

Thus to deaf heaven I’ll now proclaim:

“you are a cell in a bigger vein

And repeat it again and again,

This love will last until my death.

made of tunnels and particles, bare,

Of war, and quarrels, and bloodshed,

of a heartbeat, everywhere and

All mischief, be what it may.

nowhere,

And pray, then, why do you marry us,

everyone has life and a heart

If we’re all the plagues you say?

yet everyone is of them an essential

And why do you take such care of us,

part”.

And keep us so safe at home,

LOVE NOT ME ANONYMOUS

Nor for any outward part, No, nor for my constant heart, For those may fail, or turn to ill, So thou and I shall sever: Keep therefore a true woman’s eye, And love me still, but know not whySo hast thou the same reason still, To doat upon me ever!

ARISTOPHANES

And are never easy a moment If ever we chance to roam?

Love not me for comely grace, For my pleasing eye or face,

CHORUS OF WOMEN

When you ought to be thanking

A SHORT POEM

Heaven That your plague is out of the way,

STU PADASSO POEM.

You all keep fussing and fretting, “Where is my Plague to-day?” If a Plague peeps out of the window, Up go the eyes of men; If she hides, then they all keep staring Until she looks out again.

PAGE

K AT I E M I L N E Managing Editor

The Lion King R

ecently I went to see The Lion King: The Musical, having heard very good things, and my expectations were more than exceeded. Although I expected beautiful set and costume design I did not expect the intricacies apparent when bringing the African Sahara to life. The actors were not only dressed up as animals, they were the animals; their limbs forming the legs of zebra, the undulating of an arm forming the lope of a herd of gazelle, every elegant movement of the cheetah controlled by the full-body puppetry of the actress. Not really knowing what to expect of the show, I was also surprised at the way it paid homage to African culture. This was not just a creative rendering of the story we watched on screen as children, this was a true celebration of indigenous African culture; from the traditional garments and headpieces adorning the lion, to

the beautiful Zulu lyrics sung by Rafiki, all of this played out by a cast which were predominantly black – neatly side-stepping claims of appropriation. In the media recently there has been some controversy over the casting of black actress, Noma Dumezweni, as Hermione Granger in the West End production ‘Harry Potter and the Cursed Child’. Hermione is typically envisioned as a white character, due to her portrayal by Emma Watson in the series of films. However since the casting of Dumezweni a lot of black fans have said that they imagined her to be black before they saw the films, J.K Rowling herself has endorsed Dumezweni’s casting and said that Hermione was never explicitly described as being white. In a time where fans of the book and film series are publicly outraged at the casting of a well-respected black actress, it seems important to make clear that black actors do de-

serve a place in West End theatre. I was pleased that in a story set in the ‘Pride Lands’ of Africa, the animals were anthropomorphised into characters of African descent, as they should be. However it should not only be that black actors are cast in productions set in Africa, and the furore over Miss Dumezweni signals a sad truth about how we read characters; that unless otherwise stated, their default race is white. The Lion King was a beautiful celebration of African culture, but I hope that the next time I go to see a musical, that black actors are able to not only play black characters, but are able to simply play a character. In the meantime, I will recommend the Lion King to everyone that will listen as the best, most exciting, joyful, and inclusive musical in the West End.

JACOB TONG Music Correspondent

the Force Awakens I

n a cinema not too far away from my house a moment of movie history was waiting to take place. I bore witness to this historic event that took place at midnight of a cold windy Wednesday in December. I ran home from work with the excitement of a kid on Christmas, but it was much cooler as I knew that this was real. As I walked into my usually almost empty cinema, I was surprised to be greeted by a group of a couple hundred men and three, maybe four, women, at a push. There was a certain smell in the cinema that can only be describes as ‘Odor de la middle aged nerdy homme’: musky with hint of loneliness. The fact that a good size proportion of the crowd were there by themselves showed that this truly was an event not to miss, and these guys were not going to be the ones missing out. We were all there for Star Wars, Episode Vll: The Force Awakens; a year after the trailer and nearly thirty years since the last good film, there was a huge build up that simply could not be undone. Everyone knew it was going to be good. No one even doubted it for a second. When I sat down in the cinema it was rowdy and loud, filled with jokes between friends along with strangers chatting about what they wanted to see in the next two hours.

As the lights went down everyone just sat with blank looks of excitement gawping at the black screen, waiting. It genuinely felt like the projectionist was trying to build up tension. When the film started to roll, there was a tiny murmur from everyone in a room simultaneously getting goosebumps and, as John William’s thundering music hit everyone square in face, there were cheers, squeals and whistles, which made the whole viewing just that pinch extra special. I can truly say I’ve never seen any movie like that before. When classic jokes were delivered with excellent timing they got the laugh they truly deserved, and when the lightsaber appeared for the first time, I’ve never been around so many men who were all sexual aroused at the time and I’m not afraid to say I was one of them. It was pretty intense.

The film itself was a piece of blockbuster history, smashing sales and reviews alike, with a lot of the praise taking glorious aim at Daisy Ridley, who plays without a doubt the best thing about the whole film, Rae. Rae is a clever, strong, compassionate and above all the most kickass person in the Galaxy. Hollywood should erect statues for such a great character; outshining the very impressive Oscar Issac as Poe Dameron, John Boyega, and even

Run time: 2hr 16min

Certificate: 12a the old stars. Director: J. J. Abrams The characters are Starring: Daisy Ridley, all so Star John Boyega, Adam Wars it’s acDriver tually quite cool. RidRelease date: ley’s main December 17th 2015 rival for best character/performance is Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) the evil Sith-intraining; a badass, angry, new age Sith who you can’t help but get a little bit involved with, you don’t want to see him die but then again he’s the Sith and you want him crushed. The film runs perfectly, never too slow or too quick, with the complete ability to stand alone as one the greatest sci-fi films there has been. A harmonizing balance between action, wit and relationships gives it all the hype it received straight back. The CGI is nothing to worry about, it never felt needless or bulky. At no point did I wish it wasn’t used and, when they could, the film used animatronics to give the film that extra level. It is without a doubt the best Blockbuster film to come out last year and probably until the next one comes out. All one can really say is bravo J. J. Abrams you cinematic king, and believe the hype as well as the force.

PAGE

K AT I E M I L N E Maniging Editor

the hateful eight

he Hateful Eight is Quentin Tarantino’s 8th feature-length film and marks a departure from the epic adventure-worlds of his last two films, Django Unchained and Inglorious Basterds. Although the Hateful Eight is certainly filmed in the style of an epic, with huge sweeping landscape shots, a period setting, and a deafeningly dramatic musical score; the scope of his world is much smaller, and focuses on eight people (or should I say, nine) who have ended up stranded in ‘Minnie’s Haberdashery’ in the middle of a blizzard. The central theme of the film is that none of the characters, or even the audience, are conscious of the true intentions and history of one another.

The film begins with Major Marquis Warren, a black civil war soldier turned bounty hunter, asking for a ride from his fellow bounty hunter, John Ruth; who is bringing his fugitive into a town called Red Rock to claim the $10,000 bounty on her head. As a blizzard approaches they agree to stop for a few days at ‘Minnie’s Haberdashery’ which is halfway to Red Rock and will provide them shelter until the storm passes. On the way to Minnie’s they bump into Chris Mannix, a southern renegade who claims to be Red Rock’s new sheriff. Throughout the journey, a theme of deceit and distrust is prevalent, Ruth is suspicious of Warren’s intentions on his fugitive, they both are suspicious of Mannix’s claim to be sheriff of Red Rock (a ques-

Run time: 3hr 07min

Certificate: 12a

Director: Quentin Tarantino

Starring: Samuel L. Jackson, Kurt

Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh

Release date: December 7th 2015

tion which is never answered), and we first hear of Warren’s infamous Lincoln Letter, which later turns out to be a ruse designed to win him the respect of white men.

This theme continues as they arrive at Minnie’s Haberdashery and are suspicious of Minnie and Sweet Dave’s disappearance (as it later turns out, they were right to be). Warren interrogates Señor Bob, while Ruth demands to know the background of every other man in the house, Oswaldo Mobray, Joe Gage, and Confederate General Sanford Smithers. As things develop and the characters each get picked off one by one, we never find ourselves empathising with a particular character, only watching in awe at the carnage and duplicity that

Gage Skidmore

unfolds in front of us. At the close of the film we are still unsure of what to think of anyone that we have spent the last 3 hours watching.

Of course, this is a Tarantino film, hence it is also littered with racial politics, swearing, and shameless gore. Racism is one of the first thing I noticed during the film, with Major Marquis Warren having 65 ‘n-word’s directed at him through the duration. Although it is clear Tarantino is trying to tackle complex issues here, it is questionable whether this use of racial slur is necessary or just gratuitous and aiming to shock as a Tarantino film always does. Perhaps Tarantino felt that he needed snappier dialogue as a result of the ‘boxed-in’ structure of his screen-play, but I’m not totally sure that this way of dealing with post-civil war racism was the best way to handle a sensitive topic.

Another thing that immediately comes to one’s attention when watching the film is the misogynistic treatment of Ruth’s fugitive, Daisy Domergue. She finds herself on the receiving end of a lot of violence that is essentially pushed under the carpet, even as we meet her she is already sporting a black eye. Throughout the film she is beaten and degraded, however she seems to come back stronger every

time, slyly grinning every time she is hit or called a bitch. In fact, Jennifer Jason Leigh, who plays Daisy Domergue in the film, said herself “She’s a leader. And she’s tough. And she’s hateful and a survivor and scrappy. I thought it was funny, but I didn’t think it was misogynistic for a second.” It does seem that she has a point, when at the end of the film it is revealed that she is one of the ringleaders of her brother’s dangerous gang, which explains the high bounty on her head. Perhaps this resolution of discriminatory issues is echoed in the treatment of Major Marquis Warren. After all, he reveals that he got revenge for the treatment of black Unionists in the civil war by forcing General Sanford Smithers son to perform oral sex on him (although this could yet again be a ruse to goad the General). And at the close of the film, it is him we have most empathised with. Perhaps by showing us our own disgust and mortification when directly faced with misogyny and racism, Tarantino is subverting the issues himself in an attempt to tackle them. And of course these issues are neatly packaged in typical Tarantino style, jaw-dropping visuals, extreme violence, and all-round weird entertainment.

Cult Movie King > Pulp Fiction Perhaps the most well know of his older film, this movie presents all the classic Tarantino-esque features. From a (now) all-star cast, to following many separate storylines only for them to unite in the end, it has it all; presented with style, crisp colour schemes and some pretty long-standing scriptwriting. It deserves to be seen if not just for the rediculously gory bits that are synonymous with any Tarantino these days.

> Reservoir Dogs Again, this story following a bundle of thieves in the aftermath of a bungled heist, has all the trademark Tarantino moves. Someone opens the boot of a car and we have a shot looking up at them; lots of separate characters go off and do separate things before coming together in the end; Tarantino makes a short-lived cameo. Some would question what the point of seeing more than one of his films is, then. Asides from the mastry of cinema present in these selected classics, this one has one of those proper sad endings that have you focusing solely on praying that it’s not going to end how you think it will.

> Kill Bill: volume 1 Not actually seen this one... but I’ve heard it’s fab if you like blood ‘n’ stuff...

PAGE

JACOB TONG Music Correspondent

Bieber ...YOU WOULDN’T THINK HE WAS CANADIAN Mr. Justin Drew Bieber is now twenty-one years old and a completely different man to the Yo u Tu b e born sensation that exploded into the world five years ago. People will say he’s still a rotten product of the exploitive music industry that churns out children into international album selling, world touring messes who are all over the headlines constantly for their mistakes and cock ups. These starlets are built with the intention to burn bright and fast with the only benefit being a lot of money for the record label. The artists themselves don’t have much support past that first album if the record fails to top the charts and be played everywhere, no matter how critically good. Now this rogue teen star is back after a

spell of living the high life publicly and recklessly. Damn it’s good. If we rewind three years ago, probably even to last year, any decent music lover would scoff at you for saying Bieber was any good; a name synonymous with hook filled teeny pop, twinned with his often psychotic hordes of young teenage girls called Beliebers. Now present day Bieber released one of the biggest albums of 2015, with respect not just from the industry and artists alike but also the greater music community; played at parties with

a touch of irony but also a bit of guilty pleasure driving you to dance and sing to these party boppers. What’s the reason for this though? A man still perceived as a bit of a dick, lest we forget the monkey incident 2013, has somehow gained a lot of admiration in a much speedier fashion than most people trying to transform their image. I think the answer to this question lies in Bieber’s actual musical talent and raw ambition to keep progressing his own career. He is a devout Christian, which is touched upon in his songs, and which his Complex cover interview really gets to grips with, but regardless it is clear he has seen a greater calling. Now he wants to use this to propel himself to the top of the pile. He’s taking a control of his music; putting out the sounds he wants to hear but also keeping in touch with

parts of the younger self. The record itself puts out a mix of new low pace EDM tunes, with a balance of the pop ballads that got him recognition as a teenage heartthrob. I’m willing to sit through these, actually I think I’m starting to enjoy them as well. There should be no shame as this is actually good pop music. (That’s not an oxymoron it is actually a thing, go check out you’re not ‘cool’, it’s called being pretentious.)

Any musician that talks about Bieber on a personal level never defends his outrageous showbiz antics, but they do all admire his talent. Sonny Moore, Skrillex, talked about his insane ability to drum, bash out melodies on guitars and pianos as well as pretty sick ability to skateboard, don’t forget basketball too. And he’s Canadian, a major setback that he has time and time again defeated. This guy can really do anything, so now with the modern focus of charting music shifting towards an electronically produced era with hooks set to deeper beats and electro engineered sounds, Bieber has gone above and beyond close rivals to produce a whole album worth listening to. A fellow Pop Star who tried to do this earlier on last year was Selena Gomez, with her album Revival. There were some incredible and catchy singles to come off the album, however there was a lack of diversity in the album. Every song lacks a major difference from the last; it’s like she found the formula that worked and then made

everything follow suit, whereas Bieber’s every song fits into the motif of the album while at the same time having its own presence on the record. For twenty songs it’s a pretty monumental album, especially when trying to reinvent yourself. However in collaboration with Skrillex, Diplo, Benny Blanco (You may not have heard of him but you’ve definitely heard him), Blood Diamonds (One of the biggest producers on OWSLA) and not to forget a big help from Ed Sheeran who has writing credits on Love Yourself, Bieber has created collaborative album like most pop stars but he has somehow taken a varying range of the best pop producers out there and some edgy musicians who have swapped their secluded fan base for the mainstream. Also it has Nas on it, as in THE Nas. I don’t think for a second he would have worked with Bieber if it hadn’t been for a suitcase full of money presented alongside a good idea. With all of these musical henchman at his side, Justin has created an album that has broken one of the biggest records of all time. Seventeen singles from a single album in the Billboard chart at one time, beating the Beatles long standing achievement by three extra singles. Is he the Beatles? No! Is he our generation’s version of that level of fame? Possibly. Is he any good though? That’s the real question, which I want to say yes to but my beard, man bun and vintage flannel are having a real hard time dealing with.

Top Tracks from the album Children, Love Yourself, Where R U (Actually a Jack U track but whatever), What Do You Mean? (“Panpipes = Instant hit” a friend once told me, he wasn’t wrong)

PAGE

With the whole retro theme happening this issue, we here at [this] were going to give you some classic recipes. Then we thought about it a bit and the only sort of food springing to mind were gellatenised and made use of microwaves because they were new technology at the time. Bovril has instructions on the packaging, so if you’re looking for that sort of thing, you’ll have to go somewhere else. Instead, here’s a few delights we’ve pulled out for you instead.

Recipes

luckily the only cheese involved is in the films

a night at the movies

K AT & M E G Editors-in-Chief

6 degrees

stay puft

Footloose The six degrees of Bacon is redundant because I am always located next to a plate of bacon and that trumps being connected to any celebrities who just want to dance. I win.

Ghostbusters Are you a God? Youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll feel like one after a few of these. Of course, not the most powerful one because youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll probably end up worshipping the Porcelain God in the end.

1984 2 oz. Bacon Infused Vodka

2 oz. Irish Cream

4 oz. Tomato Juice

2 oz. Vanilla Vodka

1 tbsp. Worcestershire Sauce

Marshmallows

.5 oz. Lemon Juice 1 pinch Salt & Pepper 1 stalk Celery Garnish Pour vodka over ice in a glass, Add the remaining ingredients. Garnish with the celery. Dance.

Shake the alcohol in a mixer thoughroughly. Strain into a glass. Top with marshmallows. Cross your streams, save New York City.

Forget about me

never say die

goose on ice

The Breatfast Club We accept the fact that we had to sacrifice a whole day to the hangover that will surely follow from imbibing a whole bunch of these. But someone shouted ‘down it, Fresher!’ and we did do on autopilot. We were brainwashed.

The Goonies No truffles, pizza, Baby Ruths, or whipped cream involved; just pirate treasure in the form of alcohol and little sparkly bits of gold to make you feel like an adventurer.

Top Gun “Take my breath away,” sang Goose. So Maverick did, ejecting the canopy during a flat spin.

1986 .5 oz. Vodka .5 oz. Tequila

1985

1 oz. Goldsclager

Grey Goose Vodka

1 oz. Spiced Rum

Ice

In any kind of shot glass you can get your hands on, or even a cup if you’re not that fancy, but preferably one of those adorable skull ones you can get, combine the two ingredients. Shot. It.

Put Goose + Ice in a glass.*

.5 oz. Dark Rum .5 oz. Gin .25 oz. Peach Schnapps .5 oz. Whiskey Coke Lemon Juice Add all the alcohol into a very tall glass. Drop in ice. Top up with Coke and the splash of lemon juice.

*we take no responsibility for the crying that will occur as you reminisce about how much more than an action film Top Gun was. Oh, Goose...

Yours sincerely, The Lion Team

PAGE

MEG SKINGSLEY Editor-in-Chief

thai green curry

INGREDIENTS: For the Paste: 1 handful of fresh coriander 1 red chilli (less if you don’t like things too spicy) 1 zest and juice of a lime 1 Thumb size piece of ginger 2 Cloves of garlic

METHOD:

1 stalk of lemongrass 4 lime leaves ½ teaspoon of cumin ½ teaspoon of cayenne powder

For the curry: 400g of Chicken (you can use other meat or none at all, but i prefer chicken)

1) Place the coriander, chilli, lime leaves, lime juice and zest, lemongrass (chopped), cumin, cayenne powder, ginger (peeled and roughly chopped) and garlic (peeled and roughly chopped) into a blender. 2) Blitz until a smooth paste is formed (can be made up to 48 hours in advance) 3) Heat the paste in a saucepan

1 handful of mangetout 1 white onion ⅓ of a broccoli head 1 pepper (you can choose the colour) 500g of Coconut milk

4) Add the meat (if any) and fry until seared 5) Add the onion and fry until cooked 6) Reduce the heat and add the coconut milk, stir until the paste

is evenly distributed 7) Add the broccoli and simmer for 3 mins 8) Add the rest of the veg and continue to simmer until cooked through. 9) Serve with rice or noodles with a sprinkle of coriander on top. Enjoy!

JENNY MORAN News Editor

INGREDIENTS:

METHOD:

Brownies

1) Preheat Oven to 180degrees c/ 350degrees F and grease and line an 8inch square tin with baking paper.

20cm Sqaure tin. 125g Butter 175g Plain Dark Chocolate 225g Caster Sugar 2tsp Vanilla Essence 2 Medium Eggs (lightly beaten) 150g Plain Flour

Icing 175g Icing Sugar 2tbsp Cocoa Powder 15g Butter

2) Melt butter and chocolate together on a bain-marie (glass bowl over a saucepan of simmering water) 3) Pour mixture into a large bowl and stir in sugar and vanilla essence. Once combined, stir in eggs.

6) Take out and turn onto wire rack to cool. 7) For icing, sift icing and cocoa powder into a bowl and make a well in the centre. 8) Put butter into the well and add 2 tbsp on hot water. 9) Mix to make a spreadable icing and spread over the cooled brownies. 10) Cut into squares and EAT.

4) Sift over flour and fold together. 5) Pour into the baking tin and bake in oven for 30 mins.

brownies

PAGE

JENNY MORAN News Editor

cinnamon rolls

INGREDIENTS:

METHOD:

Rolls

1) Heat 125ml water, the milk and butter in a pan until melted and leave to cool a little.

9) Roll out the dough into a rectangle (40x30cm ish) and brush with melted butter.

2) When warm, whisk in yeast and a table spoon of sugar and leave for 10 mins.

10) Put an even layer of filling onto the dough (and press on with hands so it sticks), leaving 1cm uncovered space along one short edge and brush with egg.

30cm Round Spring form tin. 125ml Milk 100g Unsalted Butter (plus extra for greasing) 2tsp Dried Yeast 50g Caster Sugar 550g Plain Flour (plus extra for dusting) 1tsp Salt 1 Egg and 2 Egg Yolks

Filling 3tbsp Cinnamon 100g Soft Light Brown Sugar 25g Unsalted Butter (Melted) 1 egg (Lightly Beaten) 4tbsp Caster Sugar

3) Place flour, salt and the rest of the sugar in a large bowl, and make a well in the centre. Pour warm mixture into well. 4) Whisk the egg and egg yolks and add to the mixture. Combine the mixture together to form a dough. 5) Place the dough on a floured surface and knead for 10 mins.

11) Roll the dough up towards the edge firmly and cut into 10-12 pieces. 12) Grease and line the tin and pack in the rolls and leave them for 1-2 hours until well risen. 13) Preheat oven at 180degrees c/350degrees F. Brush rolls with egg and bake for 25-30 mins.

6) Oil a large bowl. Place the dough in it and cover with cling film, leaving it in a warm place for 2 hours to rise.

14) Heat 3tbsp water and 2tbsp sugar until sugar is dissolved and glaze the rolls with the mixture.

7) For the filling, mix 2tbsp cinnamon and the brown sugar in a bowl

15) Sprinkle on caster sugar and cinnamon onto the rolls and out on a wire rack to cool then EAT.

8) After the 2 hours, turn out the risen dough and gently knock back.

HOROSCOPES Aerial

Cow

Geronimo

Lupus

Mar 21 - Apr 19

Apr 20 - May 20

May 21 - Jun 20

Jun 21- Jul 22

Too much time spent watching offensively pointless nonsense on Youtube will knock 12 marks off of your next essay. Stop it.

But Danmark Har Talent is soooo good... just one more episode? Go for it.

Sit down, have a few spins in your desk chair with childish glee and get on with whatever you were supposed to be doing today. Simple.

Shake your fists, stomp your feet, maybe even cry a little - but there’s no formal process for appealing marks so you’ll have to make do with disappointing your parental figures.

Raphael

Dry Gin

Zebra

Jul 23 - Aug 22

Aug 23 - Sep 22

Sep 23 - Oct 22

Leonardo DiCaprio will not win an Oscar. EDIT: ...we, uh, must have been thinking about a different Leo

Palmaria mollis is a strain of seaweed that tastes like bacon. Mushy sea tentacles never sounded so appetising. Maybe try something new this month... if you like sand-carpet.

Take a step back from your life and breathe. Try not to trip over all the crap you’ve left on the floor because you’ve been living like a slob, procrastinating.

Twang!

Nov 22 - Dec 21 Be like the early Roman Republic. Walk out of the city if you’re an unhappy pleb because the stubborn upper-class are not listening to you.

DiCaprio

Dec 22 - Jan 19 SHOCK! HORROR! SURPRISE! MILD IRRITATION! Houses built on floodplains will flood again this month. Think of it! A flood! On a floodplain! Who could have predicted such a catastrophe?!

H2O

Jan 20 - Feb 18 Your beauty is rare and perfect like a Yellow Treskelling and that’s the least interesting thing about you. I believe in your ability to make decisions without the stars’ help. They agree, as they shine down upon you, blessed Aquarius.

Sting

Oct 23 - Nov 21 I’d bless the rain to go and stay in Africa because this perpetual drizzle will mess up your hair to no end. Get interested in hats this month.

Pies

Feb 19 - Mar 20 There are lots of things to not worry about today. A zombie apocalypse, a sudden absence of kittens, Voldemort... if you’re feeling anxious, think about them instead.

[ t h at â&#x20AC;&#x2122; s a w r a p ! ]