UT Magazine: Vol V, Issue II

01.10.13

The University Times

Magazine

AN INTERVIEW WITH DAVID NORRIS P 6.

CONTEMPORARY IRISH PHOTOGRAPHY P 11.

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

1

For all your student banking needs Talk to us today

Talk to one of our student advisers www.bankofireland.com Bank of Ireland is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland.

- Trinity pressMAGAZINE ad.indd 1 2 | THEdoh000692 UNIVERSITY TIMES

18/01/2013 15:01

October 1, 2013

The University Times FEATURES

Magazine

INTERVIEW: DAVID NORRIS

KEEPING UP WITH THE JONESES

CONTEMPORARY PHOTOGRAPHY SHOWCASE

BY JAMES BENNETT

BY EDMUND HEAPHY

KEN FINEGAN & GAVIN MULLAN

We sit down with Trinity’s longestserving senator.

We compare Ireland to other countries which have abolished their upper houses of parliament.

6

8

In association with the Gallery of Photography, Dublin.

11

EDITORIAL The abolition of Seanad Éireann is the biggest constitutional change proposed in the history of this state. It is unfortunate, therefore, that much public debate around the issue has been reduced to populist slogans such as “less politicians.” The centralisation of power in Ireland is becoming increaslingly worrying. The current government’s aggressive use of the whip, combined with its ever-growing fondness for guillotining — the process whereby legislation is rushed through parliament without debate — should make voters wary of abolishing any part of an already strangled Oireachtas.

All state institutions are prone to human error. You only have to glance inside this magazine at Gavin Mullan’s photographic collection “New City” for an example of this. When we are dealing with organisations whose decisions affect the lives of millions of people, we should be cautious. If power is left to concentrate itself into ever smaller groups of fallible individuals, the consequences will be disastrous. We have an article this week that compares Ireland to other countries that have abolished their upper houses. It is interesting to note that those who did so successfully introduced had many other measures in place to prevent the concentration of power going too far.

21

As Laura Gozzi writes in the Sigh column, it seems as if the generation that is coming of age today is being handed over an absolute mess by the one that came before it. If it is approved by the Irish people, the thoughtless move to abolish the Seanad will only contribute to this mess. What we are witnessing is the largest PR stunt ever attempted in Irish politics. It is lazy, it is shamelessly populist, and it is not good enough.

ABOVE: Scene from Troll 2

James Bennett Editor magazine@universitytimes.ie

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

3

CONTRIBUTORS EDITOR DEPUTY/MUSIC EDITOR CREATIVE DIRECTOR ONLINE EDITOR FILM EDITOR FASHION EDITOR PHOTOGRAPHERS WORDS

James Bennett Eoin Hennessy Edmund Heaphy Clementine Yost Jack O’Kennedy Elizabeth Brauders James Bennett // Ken Finegan // Gavin Mullan Eva Short // Lucy Mulvaney // Kat Clinch Loughlin Lavery // Damien O’Shaughnessy // Louie Carroll // Sean Nolan // Vladimir Rakhmanin // Laura Gozzi

CONTENTS 5

FIFTY SHADES OF IT MIGHT ACTUALLY BE OK

16

MUSIC

18

FASHION

4 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

20

FILM

21

SO BAD IT’S GOOD

22

GAMING: INDIE GOES BIG

23

SIGH

Fifty Shades of It Might Actually Be Okay EVA SHORT The revelation that E.L. James’ infamous trilogy Fifty Shades of Grey is due to hit cinema screens in the summer of 2014 has been met by many with eye-roll inducing contempt. The books, renowned for the poor quality of their writing and for featuring as titillating additions to the book clubs of middle aged housewives, are expected to become exponentially more irritating on screen.

Irritating because, whether we want to or not, we must begrudgingly admit that Fifty Shades is a phenomenon.

Since its publication in 2011, the controversial erotic fiction series has captured the public imagination. It has sold 70 million copies in 37 countries and is the fastest selling paperback in history. It has caused controversy, incited discussion, and inspired numerous parodies. It is very hard to be a member of the English speaking world today and not be aware of the existence of Fifty Shades of Grey. A film version seems gratuitous - surely, the book has impinged on our daily lives enough. Bringing the book to screen is only going to be cruel and torturous for all of us that will have to hear about it.

The situation, however, is less hopeless than one would think. It’s not an immediate write-off for multiple reasons - the first being the people tipped to be involved in the 2014 production. In what Hollywood Reporter dubbed a “director derby”, many threw their hats into the ring to spearhead the project. Among those said to be considered were Steven Soderbergh, Gus van Sant and Joe Wright.

However, the job was ultimately awarded to Sam-TaylorWood, most notable for directing the 2009 John Lennon biopic Nowhere Boy. This may raise some eyebrows, as these are all people with decent reputations, and so their attraction to Fifty Shades of Grey is curious. A cynic could say that the amount of money the Fifty Shades trilogy is expected to make is the sole draw. One can be more optimistic though, and say that these kind of people have too much self-respect to produce a film of the same low quality as Fifty Shades is as a piece of literature. The same goes for production. Trigger Street Productions, a company headed by Kevin Spacey and Dana Brunetti, is due to add the trilogy to their filmography, which includes The Social Network and more recently the Netflix series House of Cards. They probably would not want to bother with the film either unless they intended to do it right. Or at least, as right as it could be done.

E.L. James, while she will be involved, is not set to have a direct contribution to the screen writing process. That role instead will go to relative unknown Kelly Marcel.

While she may not have quite the resume of the other aforementioned people involved, the fact that the book’s author is not penning the screenplay can inspire confidence. Marcel has remained relatively quiet on the matter of how the film will be rendered on screen, but has

said one rather intriguing thing — that, in her view, the film will without a doubt be raunchy enough to earn an NC-17 rating from the MPAA. While Universal Pictures and producer Dana Brunetti have declined to comment on this, it brings up an interesting issue. The NC-17 rating is known by many as box office poison, a death sentence even. Seldom do films given this rating get wide release as many cinemas will refuse to play them. Also, the rating itself is seen as damaging to a film’s marketability and could adversely affect box office sales. Therefore Universal will do everything in their power to avoid such a situation. How though can the film stay true to the sexual explicitness of the books while still remaining in profit-friendly R-Rating territory? It is difficult to say.

‘THE FILM COULD BECOME AN INTERESTING ENGAGEMENT WITH CHANGING ATTITUDES TOWARDS SADOMASOCHISM’

Maybe — and this is conjecture — the way to deliver on the sexual tension that fans all over the world are anticipating without the dreaded NC-17 rating would be to make this tension more implicit and, by extension, a little classier. The suggestion of introducing class to the trilogy may seem laughable, even ridiculous, but it is not necessarily so. For however people feel about how intelligent the book is itself, it has spurned intelligent discussion. For one, Fifty Shades has been a subject of fascination for feminists — while some would see the female protagonist Anastasia Steele as blatantly anti-feminist, others have suggested that the fact that women can now openly admit to reading this book is progress. In any case, if the film could tap into this commentary it would add a new deeper dimension to the story. The film could also tap into a climate that is palpable in the world today - an age where BDSM, something once deemed ‘sexual deviancy’, is penetrating the mainstream. In the October 2013 issue of Marie Claire there was a feature documenting a trend sweeping US Ivy League colleges such as Princeton, Columbia and NYU — a surge of BDSM societies. Harvard’s own BDSM club, Munch, has this year been recognised as an organisation with an official affiliation with the college. The people involved in these clubs, as well as others this way inclined, would probably speak disparagingly of Fifty Shades of Grey and its portrayal of BDSM. If the film could respond to this it could become an interesting engagement with the paradigm shift and changing attitudes towards sadomasochism.

No promises are being made here. But a film surpassing the book it is based on isn’t unheard of, and can’t entirely be ruled out in this case. By this time next year, we’ll know and up until then we can only guess. Expectations are low. Maybe they will be easier to exceed than one might think.

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

5

INTERVIEW: DAVID NORRIS JAMES BENNETT

W

hen I found out that my interview with David Norris was to take place in his home, I immediately pictured a grand old townhouse in Merrion Square. I was wrong. He lives just off Parnell Street. The house is still has a fairly strong Georgian highsociety vibe to it though.

I knocked on the door and that unmistakable voice greeted me through the buzzer, telling me to come in. When I entered the house I noticed a hat stand to my left that looked as if it was about to buckle under the weight of countless boaters, fedoras, and other quaint headgear.

Down at the end of the long hall was Senator Norris. He was approaching me with a distracted look on his face, with one finger raised in a “just wait a second please” gesture. He wanted to hear the end of a podcast that he was listening to.

The podcast over, Norris plucked out the earphones and informed me that he was listening to a radio debate about the abolition of the Seanad. This was part of his preparation for the final stages of the referendum campaign, in which he intends to participate vigorously. He revealed

6 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

that he would take part in as many media debates as possible, adding that he had invited Enda Kenny to debate him on television. This invitation was refused.

From the moment I entered the house it was clear that I was witnessing a man on a mission. There was one topic and one topic only on David Norris’ mind: the future of the Seanad. Promising that we would get to it eventually, I asked him to talk first about his relationship with Trinity.

Norris is undoubtedly one of Trinity’s favourite sons. He has been consistently re-elected as one of the three university senators. He entered as a student in the sixties and has been linked to the college ever since: “TCD has been an enormous part of my life because I have been associated it with it in one way or another for about fifty years. I went in with a prize in classics and history. And then I changed and did English, which I loved. The atmosphere was marvellous. But Trinity in those days was quite different. The total number of staff and students was around three thousand. And Archbishop McQuaid had banned Roman Catholics from attending. It was a small, largely protestant university.

There were some Catholics who had permission from the

archbishop, and some who said ‘to hell with it I’ll go to Trinity if I want to.’ I understand McQuaid’s suspicions though. Because Trinity was always a place for ideas to be challenged, and for questions to be asked. That went against the authoritarianism of people like Pope Pius XII and Archbishop John Charles McQuaid. They felt that if people were allowed to question it might lead all over the place. Because the priest’s word was law and so on. Learning and being educated into a challenging mode was not what they wanted.”

Listening to Norris talk about Trinity is hugely entertaining, if at times confusing. His enthusiasm makes everything a bit scattered, and he constantly goes off on tangents, forgetting the original point. At one stage he revealed that the Trinity of the sixties was not altogether different. Even then, there seemed to exist a variation of the phenomenon now known as Team England: “There were some hooray Henrys from England who just hadn’t managed to squeak into Oxbridge. But they were great fun! They had open top sports cars. They gave champagne parties. And they had girlfriends with wonderful names. I remember one that was called Gloria Bolingbroke Kent. Isn’t that marvellous! It was real Bertie Wooster stuff.”

ance of the teaching staff. So we really learned. That was real personal contact. And we met in the tutors’ rooms on campus! There were people like Arby D. French, who was one of these great characters who wrote a monograph on P.G. Wodehouse and smoked a pipe. When I said I wanted to write an essay on Joyce he said: ‘Not my sort of thing dear boy so don’t expect an expert comment but if you really feel compelled…’ When somebody asked about heroic couplets he said: ‘Oh just look out the window and you’ll see the mind-set of the Augustan age reflected in the symmetry, balance and harmony. And that is the heroic couplet in stone.’ You can’t get that kind of exchange with fifty or sixty people. There is a general move among universities towards a kind of homogenisation. The one thing I would be afraid of is that the arts and the classics would suffer because of funding issues.”

Norris treasures his relationship with Trinity. He freely admits that if it were not for the well-established liberal tendencies of this university, he would have had no chance of being elected to public office. It was Trinity that educated him, and Trinity that gave him the opportunity to pursue the career that he is currently trying to defend.

I could only keep him off the topic of Seanad abolition for so long. Eventually I gave in and opened the floodgates to what was clearly going to be a long and impassioned rant.

There was really only one thing on Norris’ mind.And that was the Seanad.

He appears to be genuinely enraged by the suggestion that the Seanad is fundamentally useless. This has long been the opinion of most of the general public, and it is one of the main arguments of the Yes side in the current referendum campaign. Norris is on a mission to change this conception of the upper house:

On a more serious note, Norris regrets the changes that have been made to accommodate for the serious financial pressure that Trinity is currently experiencing. He recounted his own experience of being taught in very small groups, with a lot of personal contact: “The larger numbers have changed the character of the place. It’s great that so many people are getting an education. But the stresses on the system have to be taken

“I can’t understand how anybody was able to listen to the kind of things that Enda Kenny and Bruton and the others were saying. That we were useless, that we were a waste of money, and all this. How dare they! They’re insulting people like me who have worked up to twelve, fourteen, sixteen hours a day in the office! I was in the office until midnight the other day even though I’m seriously ill. That’s how I treat my work in the senate. In the senate, instead of defeating a bill, you persuade. And I’ve had at least three or four bills withdrawn. So have other people. Now they weren’t defeated.They were either with-

ing the bondholders, of signing the bank guarantee. I opposed every single one… . And what was Enda Kenny doing? He was leading his troops in to support the government.And landing this country in 400 billion of debt!”

One of the more interesting examples that Norris gave in defence of the usefulness of the Seanad was when he spoke about how it can be used to tackle difficult subjects, citing the AIDS debate in the eighties: “The Dáil were afraid to discuss AIDS in the eighties. So I hired a room in Buswell’s hotel and brought the senate in, and got Fr. Paul Lavelle and Dr. Fiona Mulcahy - a priest and a consultant - to come and answer their questions. And as a result we had an excellent debate. I asked Fr. Lavelle because he dealt with drug addicts in the inner city. And I thought horses for courses. My colleagues would be less likely to accept what I would say. But with a priest who deals with drug addicts and a consultant who deals with AIDS patients, they could ask all their ignorant questions. Which they did. Dreadful things were said! But questions were answered calmly and as a result we had a terrific debate on it.”

Norris did admit the Seanad has become weaker. However, he blamed the political parties for this. The subject of the Seanad is clearly very emotive for Norris. In a similar way to when he spoke about Trinity, it was sometimes difficult to follow his train of thought. However, this time he was fuelled by anger, as opposed to enthusiasm: “All the political parties have been involved in weakening the senate and using it for themselves… There are about 30 senate bills on the order paper not being moved at the moment. Because they’re trying to stifle the senate. The government is trying to downgrade it as much as they possibly can.”

This leads him on to the accusation that the abolition of the Seanad is a power grab, a move by Enda Kenny to concrete the centralisation of power into an even smaller group. Norris is particularly vocal on this issue: “I was used to the arrogance of Fianna Fáil. But I have seen nothing like the arrogance of this government. They show a contempt for parliament. The whole government is run by four people. Everything else is a rubber stamp.

And that’s very dangerous. Enda Kenny, Michael Noonan, Brendan Howlin and Eamon Gilmore. They basically decide everything. The abolition is a dishonest grab for power. There will be no voice, however weak, to be raised in dissent.”

Currently, it does not look as if the public is in agreement with Norris.

He remained hopeful however, saying that the debate would be won in the media, and that it would depend on the arguments made in the last few days. I asked him what it was like to be in the Seanad right now, and what his predictions were in the case of the abolition passing: “The atmosphere in the senate now is poisonous. There is a lot of suspicions that people are being offered positions.

If the abolition passes there will be chaos. The senators who didn’t find their guts before will find them now >>

“I’LL FOLD UP MY TENT AND THAT’S IT. THAT’S THE END OF MY POLITICAL CAREER.” into account. In my time, we had small tutorials. When you have fifty or sixty people, that’s useless. There is not enough contact. For us, there were six people in each tutorial.The first week was spent getting to know the group.

Then subjects were allocated and everyone wrote an essay. Every week someone would present their essay and that was criticised by the other students under the guid-

drawn or completely rejigged. And my colleagues can say the same. We are there to persuade. Enda Kenny said that the senate had done nothing to stop the economic crash.

Well that’s a good one coming from him. Because I and some other people like myself argued very clearly against the policies of the previous government. The policies of giving in to the banks, of giving in the EU, of not burn-

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

7

because they know that they haven’t a hope in hell of getting re-elected. Kenny will have created a big group of disaffected politicians, and I think they’ll take it out on him. I think there could be some degree of political mayhem.”

On the personal implications for him if the Seanad is abolished, Norris is perfectly clear: “I will be very sad. But I will feel I’ve done my work. I’ll fold up my tent and that’s it. That’s the end of my political career. I have given thirty of forty years of my life one way or another to it. And I have sacrificed my personal life.

And to end up being insulted by the likes of Enda Kenny saying I have spent thirty years doing nothing… I just find that unworthy of him and very disappointing.”

This is not the only time in recent years that Norris’ career in the Seanad looked like it might be coming to a close. Not too long ago, it looked very probable that he would be packing his bags to make the move from Leinster House to Áras an Úachtaráin. His presidential bid ended in disaster when it emerged that he wrote a letter on Seanad headed paper pleading for clemency for an exboyfriend. However, he is happy to consider what might have been: “I am an old friend and great admirer of Michael D. I think he is a very good president, but his style is very much academic argument. He makes a very good case.

I’m less diplomatic. I might have done some things that you could be impeached for. I would have gone to evictions and stood silently by with the presidential car waiting for me. I think evictions in this country are terrible, especially in light of our history. I would have got in trouble for sticking my nose into things. I think for example it would have been useful to invite some of these distinguished visitors over, and instead of giving them dinner in Áras an Uachtaráin, take them down to Athlone to a soup kitchen. And let them have their soup and look into the eyes of the people they have put out of work.”

Since his failed presidential bid, Norris has been particularly vehement in his criticism of the treatment he received from the media during the election. He now claims to be involved in out of court settlements with various media organisations, but when I press him to name them he does not budge: “It was the stress from the media situation during the presidential election that caused my cancer. I’m quite sure of it. I have reached out of court settlements of a very satisfactory nature with four newspapers so far. They lied and lied and lied. And now they’re paying and paying and paying. The only newspaper that didn’t blaggard me was the Sunday Independent. As I said, so far I have been successful in four settlements, and I have three more to come. I cannot say who I have settled with because I don’t know if I’m allowed to.”

It seems that now is a very turbulent period in the life of David Norris. On one hand he is busy seeking retribution for wrongs that he feels were done against him in the past, on the other he is trying to protect the future of an organisation that he truly believes in. Although, if you look back over his political career, it has rarely been quiet.

Maybe he’s just a turbulent person.

Near the start of the interview Norris told me that he “entered the senate twenty-six years ago in a campaign to end the quiet life there.” Whatever happens on the fourth of October, he can rest assured that he has most definitely achieved that

8 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

KEEPING UP WITH THE JONESES EDMUND HEAPHY ASKS IF COMPARISONS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES MAKE FOR VALID ARGUMENTS IN THE SEANAD DEBATE.

In a sense, the idea of abolishing the Seanad has become some kind of a creeping normality. In the same vein as a “shifting baseline” or a “slippery slope”, if you talk about it for long enough, eventually the idea of abolishing a whole house of parliament starts to sound quite normal.

Justice and pretty much every other important position in the courts service. The cabinet is also the sole arbiter of judicial promotions. The separation of powers in Ireland is so vague that the constitution itself is the limiting factor when it comes to attempts to set up a truly independent process for the appointment of judges.

At this stage, we’ve all been battered with Only a referendum could allow the Dáil lists of countries that have either abol- (and the Seanad, if it still exists) to legisished their upper houses of parliament, late for such a process. And because the or indeed, have never had one in the first Dáil and Seanad are always controlled by place. Yet we’ve heard little or nothing the government of the day — the cabinet about what makes their respective po- — we are stuck in a never-ending and enlitical systems either successful or un- tirely vicious circle, filled with people who successful, and precious little about the wouldn’t know reform if it landed on their reforms that were introduced alongside doorstep. the abolition of these houses of parliament. Even more importantly, we’ve heard There is no doubt that parliaments with almost nothing in this debate about the single houses — known as unicameral separation of powers principle — some- parliaments — can and do work extremely thing which should really be at the heart well across the world, and there’s no doubt of any discussion about democracy. that our current two-house system has failed us time and time again. Given that, As with many of the fundamental princi- as Fine Gael is so eager to tell us, there are ples in our society, the separation of pow- many examples of functioning singleers principle originated with the Romans. house parliaments, we should be lookThe French political philosopher Baron de ing at what makes them successful. Do Montesquieu — heavily influenced by the they have stronger separation of powers?

Constitution of the Roman Republic — is What about their judiciaries? How exactly credited with developing the first compre- do the legislature and executive remain hensive notion of this ideal. This was that independent, if at all, given that there is the legislature, the executive, and the ju- only one house? Only then, can we ask diciary should be separate to ensure that ourselves if the abolition of the Seanad is power did not reside with just one entity. going to bring us even closer to shutting In Ireland, the legislature is the Dáil and the door on the fundamentals of democthe Seanad. Ireland’s strong party whip racy. Sliding down this slippery slope into system means that essentially, the cabinet abolishing a house of parliament isn’t — Ireland’s executive — completely con- the problem — it’s doing so in a vacuum, trols both houses. In that sense, it’s very isolated from the lessons that have been hard to argue that Ireland even vaguely learned across the world. subscribes to this separation of powers principle. Essentially, the cabinet is a subset of the legislature, and yet the legislature acts as if it is a powerless subset of the cabinet. (And that’s before we even begin to discuss the four-person group, the Economic Management Council, that controls the cabinet.) Also, instead of the judiciary actually being sacrosanct and separate, it is merely sacrosanct in the sense that it is just forbidden to question the independence of the judiciary. Yet, the cabinet still has the sole power to appoint the Chief

>>

POPULATION

Iceland 320,000

Ireland 4.6 million

ICELAND POPULATION: 320, 137 PARLIAMENT TYPE: UNICAMERAL SEATS IN PARLIAMENT: 63 RATIO OF REPRESENTATIVES TO POPULATION: 1 : 5000 GDP: $14 billion HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX: 14 GENDER-RATIO IN PARLIAMENT (M:F): 2:1 Iceland’s parliament, the Althing, was established in 930 AD, and is one of the oldest surviving legislative assemblies in the world. Iceland was subject to the Danish crown from the fourteenth century until 1944, when it claimed independence, although the Althing had formal control of Iceland’s affairs since 1904, the year it was granted home rule. From 1934 until 1991, the Althing was elected as a single unit, but operated as a two-house parliament.

Unlike the Dáil and the Seanad, both the upper and lower house had very similar legislative powers, and bills could originate in either house. At the same time, both houses frequently met together, and after World War II, important matters were almost always considered in joint assemblies. In that sense, the Althing operated as a three-house parliament, meeting weekly in a lower-chamber session, an upper-chamber session, and in a jointsession.

In 1991, the Althing became a unicameral parliament. Structurally, there is no strong separation of powers. Yet in practice, the government and the legislature remain distinctly separate. In contrast to either the Dáil or the Seanad, non-government bills have considerable success in the Althing — so much so that it beats all other Western parliaments in this regard. The move to a unicameral parliament came hand-in-hand with significant committee reform. Committees can meet even when parliament is not in session, and can discuss issues not related to legislation. Iceland’s committee reform is similar to Fine Gael’s proposed committee reform, yet the

nature of politics in Iceland is hardly comparable to Ireland: very few politicians in Iceland have held seats for more than ten years, and the concept of a lifetime in politics is unheard of. Bills that originate from committees receive almost unanimous backing in later stages of legislative procedure. In stark contrast to the partisan “politics as usual” in Ireland — the type that will presumably continue if the Seanad is abolished — co-operation in the Althing seems to be the aim of the game.

Local government in Iceland is many times stronger than it is in Ireland. But even at that, in comparison to other Nordic countries like Sweden, it is considered weak. The responsibilities of local government in Ireland can be counted on one hand: public housing, roads, sanitation, libraries and planning permission.

In Iceland, on top of those, the very same authorities deal with education up to the age of twelve, social services to do with the elderly and the disabled, public transport, local policing, tax collection, and even civil marriage. The autonomy of regions over their own jurisdiction is guaranteed

by Iceland’s constitution.

New Zealand 4.5 million

In the same way that the Oireachtas consists of the Dáil, the Seanad and the President, New Zealand’s parliament originally consisted of the House of Representatives, the Legislative Council, and the Governor, who represented the monarch. Established in 1852, this parliament mirrored Westminster in almost every way. Up until the 1860s, the government, formed by the House of Representatives, frequently clashed with the Governor, and Britain had to intervene several times to limit his powers. Since the 1890s, the Governor’s role has been almost entirely symbolic, in a way similar to the President of Ireland.

GENDER RATIO IN PARLIAMENT

Ireland 15% female 85% male

More recently, Iceland is perhaps one of the only countries which has held the government of the crisis to account, and it has been described as one of the success stories in turning the country around since the crisis. Still, it seems clear that this is due to a more rounded attitude to politics, and not the move to a unicameral parliament.

Iceland 33% female 67% male

NEW ZEALAND

New Zealand 32% female 66% male

POPULATION: 4.5 million PARLIAMENT TYPE: UNICAMERAL SEATS IN PARLIAMENT: 120 RATIO OF REPRESENTATIVES TO POPULATION: 1 : 37,500 GDP: $183 billion HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX: 6 GENDER-RATIO IN PARLIAMENT (M:F): 2:1

Sweden 45% female 55% male

Sweden 9.5 million

The Legislative Assembly — the upper house — was an appointed body that was intended to both introduce its own laws and slow down the pace of legislation.

Members were appointed by the Governor on the advice of the Prime Minister, originally for life, until a seven-year term limit was introduced before the turn of the twentieth century.

Problems with the Legislative Council emerged early in the 1860s and 70s, when it tried to take an active role in politics.

This, of course, was not welcomed by governments of the day, and from this point on, the house was filled with government supporters.

In 1947, Britain formally ceded power, giving the parliament full control of law in New Zealand. The upper house was abolished in 1951 when the incoming government filled it with what was known as a “suicide squad”, despite several years of discussions about reform and the introduction of a very different senate chamber. Aside from the permanent dissolution of the upper house, there were no reforms introduced.

Superficially, New Zealand is, just as Fine Gael wants us to believe, very similar to Ireland. We have similar population sizes, similar separation of powers, and similar government structures. Cabinet effectively controls the legislature, yet the introduction of mixed-member proportional representation (MMP) has stifled this hold somewhat. MMP ensures that parties don’t receive a proportion of seats more than their overall proportion of the vote. For instance, in the last Irish general election, Labour received 19.4% of the national vote, but 22% of the seats. Fianna Fáil received 17.4% of the vote, but only 12% of the seats. Logically, this disparity makes no sense, and our electoral system — standard proportional representation — has meant that Fianna Fáil, historically, received ten-to-fifteen more seats than its proportion of the national vote.

There are many differences between politics in Ireland and New Zealand. >>

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

9

Those proclaiming the similarities should be wary of holding it up as an example. After all, there have been several attempts to reinstate a stronger upper house, with the most noise made in 1990, and in 2011 after the financial crisis.

MP’S BASIC SALARY

SWEDEN

Ireland € 92,672

POPULATION: 9.5 million PARLIAMENT TYPE: UNICAMERAL SEATS IN PARLIAMENT: 349 RATIO OF REPRESENTATIVES TO POPULATION: 1 : 27,000 GDP: $538 billion HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX: 8 GENDER-RATIO IN PARLIAMENT (M:F): 1:1

Iceland € 40,800

New Zealand € 86,755

Sweden € 67,416

Sweden is also one of those countries that Fine Gael seems ever so eager to compare us to. Yet if there was ever a democracy that was structured altogether differently while still being within the realms of comparison, Sweden would probably come out on top. And, for Sweden, that’s probably a good thing: The Economist rated Sweden as “probably the best-governed country in the world” and the The Reputation Institute declared it the second most-reputable country just this year. I could go on with the wonderful statistics, but let’s just say that it comes into the top ten whether you’re talking about infant mortality or gender equality.

The Swedish parliament, the Riksdag, operated as a two-house parliament from 1866 until 1971. The abolition of the upper house, the första kammaren, included complete electoral reform and moved them to a more directly proportional electoral system. This constitutional revision also included provisions for people’s referendums and civil rights.

The differences between Ireland and Sweden become even more stark the deeper you go. Comparing the two countries in a discussion about abolishing a house of parliament is thus an entirely fruitless endeavour. For instance, twelve members of parliament are elected at the beginning of each electoral period to audit the finances of state companies, as well as ensuring that their operational matters are in line with their stated goals. On top of this, an entirely separate group called the Swedish National Audit Office (NAO) requires that all government agencies submit copies of their annual accounts for review, forming an independent check on the executive branch. This ensures that parliament is provided with an accurate and co-ordinated audit of state finances. The NAO is also responsible for auditing executive power, and conducts performance-based audits.

Committees in Sweden have been extremely strong for more than two-hundred years. The Constitution Committee conducts twice yearly reviews of the ex-

10 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

ecutive. In the autumn, the committee criticises everything from delays in legislative enactment to inadequate responses to parliamentary questions. Again, as with Iceland, there is a sense that it is not these oversight mechanisms which make Sweden’s democracy successful, but instead the attitude that is taken to politics: officials in government departments do not brush off these criticisms, but instead take them very seriously. In the spring, the committee investigates the actions of individual ministers, and has complete and unrestricted access to all of the government’s documents and data. Any issues are dealt with by cross-examining ministers, and while the committee cannot dismiss ministers, the media often ensures that they have a fair amount of political influence. There are no committees which review the government in this way, and Fine Gael’s committee reform doesn’t even come close to introducing one.

Local government in Sweden is many times stronger than it is in Iceland and New Zealand, which means that it is infinitely stronger than our weak form of local government. Sweden has gone through immense periods of decentralisation, while we have been moving everything into centralised government departments.

We’re reducing the number of our local politicians, while Sweden is increasing theirs. Sweden is known as the bargaining democracy. If we are abolishing the Seanad simply because Sweden did so too and they seem to be doing well, then we are most certainly making a mistake founded on Fine Gael’s faulty logic.

•

•

•

If the Seanad was reformed and made stronger, we’d quite obviously be strengthening the legislature. But, as the American political scientist Norman Ornstein points out, legislatures are not monolithic entities any more than the cabinet or political parties are. Instead, they themselves are made up of political parties and politicians with certain interests and career considerations to keep in mind. Strengthening the Seanad, unless we commit to a radical change of the same old “politics as usual”, would still be strengthening the same political ideals of this country. Abolishing the Seanad would probably do the same. The “yes” side are probably right in that if the Seanad isn’t abolished, it won’t be reformed. Enda Kenny seems to think that it simply cannot be reformed. In comparing the other countries that have moved to unicameral parliaments, it becomes clear that we should be voting for radical reform — whether the Seanad is there, or not, it doesn’t seem to matter. But something has to start much deeper

Tír na nÓg

PHOTOGRAPHY

by Ken Finegan

Irish photographer Ken Finegan was born in 1959. In 1985 Ken joined the Drogheda Independent as staff photographer and within a few years started his own company where he gained experience in a wide variety of photographic fields. Ken has successfully completed an MFA in Photography at the University of Ulster.

The photographs in “Tír na nÓg” were shot in a small Church of Ireland National School in Dundalk. The school is home to one hundred and thirty pupils from forty four different nationalities. The photographs of pupils, shot in the deadpan aesthetic, capture the personality of each child. The environment of the school and its grounds may appear dull to those who were born and raised in Ireland, but to these pupils from other countries it is not. Ireland’s culture, mythology, sport and language adorn the walls and corridors of this school, ready to be soaked up by willing minds.

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

11

12 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

To see the full collection, visit www.kenfinegan.com

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

13

To see the full collection, visit www.gavinmullan.com

New City

by Gavin Mullan 14 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

Gavin Mullan was born in Belfast. Having completed a BA in Photography at the University of Ulster in 2013. He is now working on a project in the Craigavon area in Northern Ireland.

In the 1960s the ‘New City’ of Craigavon was planned and created from scratch on bog land between the towns of Lurgan and Portadown in Northern Ireland. The town planners intended to link these two towns by creating a new, modern urban area with a single identity. Quality housing, high-speed railways, modern leisure facilities and employment were key to this concept. However, most of what was planned was never finished, and Craigavon failed to develop a sense of place.

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

15

MUSIC Oneohtrix Point Never

L

R Plus Seven One must come prepared when approaching the work of Daniel Lopatin, aka Oneohtrix Point Never. His trippy, twisted, washout electronica has been described in a number of different ways. Some might call it IDM or Intelligent Dance Music, although one can hardly imagine anyone dancing to the music found on Lopatin’s new album R Plus Seven. More accurately, his music has been categorised as EBM, meaning Electronic Body Music. While this may seem like a ludicrous genre, it most certainly feels apt when listening to R Plus Seven.

While most electronic music is built for the dance floor to give one a quick rush, Lopatin’s music is purely spiritual, bringing about a whole-bodied feeling. It is easy to get lost in the spaciness of Oneohtrix Point Never. Wire Magazine perfectly described Lopatin’s musical movements as “not so much raving as drowning.” However, this is not the gruesome drowning we are used to. Instead, Oneohtrix Point Never creates the feeling of blissfully drowning as one gets immersed in his music. This has always been the case with Daniel Lopatin and no more so than on his most recent release and debut on Warp Records. R Plus Seven comes into being with the track “Boring Angel” where an array of drone and organ sounds lure the listener into a false sense of security and then come crashing in with rolling synthesizers and vocals chopped beyond recognition. A continuing theme on

R Plus Seven is how Lopatin changes songs so dramatically throughout that one is left gasping for air. “Americans” phases in and out of silence so much during all of its five minutes that it’s hard to tell where one section begins and another ends. Although the album is all about being abstract, more accessible songs can also be found.

One of the standouts, and definite centrepiece of the record is “Zebra”. While being more accessible than the rest of the songs found on R Plus Seven, its sweeps of choral synthesizer still leave the listener in a daze. To me, R Plus Seven captures everything that modern electronic music is missing. One doesn’t need 4x4 rhythms, let alone any structure at all, in order to make a beautifully dazzling record. Daniel Lopatin has proved this. While it may not be for the faint hearted, Oneohtrix Point Never makes electronic music rivalled by few others. The closing track of R Plus Seven, “Chrome Country”, is the perfect end to the blissful drowning of the album as fantastic keyboard motifs bring about the feeling that one is being embraced in final white light. Utter bliss.

WHAT WE’RE LISTENING TO PushaT feat.Kendrick Lamar – Nosetalgia

Roger Miller – King of the Road

Omar-S – Set It Out

Although Kendrick Lamar may be turning into one of the more annoying characters in the new generation of hip hop, one can’t deny that he’s still an exceptional rapper. Lamar and Pusha T also seem to work very well as a duo, particularly when they’re given a beat like this.

After a recent drive down to Clare where I was stuck with the pain of Midland radio stations for the majority of two hours, I was lucky to come across this classic twice. Recorded in 1964, “King of the Road” will forever be a driving anthem and with lines like “I’m a man of means, by no means”, who can complain?

A lovely bit of slow tempo house released by Omar-S back in 2003.

The Detroit legend has now had over thirty releases, most of which came out on his very own label, FXHE Records. It was also recently announced that Omar will play a 3 hour set in the Grand Social on October 27th.

16 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

ast week Forbes published its annual hip hop rich list.The list charts the total earnings of artists within the rap world even if their money did not come from musical merit. It came as no surprise then that three of the top five artists in the list haven’t made a single song over the past year. Even when looking at the broader list of the top twenty, one can see that very few of the artists actually made money when it came to musical ability. So has hip hop turned into a worldwide stock market where actual talent has been over shadowed by how many endorsement deals one can acquire? The resounding answer seems to be yes. However, that’s not to say that there aren’t any real hip hop musicians out there. There’s plenty, it just seems as if they’ll never get the recognition they deserve without first appearing in an ad or making t-shirts with their own image on it.

In 1993, legendary rap group the Wu-Tang Clan released a song entitled “C.R.E.A.M.”, also known as “Cash Rules Everything Around Me”. Little did the world know just how much this slogan meant to the Wu Tang Clan as they pioneered the way for Hip hop entrepreneurship.

They put their logo on everything from clothing, to shoes, to skateboards, to bikes. They managed to transform their rap clique into a fully-fledged business that made a lot more money than album sales ever did. And this was even in the 90s, when people actually bought music! It was this move by the Wu Tang Clan that sparked off the link between hip hop and big business deals. Indeed, it’s why the Forbes’ rich list contains so few actually functioning hip hop artists. Despite this, things have come a long way since 1993 and rap artists have found new ways to market their image beyond just clothing and skateboards. On closer inspection of the list we can see how these artist-turned-industry-moguls made their money, and how it seems as if the concept of C.R.E.A.M will never leave the rap game.

Number one on this year’s list is the infamous Sean “Diddy” Combs. Having gained fame in the 90s with hits such as “It’s All About The Bejamins” and “Been Around The World”, Combs now has an estimated net worth of $580 million.

Although Combs hasn’t released a single since 2011, he managed to rack up a staggering $50 million over the past 12 months alone. So where did Combs come up with all of this money? The answer is alcohol. Diddy’s deal with Diageo’s Ciroc Vodka has made him millions over the past few years and entitles him to eight-figure an-

C.R.E.A.M. EOIN HENNESSY MCHARDIE takes a look at the Forbes hip-hop rich list

nual payouts and a nine-figure windfall from the brand if it is ever sold. Aside from Vodka, Diddy also makes his cash through his own Sean John clothing line, Bad Boy record label and Blue Flame agency. It was clear that Diddy was determined to win top spot on this year’s list as he came second place to Jay-Z in 2010 and then commented on it in a Rick Ross song saying “Fuck the Forbes’ list, let’s tell the truth, I ate more”. Diddy has also claimed that the Forbes’ list means nothing to him, as they can never account for the money he has made selling drugs.

Although, let’s be real here. There’s no way in hell Diddy is still selling drugs. That fact was even hard to believe in ’96, so why would we believe it now? Diddy has even commented to Forbes on their most recent list saying, “You started learning how to count right, I see”. One hopes his next venture will be to provide some competition for Arthur’s Day, with everyone drinking Ciroc and passed out by 12pm. It shall be known as D-Day, or Diddy-Day. Next up on the list, and in close second position, is JayZ. Despite having released an album in 2013, Jay-Z didn’t quite earn his keep the honest Hip hop way. First off, the majority of the $46 million Shawn Carter made over the past 12 months was also through alcohol, such as Armand de Brignac champagne and D’Ussé cognac. His Roc Nation Label and extravagant live shows have also made him a fair amount of pocket. Aside from all of this, Carter’s album went platinum in July with Samsung buying 1 million copies of Magna Carta Holy Grail for $5 million. While his music is not quite what it was, one must give credit to Jay-Z for being able to make clever business ventures while also maintaining a career in Hip-Hop. The man who once credited himself with being the meanest drug dealer in town is now worth an estimated $475 million. One must also keep in mind that Jay-Z is married to Beyoncé who has a net worth of $300 million, making them one of the richest independent couples in the world. Despite their child having a stupid name, one sure does envy the little bugger.

Our next hip hop business mogul is one of the more bizarre ones. The reason I say this is because this man has been on the hip hop rich list for the past five years, yet has not released any solo material since 1999. I am of course talking about Dr. Dre. Although he stood at the mighty number one spot last year, Dre has been

bumped back two places as most of his money was made through selling 51% of Beats By Dr. Dre to HTC. However, it’s still the headphone business that is keeping good old Andre Young afloat. Although Dre made most of his money through headphones and speakers this year, he has never strayed too far from the Hip-Hop game. A portion of the $40 million Dre made was through producing and featuring on music by Kendrick Lamar. Lamar himself has benefitted from being mentored by Dre as he is now ranked 14 on the Forbes’ list, having earned a clean $9 million over the past 12 months. Despite Dre still being slightly linked to the hip hop community through Kendrick Lamar, it has still been far too long since he released any solo material. In 2001, Dr. Dre announced that he was to release a new album entitled Detox. Here we are twelve years later and Detox is still in the making. It’s the Chinese Democracy of the rap world, and one feels that Dre’s attitude has changed so much over these last few years that the album won’t be credible at all.

Our first woman on the list is Onika Tanya Maraj, also known as Nicki Minaj. The Trinidad and Tobago star earned a whopping $29 million over the past 12 months.

That’s more than Eminem, Snoop Dogg and Kendrick Lamar combined! Forbes’ also states that she is the only woman to have been featured on the Hip hop rich list since its inception in 2007. This year Minaj nearly doubled last 2012’s income figure of $15.5 million dollars. She achieved this through a slew of endorsements with Mac, OPI and Pepsi - not to mention her involvement with the T V Show

American Idol. Love her or hate her, Minaj sure does know how to make money. Like most of the other people on the list, Minaj made a fair amount of dough through alcohol as well. She owns a stake in Myx Fusions Moscato, a sweet wine now making its way into her music videos and rap verses. “I’ve never been afraid to walk into the boy’s club,” Minaj told Forbes. “Ever. Ever, ever, ever”. One can definitely see Minaj’s empire expanding while she continues to make millions off the music she makes. Not only is Minaj the only woman in the top five but she’s also the youngest, standing a good 13 years younger than our leader Diddy. To put it in her own words, “It’s time for a female Jay, a female Puffy”.

Last but not least on the list is label owner, Birdman. Living up to name of his record company, Cash Money Millionaires, Birdman earned $21 million over the past year.

This is a good $8 million less than Minaj who happens to be part of Birman’s label. Bryan Williams, as he is also known, made his money through records by artists such as Drake, Lil’ Wayne and many others. Although he’s been releasing solo material for several years now, it never really gets that much attention. One feels that Birdman is definitely more of an entrepreneur than a musician. Ironically though, there is a noticeable absence of endorsement deals and merchandise, so his money was almost solely made within the hip hop industry. Despite this, Birdman did triy to form an oil and gas exploration company in 2010 called Bronald Oil and Gass, LLC. An investigative report from Bloomberg revealed that official regulators in charge of oil and gas permits had never heard of Birdman’s company. So one is lead to believe there was dodgy business going on. No matter how Birdman makes his money, he seems to be doing a good job of it anyway.

Thus, we have learned that in order to make it in the hip hop world, you don’t have to do anything to do with hip hop at all. In fact, the main message that can be taken from this piece is that there seems to be more money in the alcohol business than the rap game. But who knows, maybe in years to come we’ll see hip hop artists make it to the rich list based on musical merit alone. Or we could see the exact opposite. Hip hop might turn into a genre comprised of ad jingles and vodka bottles. Only time will tell.

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

17

fashion Scents of Winter As temperatures drop, and we find ourselves emerging from our afternoon classes to a dark sky, we automatically change our clothes to fit the weather, but perfumes have different seasons too. Winter scents tend to be heavier, smokier and sexier than summer ones. Certain classics will always hold their popularity, like Chanel No.5 or Guerlain’s Shalimar. In this piece, we’ve chosen our lesser-known favourites, for girls and guys. Rules are made to be broken though, so I advise that you never take the ‘for him’ or ‘for her’ labels too seriously. I am a constant thief of my dad’s Dior Homme, and have a male friend who swears by D&G’s Acqua di Gioia.

DKNY Red Delicious Kat Clinch

For autumn and winter, I adore this perfume. The bottle even looks like autumn to me, and reminds me of warm apple pie! It has enough lightness and fruitiness to brighten up winter mornings but comes with a surprising warmth that goes with the cosy nature of the changing seasons.

Arnott’s Student Lock-in ADVERTORIAL Tired of those boring old Phil debates? Looking for something else to do this Thursday evening? Why not head down to Arnott’s for their first ever student lock in. From 6pm to 9pm there will be a 20% discount in Topshop and Fuse Fashion Network, and a 10% discount in Mango.

There will also be beer, music, goody bags and prize giveaways. Not to be missed! Tell your friends! Tell your enemies! Tell whoever you want… Just be there!

Boudoir by Vivienne Westwood Elizabeth Brauders

The perfect mix of a sweet and sexy scent. Like an alpine shepherdess who enjoys wearing sexy lingerie under her gingham pinafore while smoking a cheeky fag, except it’s a perfume. Weird analogies aside, it’s got strong aldehyde top notes, which fade to roses, orange blossom, and vanilla, but with a heavy dash of tobacco to make it all just smell a bit dirty. It’s not one for 9 am lectures, or a meeting with the parents. However, for nights out or romantic dates, I’m a staunch believer that nothing could rival its almost embarrassingly sexy perfection. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if this is the scent that Jean-Baptiste Grenouille put on at the end of Perfume.

DKNY Red Delicious

Black XS for him by Paco Rabanne Loughlin Lavery

A strong fragrance with a very distinctive smell, it’s hard to miss but not too intense. Black XS has an oriental woody scent with patchouli and citrus. I got it first when I was twelve as a birthday gift and had made it a signature scent by sixteen. I still wear it daily and never tire of it. It makes a great gift for holidays and birthdays, being less well known. I’ve tried several other brands but just never could move on from this one.

Boudoir

ut

Very Irresistible by Givenchy

Terre D’Hermès

Lucy Mulvaney

Umbrellas are up, kaleidoscopic leaves clutter the ground and the transition from sun hats to snoods is officially upon us. This perfume is perfect for banishing those winter blues. The bouquet of femininity boasts five variations of rose that harmonise beautifully with the fresher anise tones. Such an enveloping, elegant scent complements everything from a cosy cashmere jumper to a fabulous evening gown and has the longevity and versatility to follow you from day to night.

18 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

Terre D’Hermès

Damien O’Shaughnessy A must-have at winter due to its versatility. Fresh with hints of orange peel, it’s woody, rugged and masculine without being overpowering. This scent is not very budget friendly, but treat yourself and you will not be disappointed. It works in everything from casual contexts to black-tie and is loved by men and women alike.

universitytimes.ie

>>>>>>>

Rachel Lavin reviews mineral makeup by Bare Escentuals and Kimberly Noel.

IS FUR MURDER?

YES

BY KAT CLINCH

BY DAMIEN O’SHAUGHNESSY

NO

So here comes a hippy to throw red paint over the fur-cloaked arguments of our Damien.

Right, so to be perfectly fair to all sides, we can all appreciate the fact that there are some people who like fur. It makes sense. Fur is soft, it’s warm, and it gives the same feeling as your favourite onesie for about a hundred times the price! Realistically, the whole human race was in furs once upon a time, so some would argue that it’s as natural as continuing the farming industry. However, from a clothing perspective, we now have so many better options. We have evolved both fashion and practicality to give us thousands upon thousands of clothing choices that don’t require another living creature to suffer.

Fashion is a fickle industry. Styles, garments and the nature of how we judge certain brands are constantly changing. These are all unavoidable facts that must be embraced and contended with. That’s fine. That’s the nature of business. We, as consumers, inform and dictate what is produced and what is fashionable. Fur is desirable by at least enough consumers to make it commercially viable worldwide, and it has been available in Ireland since at least the 1700s. However, some people think they have the right to restrict your right to purchase, wear and enjoy fur, and feel righteous in doing so.

So on the one hand, we have designers, producers and consumers who enjoy fur, and on the other we have people who want to restrict that enjoyment.

I believe that every living creature has an equal right to life. That includes the ugly ones, the useless ones, and even the vicious ones. The animals exploited in the fur industry may not be barbarically hunted down like they once were, but being bred in captivity for the specific goal of slaughter is equally despicable. Let it be made clear that these are not free-range minks that go into fur coats. If you are outraged by battery farming or puppy farming, you should be outraged by the fur industry. These animals live short lives in horrendous conditions to serve a commercial end. Farming, it can be argued, kills animals for profit too. But food is a necessity. Show me a person who needs fur and I will show you a damned liar! I appreciate that many fur supporters will refute my argument with references to the numerous animals grown for meat and say it is not a necessity either, but let’s be realistic here: a steak will fuel your body. It provides you with iron, protein and other nutrients that your body benefits from.A fur coat might just make you look nice, which you could do for less than a quarter of the price and without harming animals by wearing faux fur.

Why? Apparently fur is murder. Let’s clear that up right now. It isn’t. Animals are not humans. They are a means of production. Even if you love animals, your pets are products. They’re yours, no matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise. You probably paid for them and you view them as your property.

Fur is luxurious. It cannot be denied that faux fur doesn’t give that feeling of decadence that you would get from a fur coat. But I say if you want decadence buy gold! Buy designer! Don’t kill an animal. If you wouldn’t wear your pet dog or cat then you shouldn’t support fur. Remember the disgust you felt for Cruella DeVille in 101 Dalmatians? If it had been called 101 Minks the fur industry would probably be bust by now. As for the people who work in the fur industry, I’m sure in this age of consumerism there are numerous opportunities out there for people unwilling to sell something that some people might consider morally objectionable — in fact it’s probably a CV booster!

I respect people’s right to want what they want, and if something is sold people have a right to desire and buy it. However I don’t agree with sweat shops, or battery farming, or sex-trafficking, or hunting so I cannot agree with the fur industry ­— where yet another living creature is abused for the profit or enjoyment of someone else, especially when the product is something as inessential as fur. In this day and age, there is no need for fur, only want. And killing something to satisfy a want is murder.

Allegedly fifty million mink are farmed the fur trade every year along with significant quantities of other animals. Firstly, yes that is a lot of mink, but secondly, they’re grown specifically for that purpose. They’re not animals caught and killed for their fur. They’re made only for it, they wouldn’t exist otherwise. To those jumping up and down in outrage clamouring for bans I say: How dare you! What about the people involved in the fur trade: the designers, the farmers, the furriers? These people are filling a gap in supply and (yes, you guessed it) demand. People want fur, like people want steaks. Get over it.

The whole anti-fur movement is rooted in narcissism. It is a sense of entitlement and a belief in an ‘enlightened’ fascism which claims that what you believe should be what others believe and what you want should be what people want. So if you protest outside the hardworking businesses that sell fur, you should ask yourself, why? Why aren’t you out doing something productive, or offering something better to market, or buying all the minks and living happily ever after? It’s whiny and it’s irrelevant. Quite frankly, I don’t care what you want, or what you think. You probably don’t care that I believe Alexander Gustafsson was robbed last week. I’m alright with that. What I do care about is you trying to force your opinion on everyone else by making it compulsory.

The fur industry is no different from commercial meat production in its ethical implications. Humans need or want (yes, its ok to want things no matter how much they try to make you feel guilty about being a consumer) something from animals, and have the means to get it efficiently. If you don’t want to partake, that’s cool. We live in an era where such choice exists and I would never disrespect anyone’s right to not partake in the consumption of animal products.

The city of West Hollywood enacted a ban on fur on 21st September 2013. It is the first of its kind in America. Businesses located within West Hollywood are prohibited from selling fur apparel in their stores, online or from shipping from a West Hollywood location. The ban is exclusive to ‘for-profit business’. Non-profit organisations that sell fur are exempt, leading me to wonder if this is a true anti-fur victory or an experiment in the implementation of anti-capitalist ideology? Regardless, it’s a very strange clause.

Thankfully, the retailers are fighting back. Mayfair House continues to stock and sell fur in West Hollywood. It is also engaged in legal proceedings to deem the city’s ban illegal and have it lifted. I’m rooting for them. I’m rooting for freedom. I suggest you do the same.

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

19

FILM Due to their similar subject matters, the most obvious comparison to draw with The Fifth Estate is The Social Network. Unfortunately the film is not directed with the same level of skill as its Facebook counterpart. While David Fincher offered a visually exciting and innovative way to tell quite a small scale story, director Bill Condon doesn’t show us anything we haven’t seen before. Stylistically, the Bourne series is a strong point of reference, with shaky cameras being the order of the day.

The supporting cast is packed with talent, featuring Stanley Tucci, Laura Linney, David Thewlis, Peter Capaldi and Anthony Mackie. However, most of them are reduced to reciting expository dialogue.

Although the film is largely Berg’s account of the events, the final word is left to Assange, who states that it’s the responsibility of an individual to seek the truth for themselves, hinting that film can’t fully be trusted as accurate.

While The Fifth Estate is by no means the best Wikileaks movie that could have been made, its strong story and engaging performances mean it’s definitely worth a look.

Blue Jasmine The Fifth Estate

Louie Carroll The Fifth Estate charts the rise of the website WikiLeaks and its creator Julian Assange (Benedict Cumberbatch), from humble beginnings to global exposure and wreaking havoc with US national security. It is also the story of the formation and subsequent breakdown of the partnership between Assange and colleague Daniel Berg (Daniel Brühl). Berg’s book Inside Wikileaks: My Time with Julian Assange at the World’s Most Dangerous Website serves as the films primary source. As such it’s important to remember the inherent bias on which the script is founded.

Incidentally, the script was leaked by Wikileaks itself in characteristically bullish fashion weeks before the films release.

There’s something slightly jarring about watching the recreation of events that have taken place in the very recent past, the repercussions of which are still being played out today. This applies to Cumberbatch’s representation of Assange, a figure still very much in the public eye. Cumberbatch nails the performance right down to Assange’s most subtle mannerisms, but is let down by Josh Singer’s script which struggles with its portrayal of the WikiLeaks founder. Having him spout off grandiose lines such as “courage is contagious”, does nothing to contribute to the verisimilitude of the film. The character of Daniel Berg is similarly mishandled. Although his interactions with Assange are convincing, the sub-plot involving his love interest (Alicia Vikander) is completely superfluous.

Once the film shrugs off the burden of these initial characterisations, the story is permitted to take centre stage.

At its heart is the ethical duel between Assange and Berg.

Is there limit to what should be leaked and at what point does it just become recklessly irresponsible?

20 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

Sean Nolan Woody Allen has is certainly getting around these days.

Since Match Point in 2005, his first feature set outside the United States, Allen has set six of his subsequent seven films in Europe. His latest effort, Blue Jasmine, sees the veteran writer and director return to San Francisco, the very place he shot his directorial debut.

The film tells the story of Jasmine (Cate Blanchett), once an exceedingly wealthy and pampered socialite, who has fallen on hard times since her husband’s indictment for financial fraud. We follow Jasmine as she is forced to move in with her adopted sister Ginger (Sally Hawkins) and make a new life for herself in San Francisco. Meanwhile the story of her past life with multimillionaire husband Hal (Alec Baldwin) is revealed to us through flashbacks.

While many of Allen’s recent films have felt rambling and undisciplined in nature, Blue Jasmine is a more clearly focused and fully realized film. The portrayal of San Francisco in the film is indicative of this. The city seems to consist of nondescript backdrops on which the narrative can unfold, avoiding the romantic and indulgent emphasis on setting which was so painfully evident in both Midnight in Paris and To Rome with Love. This reliance on the strength of the script instead of the pleasantness of the setting has seemingly led Allen to produce some of his best writing in years. His rhetoric is once again bitingly satirical without being didactic and his dialogue brims with wit and realism.

The excellent script is bolstered by a set of fine performances, the standout being Cate Blanchett’s, who is brilliantly neurotic as the titular Jasmine. While the film is is at its best when Blanchett is on screen, the script does allow space for her talented co-stars to shine. The subplot concerning Ginger and Al (a pleasantly surprising Louis C.K.) is extremely engaging.

This is not to say that the film is without any problems.

An ill judged scene in a dentist’s reception comes across as disturbing when the film is playing it for laughs. The uneven performance from Andrew Dice Clay is another noteworthy blip. Despite this, Blue Jasmine possesses more than enough of Allen’s charm and wit to make it compelling viewing.

The To Do List

Jack O’Kennedy Let’s talk about sex. Or rather, in high school senior Brandy Klark’s case, the lack thereof. Brandy (Aubrey Plaza), a straight A student with a superiority complex, is brought crashing down to earth when a fumbled intimate encounter exposes how little she knows about the birds and the bees. Determined to fill this glaring gap in her knowledge as she heads into her final summer before college, Brandy tackles sex like she would an exam, creating the to do list of the film’s title. Spurred on by her two friends (Alia Shawkat and Sarah Steele) she compiles a selection of increasingly raunchy sexual acts. Completion of this list will presumably prepare her for her final test: full blown sexual congress.

Director Maggie Carey (Funny Or Die) has pulled together a pretty impressive cast for her debut feature. As Brandy, leading lady Plaza recycles the same shtick familiar to fans of her turns in Parks and Recreation and Safety Not Guaranteed. While she deserves credit for tackling some incredibly awkward scenes with admirable gusto, if you weren’t an admirer of hers before, The To Do List isn’t going to change your mind. A number of bright young comic actors (such as Donald Glover and Christoper MintzPlasse) make up the staff of the pool where Brandy works as a lifeguard. Unfortunately, they’re not given great material to work with. Cameos feature throughout with Andy Samberg making the most of his brief scenes. However, a subplot involving a prank war with the country club is completely disposable, seeming to exist solely to shoehorn 30 Rock’s Jack McBrayer into proceedings. On the plus side, Bill Hader gives a typically solid performance as the pool’s caretaker and Clark Gregg is a highlight as Brandy’s beleaguered and buttoned down father.

The main failing of The To Do List is that while it attempts to do something new with the teen sex comedy via its female lead and 90’s setting, it often resorts to the same lazy plotting and crass jokes that plague the worst films in the genre. There is certainly humor to be derived from the trials that Brandy puts herself through in the pursuit of sexual enlightenment. However, scenes in which she spits semen and literally eats shit are both questionable and downright unfunny.

Ultimately, what The To Do List amounts to is an underwhelming comedy with too few laughs and too many bodily secretions. It will to appeal to almost no-one. Like an embarrassing first sexual experience, it’s probably best forgotten.

SO BAD IT’S GOOD JACK O’KENNEDY CONSIDERS THE CINEMATIC FAILURES THAT KEEP FILM LOVERS COMING BACK FOR MORE. Customer 1: I’ve heard it’s the worst film of all time.

Customer 2: How bad can it really be though?

Customer 1: Very bad apparently. It’s getting one star reviews from pretty much everyone.

Customer 2: Really? Screw it. Let’s go and see it. At the very least it’ll give us something to laugh about.

Customer 1: Go on then. Sure we’re here now aren’t we.

Customer 2: (Turning to me) Two tickets for Diana please.

Customer 1: I don’t suppose you serve alcohol here …

Variations on the above conversation have been extremely common in the cinema where I work since the release of Oliver Hirschbiegel’s much maligned film Diana a week and a half ago. Marketing itself as the true story of the Princess’ passionate love affair with the Pakistani heart surgeon Dr. Hasnat Khan, Diana fails as a film on almost every level. The dialogue is atrocious (“you don’t perform the surgery, the surgery performs you”), and the story is both repetitive and mind-numbingly dull. Diana is currently at a not so fresh 3% rating on review aggregator site Rotten Tomatoes. All in all, everyone seems to agree that it’s a truly terrible film. But is it so bad it’s good?

People tend to have a fascination with failure. Go on to YouTube and you’ll find countless compilation videos of awful X-Factor auditions with millions of views, nestled alongside similarly popular clips of failed stunt attempts and terrible comedians. Reddit has a thread dedicated to finding the best of the worst internet clips, where users can enjoy people who are so inept at being entertaining that they ironically become incredibly watchable. The same is true for cinema. Every year, long-suffering audiences sit through laugh-free comedies, derivative ac-

tion films, predictable thrillers and turgid art-house fare.

Once in a while though, a film will arrive so imperfectly formed that it transcends its awfulness. At a certain point, a very bad film can crossover and become enjoyable by virtue of its flaws.

One of the most popular examples of this phenomenon is cult-favourite The Room. The romantic drama released in 2003 is, from a technical standpoint, an abomination.

Subplots are picked up and then suddenly dropped, never to return again. The film is constantly out of focus and there aren’t enough Razzies in the world to do justice to writer, director and leading man Tommy Wiseau’s bizarre performance. So why then has this travesty since been dubbed “The Citizen Kane of bad films”? For all the reasons just mentioned above, of course! Though he’s laughably since tried to claim that his intent was to make a black comedy all along, the fact that Wiseau’s film about a tumultuous love triangle is so earnest in its intentions makes it somehow endearing. Go along to any of the numerous public screenings of the film (which typically sell out) and you’ll find an enthralled audience laughing hysterically and quoting along with our molten faced protagonist as he roars “You’re tearing me apart Lisa.”

Search online for the documentary Best Worst Movie and you’ll find a wonderfully affectionate film about another candidate for the worst movie ever made: Troll 2, which oddly doesn’t feature any trolls. Cast members are interviewed, fans are asked to explain what the film means to them, and the cult-like devotion to this frightfully poor horror flick is explored. Crucially, the director of Troll 2, Claudio Fragasso, though able to laugh at himself

at first, eventually becomes tired of the guffaws during the screenings. In one agonising scene, he stands up during a Q&A session and insists that the actors making fun of their performances and his film have “no idea what they’re talking about.” What I’m trying to say is that there’s a big difference between Adam Sandler churning out Grown Ups sequels and Roger Christian attempting to sell us scientology via a seven foot tall alien John Travolta in Battlefield Earth. That difference is heart. Sandler, a gifted, once edgy comic with serious acting chops (See Punch Drunk Love) knows that he’s making dreadful films.

Christian, on the other hand, was clearly trying to make an entertaining love letter to scientology, wrapped up in an ambitious sci-fi monstrosity.

That heart is what brings us to American filmmaker Ed Wood. Born in in 1924, the man behind such classic good bad films as Bride of the Monster and Plan 9 From Outer Space is regarded (with affection) as one of the worst directors of all time. Memorably portrayed by Jonny Depp in Tim Burton’s eponymous Oscar-winning 1994 film, the exmilitary, cross dressing auteur was a thorough believer in the magic of cinema. He was truly convinced that he was making films audiences would love for years to come. He was right, just in the wrong way.

So I hope that when Oliver Hirschbiegel has finished licking his wounds, he takes comfort in the fact that for better or for worse Diana will be remembered. Surely when it comes to the silver screen, one would rather be infamous than forgotten.

TROLL 2

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

21

INDIE GOES BIG VLADIMIR RAKHMANIN on how independent producers are invigorating the gaming scene.

It’s easy to get swept up in the hype of the next generation. With new home consoles being released so soon, the focus of the gaming community is going to once again be on shiny graphics and “next-gen experiences.” We should not forget that some of the most creative and original video games this year have come from independent publishers – and at a fraction of the price of your average AAA release. So put away your copy of GTA V, stop watching the trailer for Killzone: Shadow Fall for the hundredth time, and take a look at some of these indie releases of the past year:

pizza boxes, a writer’s desk covered in post-it notes and unfinished novel drafts, and torn, tear-stained love letters imply a lot more about the characters than a regular cutscene.

The main problem with the story is the central plot. Attention: spoilerphobes may wish skip this paragraph, as part of the magic of the game is discovering for yourself what happens in the house. It is admirable that the developers chose to deal with LGBT themes within the narrative. However, despite the overall ambition of the plot, it is full of clichés and poor writing. Some of the diary entries are cringe-worthy and sound like something out of a young adult novel. Thankfully, the sub-plots are written a little better, probably because they lack voice-overs. The father’s struggle with writer’s block and acceptance from his parents was a particular stand-out for me.

Overall, Gone Home is a flawed experiment that introduces a fantastic new method of story-telling into a still young medium. It is a shame that the story is not told as well as it should be.

BROTHERS: A TALE OF TWO SONS The oddly named Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons is another in-

this gauntlet by seamlessly merging story and gameplay.

Without spoiling anything, the ending is a moment of sheer brilliance, a set-piece that could only work in a video game. It takes lessons learned from games like Braid and 999 and brings interactive narrative to a new level.

In years to come, the epilogue to Brothers will surely be viewed by many as a breakthrough in the medium.

AMNESIA: A MACHINE FOR PIGS Amnesia: A Machine For Pigs is probably the most controversial indie release of the year. The sequel to the fan-favourite horror The Dark Descent, Machine for Pigs is a new story set in the same world. For the second game in the series, the original developers (Frictional Games) outsourced production to The Chinese Room, the creators of slow-paced exploration game Dear Esther. TCR definitely brought their own influence to Machine by stripping away a lot of elements that fans loved about the original game.

The item management, the sanity system, and the open level design are all gone. What remains is a different take on the same style of Lovecraftian horror that made the first game special.

Personally, I thought the changes were for the best.

While retaining the general turn of the century atmos-

Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs

GONE HOME One of the more interesting indie releases this summer was Gone Home, an exploration-heavy adventure title made by the environmental design team of Bioshock 2.

The game is set in the nineties, with the plot revolving around a young woman returning home after a long trip to Europe. Upon her return, she discovers that her family is missing. It is up to her to discover what happened during her absence by searching through the empty man-

teresting experiment in video game narrative. Developed in collaboration with the Swedish director Josef Fares, Brothers tells the story of two brothers who set out to find a cure for their dying father. The visuals are gorgeous.

The whole production has the atmosphere of a distinctly European flavoured fairy-tale. Much like the Brothers Grimm stories it is inspired by, the story quickly takes a dark turn, resulting in some breathtakingly morbid setpieces that would be a crime to spoil.

phere, TCR changed the first game’s visceral horror to a more disturbing, psychological one. In the original, the player was terrified of the creatures chasing him. In the new instalment, the player is terrified of the horrific implications of the story. While the game gets a little too ambitious and abstract towards the end, with an attempt to make a political statement, it’s impossible to deny the terrifying, oppressive imagery. One of the best environments featured an empty church with a crucifix made of pig carcasses on the altar. Even when the overall direction of the story gets a little out there, the terrific writing and brooding soundtrack make the game a memorable experience.

Despite the dominance of AAA titles in today’s video game market, it would be wise not to forget new independent releases, as this is where much of the creativity lies. A clever game mechanic, a different way of telling a story, an ambitious take on an existing franchise – these are all examples that current big name publishers could learn from. With the way Sony and Microsoft are embracing indie titles in the wake of the new generation, it looks like the future of video games is about to get a lot brighter.

‘WHILE THE GAME GETS A LITTLE TOO AMBITIOUS AND ABSTRACT TOWARDS THE END, IT’S IMPOSSIBLE TO DENY THE TERRIFYING, OPPRESSIVE IMAGERY’ sion.

Combat aside, the game clearly takes some influence from the Bioshock series in that the story is told solely through the environment.There are some audio diary entries from the protagonist’s sister, but the story is mostly conveyed through small objects and details. This is a fantastic experiment in narrative. What makes it interesting is that it could only have been achieved through an interactive medium. A pillow fort surrounded by empty

22 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE

The main thing that sets Brothers apart from other games is its unorthodox control scheme — each brother is controlled with a separate analog stick, with the triggers representing context-sensitive actions. The meat of the gameplay could only be described as “single player co-op.”

The player must solve a series of puzzles by combining the abilities of both brothers. At first, the control scheme is quite awkward, and the puzzles only mildly taxing.

However, the ending justifies putting the player through

LOST GENERATION? Laura Gozzi fearfully considers life after graduation.

Have you noticed how grim things have been lately? The world is a shambles. People are kept hostages in a Kenyan shopping centre. Gunmen romp through the US and we’re all running out of rhetoric to complain about it. Also, an American surveillance program spies on us all. We probably knew that already, but like in the case of the Emperor’s new clothes, it’s safe to say that we were all happier when we silently pretended to be entitled to privacy. It has been confirmed that climate change is our fault and that we’re the worst humans ever. Everyone noisily quarrelled over Syria and a potentially very dangerous conflict was narrowly avoided only thanks to a surprising stint by Vladimir Putin as a cunning peacemaker. Things really are grim.

ways worked this way. The younger generation inherits the mistakes of the one that came before it. Young people have had it bad before. We are not the first batch of hopeful twenty-somethings who have had to deal with a complicated world. Twenty-one year olds in 1941 must have felt horrendously cheated too, and rightfully so. But surely now we know enough to be able to forge a different path for ourselves. We have the internet, and no one can use it better than us. We’ve grown up alert, and our brains have learned to sift through the tons of information that we’re handed every day. If it’s true that history is life’s teacher, we must surely know enough about the past to be able to steer clear of any signs of impending doom.

What to do, what to do? Does anyone else feel like we’re being handed down a crappy world, and that sooner or later the very people who have made it this crap will die in peace and let us clean up the mess they made? I can’t really think of a worse time to be entering the final year of college than 2013. Myself and the other hundreds of Senior Sophister students will be unceremoniously kicked out of Trinity in less than a year. We’ll have to leave our safe haven of cobblestones and student deals for the real world.And the real world has never seemed scarier.

We travel and see things, and we live in an age where a few words of English can bring together two people from the other side of the world. We post about revolutions and tweet about change. We can do independent research and make up our own minds about things. We sit in our rooms and we create things on a screen and at the same time we study the old disciplines and attempt to bring the two together. We’re much more alone than before because we move so much, but we also keep in touch, and meet again. We’ve been told for years now that we’ll have to work hard to pay for our parents’ bad decisions and good lives. And we’re ready for it, because it’s been made very clear to us that we just don’t have a choice. We question ideas that have been presented to us as dogmas — the role of women, the principle of Western democracy, the family, the treatment of poorer countries— and we twist them and change them to make them ours.

It’s terrifying, because I don’t feel ready to be thrown into the mess that the Grown Ups have been busy making. I don’t feel ready because I don’t agree with a lot of things that have been done to the world lately. It’s unfair that our generation is going to be handed a package of wars, debts, governments, battles, and social vacuums of all kinds.

What if we wanted to do something different with the planet? What if we had different ideas, different plans, a different vision of what we want our world to be like?

Reading the news makes me so angry that, instead of being tremendously excited that my time as a young ‘un is coming to an end, I feel anxious and depressed. All the things I want to do will have to wait until the recession is over, or until I can travel with my gay friends without having to fear for their lives, or until my country stops being the corrupted land that it has become. I can’t see many of the things I’ve always to see, because they’ve been bombed or polluted or otherwise spoiled by people who came before me. I am angry because I know that I will spend a good amount of time adapting myself to a world that I didn’t choose: a world that is being trampled on by the previous generation, while ours watches on helplessly.

We have all the necessary skills to do something better with what we’ll be given soon. We have so many tools that the generations before us didn’t have, and we can’t be afraid to use them in new ways. We’ll all be getting out of here soon enough, and when we do, let’s make sure that we live our lives, and not the ones that have been set for us by those who came before. Have you ever felt envious of those youngsters in the sixties with flowers in their hair, who believed they could stop wars, who believed they could change the world?

Can we not be like that again? Can we walk out of Front Arch one autumn day and tell ourselves that we can and we should change what we’re not happy with. After all, this is our world now, and no wars or policies or conflicts or projects or plans are unstoppable.

They will need our permission to go on, and we have the power to take control of our lives and our world again.

DOES ANYONE ELSE FEEL LIKE WE’RE BEING HANDED DOWN A CRAPPY WORLD?

I’m twenty-one years old! I want to be excited about things! I want to walk out of this pretty campus one day and be terrified, yes, but also incredibly exhilarated by everything that awaits me. For now, I just feel a vague kind of anguish. And judging by what I hear from those around me, I’m not the only one.

There is no easy answer to a problem that we didn’t create. After all, the world has al-

Soon enough we will all be turned out of this university, with the wits and the will to go against what is erroneously being presented to us as inevitable and inescapable. So for now, yes, be angry when things are grim, but bottle up all that anger and let it out once you get out of here. Reclaim the world that we have the right and the duty to improve.

After all, it’s not perfect, but it’s ours.

THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE |

23

24 | THE UNIVERSITY TIMES MAGAZINE