Palatinate

The Visit

subs — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:42:31 +0000

Morality is dead; long live Morality!

At the final applause, the stage is rife with victims of revenge, greed, temptation.Their yellow shoes are shining gleefully, especially in the murder scene, when the darkness allows us only a sketchy glimpse onto the last breaths of Alfred Ill. Moments before, a human tree has knocked on the table Ill is now lying dead on, shouting: “Cuckoo!” The woodpecker.

Hill College Theatre Company’s (HCTC) staging of Friedrich Dürrenmatt’s “The Visit” incorporates all its facets, allowing it to be absurdly comic and tragically disillusioning, told half laughingly, half cryingly. The story of Claire Zachanassian (Caroline Gaunt) who, after 40 years, seven marriages and a thereof resulting fortune, returns to the fictional village Güllen to avenge herself on the man who once denied paternity of their mutual child, presents itself as more than a pessimistic inventory of the human condition. Now an unimaginably wealthy woman, Claire offers the people of Güllen one Million if they take Alfred Ill’s life, punishing him for his past misdeed. Claire’s absurdly pragmatic definition of justice has the dramatic potential to evoke multifaceted reactions from the audience: a sceptical smile, perhaps followed by a hearty laugh, then deathly silence. Rob Henderson’s insightful staging exploited this potential to the fullest.

From very early on, we know that Alfred Ill (poignantly dreamy: Tom Thorp) is going to die, making “The Visit” an allegory for the victory of greed, especially relevant in times of bursting credit-bubbles. A wise choice of subject matter! To not restrict the play by its allegorical nature, however, so that an answer to the question “Why?” is at least thinkable, is a problem which Henderson solves when no word has yet been spoken: Four villagers are shown sitting on a bench like hens on a perch, plainly dressed, ‘Chinese whispers’-style. A powerful image for malfunctioning communication: When passing on information, the message is likely to be changed or lost in the process, as every link of the chain can alter the content as they choose. Never do we witness the people of Güllen reflect collectively about the morally questionable consequences of Zachanassian’s offer. Instead, they indulge in lies of loyalty and anti-capitalism. Ironically, action undermines these noble affirmations. While the village is pulling the wool over its own eyes, Claire (Gaunt with a twinkle in her eye) orders the doctor: “Next time (someone dies) you will diagnose a heart attack.” Bluntly, she mentions the coffin in which Ill will soon be carried off-stage. And while we are still chuckling about the fantastic idiocy of Koby and Loby (Beth Greenwood and Persephone Barda), we realise that Ill’s death is inevitable.

Central to the play, so Dürrenmatt, is “a community that slowly succumbs to temptation”. In the HCTC production, too, Güllen is the true protagonist, unified by the yellow shoes everyone has bought “on account” – in gleeful anticipation of their ‘remuneration’. These shoes should have been made detonate on the wooden stage as Ill’s recognition of his approaching death – which can be read by the audience in Thorp’s very steps – in this harmlessness is the major achievement of the play: The inconspicuous as a source of enormous dramatic power.

Finally, Güllen is encircling Ill in a threatening collective. He dies in absence of a shot, a scream or a single perpetrator. No one is relieved. No one is responsible. Temptation was too great. In unison, Güllen screams its lie into the dark: “It was done for justice!” Moments before, a sunglassed, gum-chewing Mafioso crouches on a stool, playing on his acoustic guitar Chopin’s Funeral March…

Equus

subs — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:40:37 +0000

Knowing very little about Equus, besides that it was the play in which Daniel Radcliffe famously disrobed in 2007, and that it was about horses, I wasn’t really sure what to expect from this production from This Theatre Company. Yet this was one of the most phenomenal theatrical performances I have ever experienced, and the most impressive production I have seen on the Assembly Rooms Stage. Written by renowned playwright Peter Schaffer in 1976, Equus tells the story of Alan Strang, a 17 year-old boy who is receiving psychiatric treatment in hospital after blinding five horses, seemingly without reason. The motivation for this horrific crime and the events that led to it are played out before the audience through Alan’s treatment with psychiatrist Martin Dysart, who in treating Alan begins to analyse his own unfulfilled life.

Such an intensely complex piece, with examination of themes such as religion, consumerism, sexuality and mental illness, is a huge task for a student company, and the cast and production team should be praised for creating something that was so realistic and absorbing that I received quite a shock when the theatre lights came up, having almost forgotten that it was all mere fiction.

First praise must go to Paul Moss whose convincing portrayal of mentally unstable Alan was quite outstanding. His performance could be at times wonderfully comic, and at others utterly heart-breaking, whilst always remaining completely believable. The depth and intensity of his performance belied the fact that he is only a fresher, and I’m sure a great many more fantastic performances will come from this talented actor.

Alan’s parents, Simon Radford and Beth Greenwood, gave touching performances as a family whose lives have been shattered by Alan’s crimes, and who become plagued with guilt that Alan’s condition is a result of their parenting. Radford’s performance as Alan’s impossibly controlling atheist father, who blames his wife’s strict Christian practices for Alan’s behaviour, particularly stood out.

Kate Hunter and Olivia Stuart- Taylor must also be commended for their performances as Magistrate Hesther Saloman and Alan’s love interest Jill Mason, both managing to shine in these smaller roles despite the domination of other characters.

The role of psychiatrist Martin Dysart presents a great challenge to the actor. He is on stage for almost the entirety of the play and must deliver some of the most complex dialogue, and although Mike Hutchinson tackled it with some success I felt his delivery sometimes lacked variation and his speech was not always clear, hampering his performance. The script also suggests that Martin is a fairly elderly man – sexagenarian Richard Griffiths played the part in the recent London revival – yet no effort was made to age Hutchinson, reducing the credibility of his performance.

Besides playing their own characters, five actors also took on the roles of the horses, transformed very effectively into the animals with the aid of beautiful metal horse masks and superb movement direction from Jenna Miller.

For me one of the most impressive aspects of this production was Jason Bainbridge’s fantastic set. The entirety of the action took place within a barn, with characters entering and exiting through the stable doors and bales of hay doubling up as psychiatrists couches. This was an effective use of the Assembly Rooms’ very limited space, and having scenes take place in a barn which was full of people yet empty of horses served to emphasise the theme of abnormality within the play.

Richard Hall’s lighting design was fantastic, and alongside the music of composer Dan Jeffries succeeded in creating a sustained atmosphere of tension.

Enormous credit must go to directors Bobbi Nicholson and Gregory Carter for taking such hugely challenging material and turning it into a production which was visually brilliant, exceptionally acted and utterly compelling.

Behind Every Great Man, There’s a Great…Photographer?

subs — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:35:37 +0000

Andy Warhol was a leading figure in pop art. Warhol’s widely diverse social circle ranged from bohemian street people to wealthy aristocrats and his life-long fascination with Hollywood inspired his celebrity portraits which he began in 1962. But what about the man who boosted his fame and kept him in the limelight?
Andy Warhol met the photographer Nat Finkelstein in 1964 and immediately recognised in him a man who could make him more famous. Here was a man who could get Warhol’s face published and generally heighten awareness of his existence. Finkelstein, who died last October, was already well established as a photographer, but he became fascinated by Warhol’s work, particularly his infamous studio, The Factory, ‘the place to be’ in New York.
That summer, Finkelstein had experienced one of Warhol’s ‘100 Most Beautiful People’ parties and observed the photogenic eccentrics with whom Warhol surrounded himself, such as Edie Sedgwick, Bob Dylan and Marcel Duchamp. From here on in Finkelstein immersed himself in Warhol’s hedonistic lifestyle and worked as a photojournalist in The Factory. He was clearly impressed by what he saw, and later wrote “I watched pop die, I saw punk being born. I participated in a cultural revolution that shook the superstructure of our society … I can’t really say what Warhol did to or for the rest of society, but he was my artistic messiah”.
Finkelstein’s natural talent for photography had him turned away from photography courses and snapped up by art directors from prestigious magazines such as Harper’s Bazaar. In September 1962 Finkelstein was commissioned by Pageant magazine to document a Pop Art “happening”. This was his lucky break, as it was his photographs of Claes Oldenburg in Greenwich Village that came to Warhol’s attention
Finkelstein’s portraits represent human frailty and failure wrapped in a sordid world of sex and drugs. Famously he photographed the beautifully tragic Edie Sedgwick, which inspired the 2006 film Factory Girl starring Sienna Miller.
While Finkelstein appears to have been fully occupied photographing beautiful people in a drug induced haze in The Factory, he was equally intent on documenting, as well as participating in, the battles for civil rights that were raging at the same time out in the real world. He was an extremely political man and he couldn’t ignore what was going on outside.
However, his talent began to get him into trouble. When he photographed policemen beating protesters at a civil rights rally in August 1965, Life magazine suppressed the photographs but Finkelstein continued to push the boundaries until, in 1969, his political activism prompted a judge to issue a warrant for his arrest.
In the 80s he returned to photography, but punctuated it by visits to Bolivia to obtain the cocaine to which he was now addicted. It took Warhol’s death in 1987 to encourage him to become clean. Bizarrely, he went to Amsterdam to achieve this.
Despite having a broad range of photographic material with extensive subject matter, his timeless and iconic works come from The Factory. He says of his experience there: “after a whole lot of living, I look upon The Factory scene like a perpetual carnival in Rio de Janeiro: beautiful girls, pretty boys, music in the air and fucking in the streets, and every once in a while somebody runs in and kills one of the guests”.

An Ice Time in London

subs — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:32:46 +0000

Doing their part to raise environmental awareness, artists worldwide have increasingly focused attention on the plight of global warming’s key animal: the polar bear.
Last Christmas the public witnessed a powerful piece of installation art in Trafalgar Sqaure, the extreme sculptor Mark Coreth’s latest project. Trafalgar Square’s Northern Terrace played host to an enormous ice bear in the run-up to Christmas, created using a combiation of ice and bronze. Coreth says of his project, “It will essentially be an ice bear and as the ice melts it will reveal a skeleton, a pool of water and a very powerful message”. And he certainly achieved his aim, as thousands of spectators gathered to watch the artist in action last year, working under the pressure and time restriction that his chosen medium forced upon him.
It was back in 2007 that Mark made his first trip to the Arctic and witnessed first-hand the receding sea ice and the effects of global warming on the Arctic’s polar bears. It was then that he decided to bring the Arctic to the general public in the hope of conveying this important message through visual art.
This isn’t the first time that artists have involved themelves in this important environmental issue. In September 2007, 1,000 miniature people slowly melted away on the steps of the central Gendarmenmarkt square, Berlin, in an effort to draw attention to melting ice caps in Greenland and Antarctica. Brazilian artist Nele Azevedo carved the figures out of ice and placed them on the steps where they began to melt within about half an hour in temperatures of around 23 degrees celsius. This created a stunning visual effect and poignantly conveyed the fragility of human life and demonstrated the physical effects of global warming.
Since 2005, Azevedo has been setting up her Melting Men in various countries around the world. Although originally intended as a critic of the role of monuments in cities, environmentalists around the world are adopting her work as climate change art. The installation spotlighted the World Wildlife Fund’s warning that melting ice could possibly cause sea levels to rise more than 3.3 ft by 2100 but interestingly, Azevedo does not class herself as an active climate change artist. The Melting Men installation “was conceived as a critical view of the official historical monuments”. Many viewed the work as comment on the issue of global warming, to which she responded, “I’m glad it can also speak of urgent matters that threaten our existence on this planet”, which is something we all should dwell on..

College pool – a complex and competitive challenge

subs — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:36:10 +0000

It’s Wednesday evening. You head down to the JCR for a drink and a quick game of pool. To your annoyance, you are unable to even see the table due to a huddle of college pool players in the middle of a match. There’s at least a fiver’s worth of 50p’s on the side of the table, and the message is clear: “Baize reserved indefinitely.”

This is the only time in the last fortnight you have actually wanted a game, and resentment builds so quickly that the idea of strolling over, grabbing a cue, snapping it on your knee and walking away without a word momentarily proposes itself as a possible course of action. But no, it will have to be just the drink for you tonight.

Were you however to wander over to the edge of the invisible pool sphere that engulfs the table, you would observe a peculiar and intriguing world. (Cue David Attenborough voiceover) “Here we have the college pool players in their natural habitat.” Welcome to a world in which those who do not have a suitable nickname (something like James ’snooker’ Smith) will be slowly killed off in a pub-sport equivalent of natural selection, and those who don’t possess their own cue…well, let’s not even go there.

As you look in, as still as possible so as to not alert them to your presence, it becomes apparent that they are speaking a language you have never really heard before. Some words sound familiar but the overall meaning remains out of reach. The jargon-speakers are clearly the only ones to have survived the deterioration of the previous table and into a new era.

“Is it touching?”

“Yeah. I reckon the only option is go for the double, avoid the kiss, and leave the white near baulk.”

“Or use a triple cushion escape with a trace of right hand side, leave him with nothing on.”

“No, he’s got an easy safety from there.”

For the life of you, you just can’t understand why he’s not going to pot the red that’s right in front of the white. And for some reason, when his attempted pot doesn’t go in, but stays in front the pocket, his team mates give a ripple of applause – “played Roger.”

To comprehend all the pool-talk the best option is, as with any language, complete immersion. Becoming a member of the college pool team is probably not an option, so that will have to be left aside. The reason for not potting an easy ball is always that no better position can be gained from doing so, and leaving a ball over a pocket has the benefit of blocking it from your opponent. All this can be picked up quickly enough.

Most of the time they seem to take an age to decide what shot to play. When team mates are whispering to themselves though, and not allowed to help the players at the table, playing one shot when there was a better alternative is rarely revealed to you in an arm-round-the-shoulder manor by the rest of the squad.

Unfortunately for everyone else in the JCR who fancy a frame as well, seeing one of the pool teams leave the table at about 9:30 does not signal the end of the match. Half way through there is the mandatory beer leg, and the losing team trudge off to the bar. There remains at least a couple of quid on the side of the table.

As an observer, there are few no-go areas. Firstly, don’t make the mistake of advising players what shot to attempt. The chances are they will be considering something more tactful, and it’s against the rules for players to take suggestions. Secondly, try not to walk in their eye-line as they line up a shot. Every college pool player likes to think of themselves as Ronnie 0′Sullivan, and may react a la Christian Bale to such a distraction. On the other hand, always remember that any sort of crowd is welcomed: why the rugby lads get all the attention when we are exhibiting talent of far more subtlety, is a question that bubbles under the surface of every half decent pool player.

To see a good college player in full swing is impressive, and as you perch on the edge of this strange environment, try to appreciate the skill involved when four or five balls drop in succession before the black is also cleared up and the frame is over with a handshake. “And after waiting for his opportunity, the college player pounces. His prey has left themselves open to attack, and he takes his chance with devastating effect.” Attenborough again.

Don’t wish you owned a specialised chalk, and don’t wish you spoke the language of the baize, but do your best not to resent the table-hogging that occurs every week. Some of your college pool team are in actual fact very very good at a difficult game.

Democracy challenged in the Ukrainian elections

subs — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:09:17 +0000

The Ukrainian presidential election has, for perhaps obvious reasons, not entirely caught the imagination of the British public. But what has been going on with our friends in the East certainly isn’t without consequence; it emphasises the arrogance and incompetence of the liberal governments who dominate Western Europe.

Viktor Yanukovych has narrowly beaten Yulia Tymoshenko in the presidential run off, the incumbent Viktor Yushchenko having been eliminated in the first round of voting. Bully for Mr Yanukovych, you might say. But the narrative strands, when a picture of Ukraine over the past few electoral cycles emerges, might make you think a little. Remember the Orange revolution of 2004, when Mr Yushchenko was swept to power by a people’s uprising, a moving display of popular support? That very man couldn’t buy a vote this time round. And who was the man deposed from office then? Mr Yanukovych. What was the spur for the mass protests in the capital’s main square back in 2004? The elections just held had been rigged in favour of Mr Yanukovych. You might also remember seeing that this revolutionary hero, Mr Yushchenko, had severe dermatological problems. Indeed, he was poisoned and disfigured by supporters of Mr Yanukovych. A little surprising the newly minted president didn’t decide back then that his career had perhaps run its course.

And yet here he is, having beaten Mrs Tymoshenko, the soon to be deposed Prime Minister and former ally of Mr Yushchenko. The two separated after vituperative attacks on the other about the handling of the Ukrainian economy, where GDP has shrunk by a nearly unbelievable 15%. This has left the path open for Mr Yanukovych to occupy the power vacuum, promising to grip hold of the economic crisis by implementing stronger ties with Russia. Indeed, the Kremlin supported Yanukovych to the bitter end of the Orange Revolution, and his power base lies in the Eastern, Russian speaking half of the country where many still describe themselves as foremost ‘Russian’. On a side-note, Yanukovych is a self-styled ‘hard-man’ who twice, in his youth, went to prison for violent crimes.

This should be the point where the Western European commentator holds her head in her hands, bemoaning the lurch towards a Putin-styled and allied authoritarian government that embodies both the most hideous oligarchic free marketeering mixed with iron-standard repressive state controls. And indeed it is difficult for us to be anything but disappointed that the democratic fervour of the socially liberal revolution has been extinguished so quickly. But the blame for this shouldn’t go to some ‘backwards’ electorate or to the increasingly worrisome grasping hands of Mr Putin. The fault lies with Yushchenko’s disastrous administration, and the western powers that at once supported and marginalised the people’s project.

Personal idiocies aside, Yushchenko and Tymoshenko presided over an administration where the economy was mishandled, where the liberal reforms demanded by the Kiev protests of 2004 were not carried out. These leaders have been found to be ideology-free. There was no notion of help coming from the west, of course, from whom a hand of friendship and an E.U. membership card would have helped greatly. Not only has Ukraine, like so many former Soviet bloc states, suffered disastrously from trying to develop the ideological hyper-competitive capitalism that the west offered as an example, but also suffers now from the mistakes of these very country’s avaricious greed. The death of the left in Italy, France, Germany, and, yes, Britain, feeds across Europe. As countries look to the United States, proper European integration is ignored, and even countries able to obtain E.U. membership are marginalised in the internal affairs of the organisation. Who, then, can blame the Ukrainian people from turning east?

Tymoshenko herself realised the importance of befriending Putin; both main parties were, in effect, pro-Russian. Both needed the economic support of Russian gas; the constant that could re-start the economy after Western degradation left it dead. Yanukovych, is, also, more than just a demagogue. He will not stand being a Moscow puppet, even if he does preach co-operation. He remains committed to Ukrainian E.U. membership and human rights improvement. International observers appear to agree the elections are were model of transparency. Frankly, his economic policy, premised on the aforementioned gas, looks the more solid.

Eastern European states are better off looking east while in Western European the right dominates with anti-humanitarian economics, and the left wallows in its own lack of ideas. Some of the stories coming out of Russia are deeply troubling; but with the alternatives proffered, who could argue with the Ukrainian who deems a Kiev-Moscow alliance “a price worth paying”.

Mrs Tymoshenko threatens to march on Kiev if her defeat is confirmed, arguing electoral interference and a return of the bad old days. If the positive reports on the election’s conduct are to be believed, this would be an anti-democratic nostalgia show, making this writer increasingly sympathetic to Mr Yanukovych. Though maybe, when camping out in central Kiev, Tymoshenko could invite some Brits, French and Germans along, and have a good think about how to solve their own chronic, listless, incompetence…

Lies, damned lies and statistics

subs — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:48:13 +0000

It’s a profound irony that this often used quote is attributed to Benjamin Disraeli; no evidence can be found to suggest that the British Prime Minister wrote this in any of his work. Indeed, the earliest known usage of the term was made years after his death.

What cannot be doubted is the truth behind the words. For several decades, politicians have sought to manipulate information to produce a statistic that will be well received by the public. Whether it is a reduction in the time patients spend on the NHS waiting list, or the nuclear capabilities of WMD in Iraq, it has been shown that public opinion can be swayed by the presentation of certain facts or the dressing up of suspicion into confirmed intelligence reports.

Statistics, however, often conceal the actual truth – not as a result of careful manipulation, but rather by accidence. A football analogy illustrates this perfectly. The record of being England’s highest goal scorer in a calendar year does not belong to any of the prestigious candidates, such as Lineker, Owen or Rooney, that may initially spring to mind. No, the honour is bestowed on Peter Crouch with his 11 goals in 2006. Yet if you included Crouch in a list of England’s greatest strikers you would be laughed at. Despite his robotic dancing and his prolific record, Crouch’s ability continues to be questioned, with pundits recalling that 4 of his goals were scored against Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago.

This illustrates the problem of accepting statistics at face value. The college points table for sport is a perfect example of this. At the moment Grey sit atop on 1055 points, Collingwood second on 960 and Hild Bede third on 903. At the end of a sporting season, clichés are often heard telling people that the ‘table doesn’t lie’. As a Hild Bede student I know it does – Hild Bede is the greatest college. Yet putting aside my bias, I know this, logically isn’t true either. This is because of the deeply flawed system adopted by Team Durham to judge which college is best.

A little known fact is that college league points are determined by league rather than sport, so that a team win produces 16 points if you play in the Premiership, 8 in Division 1, 5 in Division 2 and 3 in Division 3. On the face of it, this seems like a fair system. Except it isn’t. The points system should be weighed heavily in favour of major sports such as football, netball, rugby and hockey. As it is not, it means that other, less mainstream sports, such as table tennis and ultimate frisbee share equal footing. Both sports are undeniably equally enjoyable and challenging. As President of Hild Bede Table Tennis I should know. Yet, I’m also a player in the 6th college football team and there is something slightly amiss when the success of 2 teams of 6 table tennis players generate more points through their performances than the entirety of the 6 football teams in Hild Bede. Put in even starker terms, 12% of Hild Bede’s college points have been earned by less than 1% of its students.

If major sports were weighted ahead of others, the college league table would undoubtedly look different. Although Hild Bede does have a football team in the promotion pool, it can safely be argued that the college would not be riding high in third position if table tennis had not accrued 112 of the college’s 903 points. As a Hild Beder, this is something of an embarrassment when it is considered we are the largest undergraduate college in Durham. Indeed, when several sports are scrutinised, it becomes obvious that Grey would not be at the top as their position is much to do with the points they have gained from being unbeaten in both the table tennis and ultimate frisbee leagues.

Consequently if you were to weight points to major sports, perhaps defined by the number of players involved across the leagues, it is clear, if unsurprising, which college rises to the top. In the men’s leagues, Collingwood are top of the Premiership for rugby and hockey. Likewise, in the women’s leagues, Collingwood are top of the Premiership for Netball and running a close second at hockey. Considering this success, you may expect Collingwood to be doing slightly better in the college league table. Except they are disadvantaged (admittedly through no fault but their own) in that they don’t have that missing ingredient: a good table tennis club.

As a table tennis player, it’s nice to know that a small personal victory may add up to a greater college tally. Maybe I should just accept that combined ranking tables are often flawed. A quick glance at the FIFA world rankings would lead to the assumption that Greece are the 12th best national side. All football fans know this isn’t true. However, if nothing else, rankings tables are a great way to debate sporting brilliance. Just remember not to rely on the facts.

All information correct as of 4/2/10.

Mandelson strikes back at universities

subs — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:28:56 +0000

Lord Mandelson has struck back at university lecturers and administrators, accusing them of using “extreme rhetoric” to spread alarmist claims about funding cuts.

Higher Education faces meltdown, critics have claimed, as universities have been demanded to save £449m in 2011-12. Spending on teaching has been slashed by 1.6 per cent, while building budgets face a 15 per cent reduction.

In a speech at the first Lord Dearing Memorial Conference in Nottingham on the 11th February, the Business Secretary denied the cuts would bring universities to their knees, accusing academics of being “set in aspic”.

He added: “Much of the rest of the public sector will receive similar constraints in the course of this year or soon after. The appearance that universities are in the frontline of public spending cuts is an illusion created by that need to plan ahead”.

Mandelson went on to state it would be wrong to guarantee every applicant a full-time place at university, insisting: “Our best further education colleges and apprenticeships can provide a preparation for the world of work that compares in its excellence and market value to the best of our universities”.

Many remain sceptical however. Sally Hunt, University and College Union general secretary, said: “It is quite outrageous that students who have been told by this government to aim higher their entire school lives are now having the door slammed shut in their faces”.

“Cuts have consequences, and Lord Mandelson would be better off listening to the academy’s concerns rather than rudely dismissing them.”

Why no platform policies are detrimental to defeating the BNP

subs — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:26:27 +0000

One of the major sources of tension between Durham University and the NUS over the recent cancellation of the BNP debate has been the no platform policy. It is a policy that the NUS showcase, so proud are they of this sparkling piece of union legislation. At the NUS annual conference last year, executive officers proudly stood up and shouted emotive rhetoric about how the BNP did not recognise all of their members and how refusing to debate with them would destroy their small clutches of power and ensure a victory for freedom for all.

Sadly, it hasn’t quite worked out like that. The BNP vote is increasing, and I believe these no platform policies are partly responsible. To clarify, the NUS (amongst other organisations) refuses to allow the BNP to partake in a debate if any of their (NUS) members are also in the debate. Naturally, therefore, they felt compelled to step in when Durham proposed their contentious debate. Rather than simply attacking the NUS over this one move, we should examine the general no platform policy itself.

BNP voters are a fairly homogenous bunch; white, low-paid, and live in deprived areas. I do not deny that some, if not many, possess racist views, and perhaps will never be tempted to vote for another party, but many feel simply neglected by the major parties. I do not wish to criticise the Labour party here, but since the Blairite move into the centre-ground, Labour have undoubtedly lost their focus on (amongst others) white, low-paid, deprived area voters. If the party that your family have consistently voted for suddenly start being interested in securing the votes of the professional classes (as happened in 1997) it cannot be surprising that they have felt betrayed. There are still many supporters of nationalisation, for example, in this country, who, again, feel let down by Blair.

In this atmosphere of political betrayal, voters are likely to turn to outside parties. The BNP message is simple; immigrants are taking your jobs and money. It cannot be surprising that is a popular philosophy for a small section of easily persuaded voters. They feel that the BNP actually are listening to their concerns (which no other party does) and hence, give them their vote.

This could be rectified, but no platform policies are actually making things worse. If you vote BNP and then are told that the major parties will refuse to debate with your chosen candidate and that you must be an illegitimate, racist, neo-Nazi thug, isn’t that simply going to harden your resolve that mainstream society is not listening to you? If you are an ‘illegitimate’ voter, then why should you vote for a main party? Doesn’t that mean that your vote doesn’t really matter? It leaves you with no choice but to vote BNP; the only party who will actually recognise you. We need to engage with these voters; we need to explain why anti-immigration policies are a bad idea, why racism is unacceptable and win back their vote. Most of all, we need to show that we do actually care about their opinions. If we debate with the BNP, we can achieve these goals. They have no real legitimate views; they thrive off hatred of other parties. I know some BNP voters will never change, but perhaps David Cameron wasn’t being so stupid when he proposed that we ‘hug a hoodie’; maybe it’s time we start hugging disgruntled voters. The NUS is wrong not just to stop the Union debate, but to refuse all contact with the BNP. As students, we can use our intelligence to show their flaws and backwards views and win over their voters. The worst thing to do would be to continue ignoring them.

DSU President’s Column

subs — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:17:16 +0000

As I sit here writing this it is the day after the husts for the Sabbatical and Trustee elections in DSU. It is hard to believe that it was a year ago that I was standing in front of a room full of people, asking for their votes. It is quite satisfying to be able to say that it is now someone else’s turn! By the time this is published, voting will have opened and campaigning will have begun in earnest. Hopefully you will already have received my university-wide e-mail, been given information from your college DSU reps and maybe even seen the candidates campaigning or one of the DSU officers enthusing about voting.
This year, we have voting stations in colleges and also in Riverside Café and the main library, broadening the election to truly focus on livers-out as well. Plus of course you can log on to any computer, at any time, and vote at your convenience. We’re aiming for a huge turnout this year of over 30%, which would be one of the highest turnouts in the country. But obviously we can only achieve this with your help; so make sure you log onto vote.dsu.org.uk and make your voice heard. Voting is the primary way to have a say in who runs your union, and the direction it will take for the year ahead.
I’m really proud of the fact that the majority of our elections this year are contested. When I stood to be President, I stood in the only contested election of the set. Not only is winning a contested election more satisfying for the candidates themselves, it also gives you all a real choice, which is the most important thing of all. This year we have two candidates standing to President; a post-graduate student and a current JCR President, we have three candidates standing to be Education and Welfare Officer, two candidates standing to be Societies and Student Development Officer, including an international student and a grass roots society exec member, and five students standing for four positions of Student Trustee.
The fact that such a diverse range of people are standing demonstrates how we have tried to open up DSU this year, making it more accessible and relevant to students. I’m not saying we’re perfect, and there’s certainly still a long way to go but I do believe that we have made some very significant strides in the right direction. For the first time, DSU officers have been getting out into colleges, we’ve created new ways for students to engage with us and had record breaking turnouts in referendums, asking students exactly what they think about issues.
As the only over-arching representative body of the University and a central place for students to come together and make their voices heard, it’s vital that your officers to have as big a mandate as possible. If you think there are things which need changing in the union, then voting is the first place to start.