Our April edition marks the last issue...
Transcript of Our April edition marks the last issue...
Our April edition marks the last issue for NewSouthendian in the 2017/18 academic year. And it has been a fantastic year – we’ve under-gone a much-needed style change, commentated on all manner of events throughout the school year, and offered up plenty of insight into all kinds of issues, including music, sport and culture.
As the cover suggests, NewSouthendian has added a slight twist of controversy to our last outing. From positively medieval theories of the Earth be-ing flat, to why school rules aren’t all they’re hyped up to be, we want to get people talking with this issue. We’ve also highlighted some shocking stories of dehumanisation from Africa and Asia, as well as more clandestine practices form the world of cycling.
On behalf of the team at NewSouthendian, I’d like to wish everyone the best of luck with their up-coming exams; whether they are just end-of-year tests, or A-levels at the business end of exam sea-son; and of course everything in between.
Enjoy the last issue and we’ll see you in autumn!
Are school rules too restrictive?
On Monday through Friday, we walk into a
professional working environment, where all
year twelve students should study four AS
levels (to many students’ delight!) and
mobile phones must never be in sight in the
corridor. When in class, we must stay in
silence unless spoken to, if you even look in
your form diary, you will be asked to stand
up whenever somebody other than a
student walks in, unless asked not to.
So what’s all the fuss about? Some of these rules and policies seem outdated and frankly, pompous and unnecessary. We live in a modern world where phones are commonplace, people no longer have status unless they earn it and young people are becoming more and more independent.
Well firstly, we are told that school rules are to help us grow into individuals who are responsible and know what is right and wrong. However, even the slightest practical things such as looking at a phone to check the time during lesson, texting a parent in-between lessons in a corridor and looking at BBC News are frowned upon, despite how useful and responsible these uses are. I understand why some are complaining about the overly excessive use of mobile phones in school, however a blanket ban,
like they have at other schools or even just being shouted down the corridors which is what happens here, is not at all useful and causes even more disruption than it has to.
The second reason schools stick to policies, rules and traditions is because they want us to end up being happy and healthy individuals...well, some of them have the reverse impact. At my old school, tradition was not often thought of, and as a result it felt more like a business which did have a negative impact on some people's well-being as not enough emphasis was put on values. However, some schools stick to tradition so much that people can’t speak freely and, in some cases, are discouraged from having any relationships with the threat of expulsion, as is the case in a private school environment. Such policies bottle young people up to the point that when they are released from what feels like a prison, they instantly snap and start behaving inappropriately, which has many detrimental impacts.
So what can schools do to stop this
becoming a serious problem? In my view,
do not hark back to traditional and keep
long-lasting policies, but do what is needed
to keep students happy, healthy and
hopeful. Even if it means tolerating mobile
phone use a little bit more, or allowing
someone to drop an AS subject.
If students know that they are
supported in doing what they
want to do at their best, and
have that forceful pressure
lifted off them, maybe people
will begin to do better and
students may end up being
much less depressed,
something we all want.
Adam Chinnery
School Rules: Are they useful?
State Racism Against White South
African Farmers: The Untold Story The blatant and public genocide of farmers with European descent in South Africa is truly disgusting and completely unjustifiable, no matter what your political affiliation. But perhaps what is even worse is the media's complete failure in reporting the issue.
Now this isn't going to be some alt-right sob story about how privileged people are oppressed. It's much more than that. Attacks on over 3,000 white farmers in South Africa since 2010, leading to the deaths of more than 400 innocents, is far worse than any form of casual discrimination, and nobody can deny that.
These deaths are the result of a new divisive government policy of Land Reform. A policy, I might remind you, which was adopted in Zimbabwe and
heavily contributed to a national malnourishment rate of 45%, as maize production in particular dropped by a third. Ironically, this led even former Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe to admit the reforms were flawed, which I think tells us something.
The reforms, in simple terms, would oversee the transition of farmland away from experienced white South Africans to the majority ethnic group, which admittedly may, at a glance, seem fair as 72% of profitable farm owners have European heritage. However, it is the way in which the South African government has gone about this, and the sheer level of violence that has been incited, that makes what is borderline acceptable into an affair which is damn right disgusting.
The crack down on minority farmers goes beyond subtle legislation - which by the way grants the govern-ment the right to take away farmland without explanation - and has even ventured into the unacceptable with politicians openly encouraging attacks. For example the leader of the EFF (the main opposition party), Julius Maleema, proposed this legislation in the first place to take on "the criminals that stole our land" and in 2016 also stated that he was "not calling for the slaughter of white people...at least for now". And the governing African National Congress (ANC) has been just as bad, its behaviour perhaps being epitomised by the public singing of "Shoot the Boers" by the ANC's youth wing - a song which openly calls for violence against white farmers. Ultimately both of these examples make it fairly obvious that both the government and the opposition have formed an anti-white consensus, seeing farmers that didn't decide their ancestry being left brutalised and without their property as a consequence.
We must not allow this despicable hate to continue.
Innocent lives have been put at risk, for what? Farm raids are common and leave families without money, tools or cars, ruining the livelihoods of those who were lucky enough not to be served a fate even worse. In this world, many farmers consider themselves lucky to be beaten, normal to watch their wives raped, and not too bad to see their children brutalised; as long as they are able to keep their lives at the end of it. Such a situation should never become normal, and we must take it upon ourselves to report such instances without fear or unease, as the history of racism in South Africa does not justify the actions we see today.
There are people out there that have started to tackle the dangerous and pressing crisis in South Africa, but more needs to be done. 17,000 people across Europe and 16,000 across the US have signed petitions crying out for President Trump and Mr Juncker to open their borders for farmer refugees from South Africa.
Awareness is the biggest problem however, as barely any media outlets are producing any material on the crisis, in case they are labelled "pro-apartheid". But we at the NewSouth-endian are the true defenders of social justice and thus see beyond petty and inaccurate accusations.
At the end of the day, we should all tackle discrimination wherever we may find it, no matter what back-ground the oppressed may have. This is called being a nice human being, not some brutal monster using hatred and legislation based on greed to gain at the expense of others.
...And even if you are horrible and
love a good ol' bashing: it doesn't
make economic sense, and only hurts
the majority in the long term!
Owen Cartey
Image
The Zodiac Killer The Zodiac Killer is perhaps one of the most sinister serial killers to have ever surfaced in the 20th century. Unlike Jack the Ripper, The Zodiac Killer was clean, precise and untraceable, especially when considering the technological advance-ments made in the investigative industry. Whilst many suspects were proposed and many theories are still bounded around the internet today, The Zodiac Killer remains as undetectable as he was when he first killed in 1968.
The Suspects:
The first suspect comes from Gary Stewart, who believes that his own father, Earl Van Best Jr., is the Zodiac Killer. He bears an uncanny resemblance to the composite sketch, and his name also matches the number of characters in the "my name is" cipher. However, although Earl Van Best Jr. looks like the composite sketch from the Paul Stine killing, he does not fit the description of the large, heavy-set man at the three previous killings. Gary Stewart also tried to test his father's DNA against the recovered 2002 Zodiac DNA, but was not allowed to, leading Gary to believe this to be a police cover-up.
The second and most famous suspect is from Robert Graysmith, who believes Arthur Leigh Allen was the Zodiac Killer. This theory is the basis for the 2007 film The Zodiac starring Jake Gyllenhaal as Robert Graysmith. On the day of the third Zodiac attack at Lake Berryessa, Allen told his family he was going to that exact location. He came home that evening covered in blood, with a bloody knife in his car. Additionally, one of Allen's friends, Don Cheney, said that Allen
referred to himself as the Zodiac before the killer publicly did. Cheney also said Allen planned on hunting people. When Allen was interviewed, he said his favourite book was The Most Dangerous Game, a book about a man who hunted humans, and a book referenced by the Zodiac in his first letter to the press. He was also wearing a Zodiac-brand watch with the same Zodiac symbol the killer used. When police searched his trailer home, they found small, dissected animals, bloody knives, and sexual devices, but no direct evidence of the murders. In 1974, Allen was convicted of child molestation and went to jail for three years. Coincidentally, during this time, no Zodiac letters were received. In 1987, an inmate told police that Allen admitted to him that he murdered Paul Stine. In 1991, Mike Mageau, the man who survived the second Zodiac attack, picked Allen out of a lineup of photos as the killer. This led the police to search Allen's home again, and this time they found bomb formulas, constructed bombs, and tapes about the Zodiac killer. A year later, Allen died from a suspected heart attack. It is worth noting that Allen's DNA was compared with the Zodiac's stamp saliva and it was not a match. But it is believed that Allen had a habit of letting other people lick his stamps for him. Allen also underwent handwriting analysis, which wasn't a match either. Finally, Allen does not look like the composite from the Paul Stine killing, but is still considered to be a prime suspect.
The last suspect comes from retired police officer Harvey Hines, who believes Lawrence "Kane" Kaye is the Zodiac. In 1962, Kane was involved in a car accident that resulted in brain damage
influencing his behaviour. A psychologist claimed Kane was "losing the ability to control self-gratification." Additionally, the Zodiac's second victim, Darlene Ferrin, had a sister who said Kane followed and harassed Darlene in the weeks leading up to the murder. Also, Don Fouke, the cop who had possibly come into contact with the Zodiac after the Paul Stine killing, apparently said that in the hundreds of pictures he had been shown over the past 20 years, Kane was best likeness of the man he saw that evening. Kane also lived near the victims, or near the locations of their deaths. Kane moved to South Lake Tahoe in 1970, and that year a possible Zodiac victim named Donna Lass disap-peared. Coincidentally, she worked at the same hotel as Kane. Finally, in 1970, Kathleen Johns and her baby were tricked into getting a ride from the Zodiac. He told her he was going to kill her and throw her baby out after her. Johns was able to jump out of the car with her baby and escape. Although this is an uncon-firmed Zodiac encounter, the Zodiac possibly confirms this interaction in a
letter. In a lineup of photos, Kathleen Johns points to Lawrence Kane as the man who tried to kill her. Kane's handwriting did not match the Zodiac letters, but also could not be ruled out. Also, Kane resembles the description of the killer at the Paul Stine murder scene, but not the large, heavy-set description of the Zodiac in the first three murders.
The Killings
The first killings occurred on Dec. 20, 1968, in Vallejo, California. The two teen victims were shot and killed while sitting in a parked car in a gravel parking area. Investigators attempted to piece together what had happened, but the killer had left behind no trace and, as the two victims had been killed instantly, there were no eyewitness accounts.
The next crime occurred on July 4, 1969, only a few minutes away from the first killings. The killer approached a parked car with a flashlight and shot the two passengers before walking away and coming back to shoot them again. One of the victims, Michael Mageau, survived and was able to give a description of the killer: He was a young, white male, aged between twenty six and thirty years old, stocky, weighing around 200 lbs or larger, 5’8”, had light brown curly hair and a large face.
A few weeks later, the San Francisco Chronicle, the San Francisco Examiner, and the Vallejo Times-Herald all received identical handwritten letters from some-one claiming to be the killer. The letters included three different codes that the Zodiac claimed would reveal his identity. A couple days later, the San Francisco Examiner received another letter, in which the killer referred to himself as the Zodiac for the first time, writing, "This is the Zodiac speaking."
Mary Jane Kelly
Image
On Sept. 27, 1969, in Napa, California, a picnicking couple was stabbed by a man in an executioner-style hood with the Zodiac symbol on his chest. But one of the victims, Bryan Hartnell, survived! He was able to give a description of the killer. Hartnell described his attacker as measuring between 5’8” and 6’0”, having dark brown hair and being heavy-set, weighing between 225 lbs and 250 lbs.
Finally, on Oct. 11, 1969, in San Francisco, taxi driver Paul Stine was shot in the head by his passenger. A teenager across the street heard the shot and got a good look at the perpetrator, and so did two other witnesses. In the chaos of the situation, the police dispatcher somehow incorrectly identified the suspect as a black male, even though he was described differently. The neighbour described a white male, twenty five to thirty years old, 5’8” to 5’9”, of a stocky build with a reddish-brown crew cut and heavy-rimmed glasses. When two police officers, Donald Fouke and Eric Zelms, drove past a stocky, white male with heavy-rimmed glasses a few blocks away from the scene, they did not question him, since he didn't fit the dispatcher's description. The Zodiac would later mock this interaction in a letter, making it likely that the two cops drove by and saw the nation's most notorious serial killer at the time without even knowing. A composite sketch was drawn based on descriptions by the two witnesses at the Paul Stine killing. It has become the most famous image of the Zodiac.
A coded message was sent to the San Francisco Chronicle, seemingly from the Zodiac Killer himself. The letters were sent for some time, but had a hiatus from 1971 - 1974 where all contact was cut off, before he sent one last letter claiming to have committed 35 murders.
The SF police department was able to extract a partial genetic profile from a Zodiac letter from the saliva on the stamp in 2002. It wasn't enough to conclusively identity a single person, but was enough to eliminate many of the previously considered suspects.
While still remaining the most notorious cold case in America, being a household name up there with Jack the Ripper and Ted Bundy, the case is high profile enough that many people are still invested in finding out the true identity of the killer. The brutality and high-profile nature of the murders only adds onto the thirst for answers shared by both the friends and families of the victims, and the general public.
Liam Marsh Chloe-Anne Morris
ADVERTISMENT
The Bride kidnapping culture in Kyrgyzstan
History has proved that this is one of the most de-structive phrases acting to justify outdated and old-fashioned customs, as the notion of tradition of-ten prevents humanity from evolving. Although it is easy for those raised with cosmopolitan ideas to look onto other cultures and deem them too feudal and backwards, in this instance I would say it is justified. I like to write about things that interest me and that I identity with, but I also like to write about acts of sig-nificance that I feel I should address. I may not hold any power – yet - but in this small way I do my part.
We often forget that gender equality is something that may never be realised in parts of the world. The bride kidnapping culture in Kyrgyzstan, the traditional way off getting married, is an example of this. Groomsmen plan the kidnap together and grab the bride off the street to take back to the grooms’ house where female relatives hold her to convince her that marrying him is the right idea. Vices documentary featured filed instances of kidnapping and male family member jokes about being careful and ensuring “her running away” is avoided.
The practice is most common in rural areas where most of all married women are kidnapped. Although the practice is illegal, not many policemen realise this and often few actually care. As well as this, some girls may already be in relationships but, this has no signif-icance to the family of the groom and any previous relationships no longer carry any significance.
Despite claims of the practice being a tradition, the practice has been popularised by the Film “Boz salkyn” released in 2007 which was a pro kidnapping film which resulted in many couples naming their daughter Abseba after the protagonist of the film. Abdyshova Zyinagul a mother of a kidnap victim who was kidnapped at night when she wasn’t home, stat-ed the kidnap destroyed her daughter's plans for her future, causing depression. However, whilst her parents took her back, the community put pressure on them, condemning them as bad: “saying it is wrong to take her back this is our culture”.
Suicide rates and spousal abuse is higher amongst kidnap marriage couples. In the documentary the future groom stated he was “nervous but excited” with a visibly upset girl in the van restrained by eight men and a crowd of elderly women consoling her stating she “would be happy eventually”. The reason-ing behind the humiliating kidnapping is explained by a male elder: "a girl who accepts a marriage proposal
is too eager and desperate", but a girl who says no is an innocent example of the significance of a female’s virtue. The proposal is accepted when the girl “consents” by eating, representing that she accepts the husband’s way of life and has been worn down to the point where she accepts her fate as a new bride. The marriage cloth is then literally forced onto her head and the groom’s family beg her not to remove it. The groom justified the kidnapping to a concerned cameraman by saying that it is normal for a bride to be afraid and that the groom’s family go to the bride’s house and apologise by giving the family a sheep in return to smooth the kidnap over. Obviously a woman and sheep are clearly of the same value.
Many citizens claim that the practice has roots in tradition whereas it began towards the end of the Soviet rule when students were put under pressure by family members to not marry other students from their universities. Young adults were now being en-couraged towards education and young marriage was discouraged with the banning of dowries a response to the practice. Therefore, kidnappings were organised to defy both sides of the family. The thought of those innocent girls, girls who definitely do not consent to being kidnapped, is chilling and may result in the dimming of their female aspirations. A wife may simply tolerate her husband and may have to suffer a loveless marriage for the rest of her life.
After the wedding night, bride sheets are hung to
prove that the wife is no longer a virgin. Also, as if
this is not bad enough, brides are often trapped in
and are unable to leave the marriage due to pressure
from family and friends and the overall view that she
is no longer pure as she has spent a night with a
man. Often, when one tries to escape, the groom
spreads lies that he has deflowered her and robbed
her off her virtue to leave her with meek marriage
prospects and no choice but to return. The over-
whelming sense of hopelessness amongst all of the
females in the documentary could be argued to be a
“tradition” in itself. To know that your grandmother
was kidnapped, your mother was kidnapped and later
in your life you will be as well, must burden young
women with the idea that their own futures are out of
their control. Girls as young as 15 are kidnapped by
older men and are expected to stop their education
because of a circumstance that they had no choice in.
In order to enact change there must be an agent of
change. It’s the 21st century and this tradition is
more of a robbery; a robbery of freedom, a robbery of
potential and a robbery of love.
Tomi Loye
When "I do" means nothing
The turn of phrase La Nouvelle Vague meaning New Wave in French applies itself to the history of French Cinema which spanned the years 1959 to 1960. Starting with a straight-forward, journalistic label applied to the youths of 1958, the term Nouvelle Vague soon brought together a whole generation of cinema lovers who began their feature-length films at the end of the fifties. Some individuals, who were already being identified by their short-film outputs, were providing the impetus for the movement. Among these individuals we find, notably, François Truffaut, Jean-Luc Goddard, Claude Chabrol, Éric Mohrer et Jacques Rivette.
A cinematographic phenomenon quite paradoxical, the Nouvelle Vague was made up of screenwriters, events, books, and the extremely diverse concepts and ideas of the director.
The Nouvelle Vague appeared as a formidable movement – perhaps even a tiny revolution – in so far as it allowed for new creators to attempt to renew French cinema. You could say that the sole common trait among the talented creators of Nouvelle Vague was their willingness to distance themselves from the general consensus of what was deemed ‘quality cinema’ to the profit of more private creations, with their out of the ordinary methods: a very small budget, a reduced team, unfamiliar actors, natural settings and lack of authorisation form the Centre of Cinematography and the moving image.
The 1959 Cannes Film Festival essentially belonged to Nouvelle Vague, represented by Les Quatres Cents Coups, by François Truffaut, upon whom the prize for Best Director was bestowed. The following summer began the creations of À bout de souffle by Godard and Signe du lion by Rohmer – whose respective
plots take place in a bizarre Paris – while Rivette had just finished Paris nous appartient. Safe to say, the movement had taken flight.
Dating the demise of the phenomenon that
was Nouvelle Vague proves to be difficult
however. The first crisis of a series of commer-
cial failures was seen in 1962; and certain
films were no longer commercially distributed.
Alongside this, the Nouveaux filmmakers
emphasised the existing gap between their
creative originality and the receptiveness of
the cinema’s audiences, which, despite
everything, remained, and still remain, a mass
audience. The producers themselves support-
ed the films that best conformed to the criteria
of the general public. But, at any rate, even if
the success of the Nouvelle Vague only lasted
two or three years, films such as À bout de
souffle or Les Quatres Cents Coups have since
become critical films of reference for the
young cinema lovers all over the world.
Jack Morson
Poignant, yet short-lived:
La Nouvelle Vague Scanning the ways in which this brief move-ment fits into the vast history of francophone cinema
On 14th of March 2018, Stephen Hawk-
ing, aged 76, passed away peacefully in
his home in the early hours of the morn-
ing. His death has been received with
much sadness, and many are keen to pay
tribute to one of the most influential and
well-known scientists of our time. So
now let's look at a brief history of the life
of Stephen Hawking.
He grew up in London and achieved a
first-class degree in physics from Oxford;
he then attended Cambridge University
to study cosmology. At 21, he was sadly
diagnosed with motor neurone disease;
however before this he was a keen horse
rider and rower. A year after being diag-
nosed, doctors told him he had only a
few months left to live, but the disease
progressed slowly and he was able to
marry his wife, Jane, with whom he had
3 children. They divorced after just over
20 years and Hawking married his nurse,
Elaine Mason in 1995, they were togeth-
er for 11 years. He amazed doctors by
living for so long with what should have
been a fatal disease, but it wasn’t easy.
He was entirely dependent on support
from others, and in 1985, he experi-
enced severe pneumonia which resulted
in him having to communicate with an
electronic voice synthesiser.
Without a doubt, he was one of the most
famous scientists of our time and his
book, 'A Brief History of Time' became a
best-seller, with over 10 million copies
sold in 35 different languages world-
wide. Hawking was determined that his
ideas and findings would be widely
available, and wanted to make it so any-
one could understand. In his book, he
talks about the concept of space and
time, and addresses the structure, origin,
development and future of the universe,
all in a manner that an unscientific mind
could understand. He wrote ‘The Uni-
verse in a Nutshell’ as a sequel in 2001.
Furthermore, he took part in projects to
find alien life.
Not only was Hawking a pioneering sci-
entist, he also had a somewhat celebrity
status and was represented several
times in film and television. He has been
portrayed in The Simpsons, The Big
Bang Theory, Futurama and Star Trek.
His voice has been used on one of Pink
Floyd’s albums and has been portrayed
by Eddie Redmayne in the 2014 film of
his life, ‘The Theory of Everything’.
It cannot be argued that Stephen Hawk-
ing was a hugely influential figure, and
his ideas will still be important in science
for many years to come; the many por-
trayals of him across the media go to
show how much of a popular celebrated
figure he will be. Following his death,
thousands more tributes are sure to be
payed to this hugely inspirational man
who gave so much to science.
Lucy Phillips
A Brief History of
Stephen Hawking
A raven impaled on a knitting needle; a man eaten alive by rats underneath the Rialto bridge; old brick stripped back to reveal a satanic shrine – all oozing in glorious technicolour lighting. This is a snapshot of the bizarre and iconic imagery that marks the work of film auteur Dario Agento, pioneer of modern horror and the Italian Giallo sub-genre. Agento began his career by writing for film magazines whilst still in high school, moving on to screenplay writing after graduation. He is best known for his work as a producer on the cult classic 'Dawn of The Dead' as well as a distinctive vibrant aesthetic with his brilliant use of gore and stories centered around the occult or supernatural. Unfortunately, the once great director has become somewhat unfashionable in recent years - perhaps his surreal style style failed to translate into the digital age – and he has not managed to recreate the magic present in his films of the 70s and 80s.
Suspiria is Agento's undisputed masterpiece and has the unfortunate timing of being the first of a trilogy, dooming the sequels Inferno (1980) and The Mother of Tears (2007) to live in its shadow.
Luca Guadagnino, director of Oscar nominee Call Me by Your Name, is planning a reboot of the horror classic starring Dakota Johnson, Chloe Grace Mortez and Tilda Swinton, however he has stressed the project is less a straight remake, "more a homage to the incredible, powerful emotion I felt when I saw it". Focusing minimally on plot, Suspiria transcends the pulp fiction and slasher films it is inspired by, and moves into the realm of pure art. Argento is meticulous in his construction of striking art deco set pieces, cultivating a refined aesthetic – everything on screen contributes to the 'out-of-time' feel of the film and gaudy reds and greens bathe the screen in a hallucinogenic glow. The violence is brilliant, with the obviously fake quality that to me makes it all the more grotesque as various beautiful young actresses thrash around in barbed wire or fall 30 feet through a glass ceiling, drenched in neon-paint so bright it bears little resemblance to the quality of real blood. If you're looking for a feminist film maker it is probably best to not get your hopes up, Argento is unashamed about his love for mutilating females in every way imaginable. “A woman in peril is emotionally affecting" he justifies "a man simply is not” however, perhaps this
THE HORROR MOVIES OF DARIO AGENTO
An insight into the director deserving of the cult classic title
is open to critical interpretation, after all it is women who are taking the centre stage even if they are getting their eyes gouged out or being set on fire.
Inferno is the 1980 follow up to Suspiria and, as was probably inevitable, failed to live up the greatness of its predecessor, receiving mixed to negative reviews at its time of release. This is a shame as on its own it more than holds up and if it hadn't had such an impossible legacy to live up to probably would have been received far better. Inferno does not possess quite the same amount of freakish beauty as Suspiria and, dare I say, sometimes lingers a little too long but still has plenty to offer in terms of style and certainly a lot more gore. The violence in Inferno is so utterly bizarre and far-fetched that it is hard not to laugh out loud, as I did during the famous rat eating scene, which only contribut-ed to my thorough enjoyment of the film. However, sometimes this cartoonish quality moves past the point of irony and becomes corny, a costume supposedly emulating 'death itself' seems more appropriate for The Muppets than the climactic scene of a horror and distracts from the action; effects that may have been passable at the time have not aged well. Nevertheless, credit must be given where it is due that the majority of effects happen on
camera without the aid of digital manipulation which can often make films feel so soulless. For example, the fire during the grand finale famously nearly spread to other nearby sets that were occupying the same studio. Overall the film holds up and definitely deserves cult status.
Agento did not just direct pure horror/slasher fics but is also considered a landmark director of the classic Giallo, a subgenre of Italian thriller that combined elements of crime fiction, exploitation, voyeurism and the traditional "whodunnit", with films like The Bird With the Crystal Plumage and Four Flies on Grey Velvet. Deep Red, one of the most critically successful Giallo films, signifies a transition for Agento between two genres. The film still consists of the archetypal black-gloved Giallo killer, stalking beautiful women with lots of point-of-view shots of the murders, but more supernatural elements are incorpo-rated, and Argento's penchant for the occult and the satanic can be seen to emerge.
So if you enjoy realism, feminism, tightly-written plots or are the type of person who complains about gore looking 'so obviously fake' in films, Dario Agento probably isn't the director for you. But otherwise. I highly recommend checking out his work because that way you can justifiably watch women getting sliced up since it's just art! Also, watching edgy, niche films just proves that you're a far more cultured person than
everyone else. Helen Stott
On 6th March, a story broke in the press of the poisoning of a man, now known to be Sergei Skripal, 68, and his daughter, Yulia, in a shopping centre in Wiltshire. More evidence has now been uncovered, declaring that Skripal was a Russian spy who was jailed in Moscow but released in 2010 and given British citizenship as a result of a spy swap between Western powers and Russia. We also now know that the nerve agent Novichok was used, a chemical developed by the Soviet Union in the 1970s. At present, it is unknown how the two victims were exposed to Novichok – a police officer who responded to the scene was also placed in intensive care, with another 21 injured.
On 12th March, Theresa May stated in the
House of Commons that it is very likely
the Russian state is responsible for this
act of terror. Vladimir Putin, an ex-KGB
agent himself, once warned that “traitors
always end in a bad way,” and certainly,
both Russia and its predecessor the USSR
have form for dealing with any loose ends
in a brutal fashion. From poisoned
umbrellas to mysterious suicides, there
have been a number of Russia-related
deaths that have happened in the UK, and
here I will explore just a select few of
these.
Georgi Markov,
September 1978
Markov was explicitly anti-communist at a time where it was not permitted to be so in the Eastern Bloc. Originally working as a novelist and playwright in Bulgaria, he moved to London in 1971 and started working for the BBC. Between 1975 and 1978, Markov broadcasted a show on the US-owned “Radio Free Europe,” giving an analysis and criticism of life in Communist Bulgaria, which was firmly within the orbit of the USSR at this point. This made him a clear enemy of the Bulgarian state and he was dealt with accordingly. On 7th September 1978 while waiting at a bus stop, having just walked across Waterloo Bridge, he was pricked with an umbrella in his thigh. That night he developed a fever, and despite being admitted to hospital, he died four days later. The exact cause of death was poisoning from a ricin filled pellet, which was contained within the umbrella. The assassin is claimed to be Francesco Gullino, believed to still be alive and free to this very day. It is speculated that the Bulgarian authorities asked the KGB, the Soviet secret police, for assistance in the assassination.
Alexander Litvinenko, November
2006
Litvinenko worked for the Russian Federal
Security Service up until 1998 when he
and several others accused the Russian
state of organising the assassination of
Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky.
Subsequently, Litvinenko was arrested the
following March, but was ultimately
acquitted in 2000. Following this, he fled
with his family to Turkey, eventually being
granted political asylum in the UK in 2001
Russia’s Reign of Poisonous Terror
A closer look at the mysterious deaths on UK soil
on humanitarian grounds. Between 2001
and 2006, Litvinenko worked closely with
MI6, MI5 and other authorities to provide
information about Russian organised crime,
including alleging that the KGB and other
Russian security services supported and
funded global terrorism – even going as far
to imply that Russia was the originator of the
London 7/7 bombings. It was clear that
Litvinenko was too dangerous for Russia to
tolerate, and on 1st November 2006, he
suddenly fell ill and was hospitalised, where
large amounts of radiation were found in his
body. Later enquiries have found that he was
poisoned by the radioactive polonium which
was slipped into his tea by two other
Russians. He died on 23rd November,
prompting international outrage and a public
inquiry that concluded that Litvinenko’s
murder was “probably personally approved”
by Vladimir Putin.
Alexander Perepilichny y,
November 2012
Out of all the examples in this article, this one is perhaps the biggest conspiracy theory, as little is known about the causes of Perepilichnyy’s death as the inquiry is still ongoing. Perepilichnyy was aiding an investment firm uncover a $230m Russian
money-laundering scheme, and the firm alleges that Perepilichnyy could have been deliberately killed as a result of attempting to uncover this scam. His death, which occurred suddenly while jogging, was to be ruled as a result of natural causes. However, tests have shown a “suspect compound” that potentially matches a type of “vegetable poison.” Furthermore, Perepilich-nyy had received threats from an organised crime group before his death, which prompted him to take out multiple life insurance policies before his death. The fact so little is known about the death does suggest something suspicious.
So, does Russia really pose a threat to our way of life? It does seem that way, at least to an extent. While some attacks are more closely linked to Russia than others, such as the attacks on Litvinenko and the recent one on Skripal, it is clear that Russia has very little regard for international diplomacy when it comes to dealing with potential threats to its regime.
As Theresa May stated, “Russia views some defectors as legitimate targets for assassina-tion,” and it certainly doesn’t seem to be fazed by the prospect of tighter sanctions or breakdowns in relations. However, it should be stated that Russia has described the allegations as a “circus,” denying all responsibility. It is unclear what will happen in the future, but these do seem to be troubling times for Russia-West relations, which are now at the lowest point since the Cold War.
Noah Sims
Image
Gun crime has always been a prominent issue for the USA, placing it extremely high in the global ranking for deaths related to gun crime (especially whilst being a developed country) and unfortunately, it still retains its high rates today. In 2014, the rate of deaths due to guns was on average 10.5 people per 100,000, with 3.5 out of 100,000 due to homicide. Although for many this may appear low, considering the extremely large popula-tion of the USA, this totalled around 34,000 deaths due to guns in 2014 alone. This shows the huge issue of gun crime in the US, and makes many question why this continues to happen- already in 2018, 2,807 people have been killed by guns and over 10,000 have been injured, shocking both US citizens and people across the world.
Whilst many of these incidents are shown
across the globe, gaining widespread
international attention, such as the Las Vegas
shooting in October 2017, killing 58, and the
recent Florida school shooting that killed 17
students and teachers, the majority of
shootings in the USA are ignored by the
global media, diminishing negative publicity
for the USA as the world’s leading economy.
For example, on 13th March 2018, a man in
North Dakota was shot and killed by police
following a car chase; after it was ‘suspected’
that he had weapons in his car. Such brutality
is not an uncommon incident in the US, with
crimes such as this happening constantly;
despite it being such a serious issue however,
the majority of them fail to gain any sort of
global recognition.
However, despite the sheer number of gun
related deaths that occur that are not heavily
mediated, many people across the world are
nonetheless aware of the atrocities that take
place inside the US, leading many to question
why it is such a common occurrence. The
answer clearly lies in America’s laws regarding
the ownership of guns. It is written into the
US Constitution that individuals have the right
to bear arms, which is enforced in 44 out of
50 states with further laws, and legally,
anyone over the age of 18 who also under-
goes a fairly brief background check, is
allowed to have a permit, thereby allowing
them to purchase a gun. However, shockingly,
in some states, people are allowed to carry
handguns without needing a permit, meaning
that basically anyone is able to purchase a
gun in certain states. The results of these laws
are shocking, the fact that for every 100
people in the USA, there are on average
101.05 guns, meaning that there are more
guns than people in the USA! In addition,
officers are allowed to shoot criminals if they
feel they are under threat, as well as citizens if
clearly carried out in self-defence. However,
sometimes the victim can be completely
innocent, or even if not entirely, do not
deserve death for their crimes.
So what could be done to prevent this? Many
argue that the USA should look to other
countries as a model to change their gun laws
Will America’s gun laws
ever be shot down? Gun crime in America - just another part of modern society
People lay tribute to the victims of the Las Vegas
shooting- the worst mass shooting on US soil
and help to reduce their rate of gun-related
deaths. Japan, for example, makes it extremely
difficult for their citizens to buy guns- they
believe that guns as a whole do not have a
role in civilian society. In addition, the vast
majority of their police do not carry guns, and
are instead trained in martial arts to prevent
the shooting of possibly innocent people. The
effectiveness of Japan’s strict regulations
regarding guns is obvious- it has the lowest
rate of gun violence in the developed world,
with only 0.6 out of 100,000 dying as a result
of guns in 2015; this is only around 760
deaths in an entire year, which is only slightly
more than the amount the USA has in one
week. This has led many to question why the
US does not look at the lack of gun violence in
other nations in comparison to them, and do
something as a result.
Of course, it is never as simple as that. Despite many marches, demonstrations and petitions to the government asking for a change in the US’s gun laws, nothing has been done. The US Constitution is codified, meaning that any change to it is hard to enforce, as it is so entrenched in society. In addition, despite the number of people who beg to have the laws changed, many of the population still argue that is a fundamental right for them to be able to own a gun, as shown in a recent survey, where 73% agreed that citizens should hold the right to bear arms. Even more scarily, 37% of Americans see mass shootings as just another inevitable part of society that can never be prevented, thereby showing the
reasoning behind a lack of motivation from the government to change gun laws, as many people just accept gun crime as the norm- after all, if the people do not seem to want change, why should the government put time, effort and money into making and enforcing that change?
Which leads on to the final question- will the
USA ever change? Eventually, the answer is
likely to be yes; as the world becomes more
interconnected, and as more and more news is
shared on a global scale, it is likely that the US
will receive even more petition from outsiders
to change its gun laws which may just about
push them to make some changes to their
system. However, being the most powerful
country in the world, they are able to, for the
most part, look over the weak attempts of
other nations to force them to change, and are
able to carry on with their own ways of life. In
addition, there seems to be a lack of a real
want for change from a large chunk of the
population, who seem to not care about it at
all, and also, the uproar that it would cause
among the vast majority of people who believe
it is their right to own a gun, is simply not
worth the effort. So in the future, yes, the US
may change their laws, when the pressure
eventually becomes too much to deal with, but
for now at least, they seem to be fully
cemented in their view that gun crime is ‘just
another part of modern society’.
Japanese police are trained in martial arts so they do not have to bear arms
Many people believe owning a gun is a right, and firmly against any changes to gun laws
Kate Fewings
Image
Outrage as Team Sky, Sir Dave Brailsford and Sir Bradley Wiggins found to have breached ethical system of racing.
Fifteen years ago, it would not have been a surprise when news broke of a top cyclist and team potentially breaking the rules by using perfor-mance enhancing drugs. However, in 2018, cycling looked to have turned a new page in its history as less riders were becoming banned for using illegal substances to enhance their performance during key tours, like the Tour de France and La Vuelta.
Whilst this may still be the case, there are growing worries about the use of legal performance enhancing drugs through the use of TUEs, standing for Therapeutic Use Exemptions. TUEs
allow for athletes to take certain drugs if they are proven by a doctor to help put a cyclist back on a level playing field due to the way they counteract medical conditions. One example of this, and the one in contention with Sir Bradley Wiggins, is a hay fever drug which would be banned by the UCI, cycling’s govern-ing body. However due to a doctor’s signature, specific cyclists are allowed to use it. What makes this more controversial is that the drug in question, triamcinolone, was a drug which cyclist Michael Rasmussen was banned for taking during his career.
Sir Bradley Wiggins has come under scrutiny due to the timings of when he takes the drug, namely before major tours. Wiggins was quick to answer this criticism by stating that he takes it at that time every year since that is when there is lots of pollen in the air, resulting in millions
Did 'Team Sky' Wheelie Know
What They Were Doing?
of people taking hay fever tablets and medication of some kind.
Wiggins’ teammate Geraint Thomas has called into question whether TUEs should exist in any form as they simply encourage the bending of rules. This is because whilst taking a TUE when it is not necessarily needed is not breaking the rules of cycling, it is breaking the ethical lines set out by the sport.
This does however bring into question whether or not the incident should even be looked at. This is because the publicity caused by this scandal, whatever the outcome, has negative connotations for everyone involved. If you are Sir Bradley Wiggins, Sir Dave Brailsford or Team Sky, then your reputation as a clean team and cyclist is brought into retrospect. This could further harm Sir Bradley as he is widely viewed as one of Britain’s most suc-cessful and influential sportsmen. Furthermore, these rumours and allegations may deter kids from getting involved in the sport, leading to a decline in uptake in the future.
As well as this, the sport of cycling is harmed by the allegations as they bring into question whether or not the sport has moved past the period of time
when drug cheats were common and almost an expected part of cycling which they had been trying so hard to get away from.
Looking at this, whilst the actions of those involved may have been stupid, unethical and questionable, looking into the matter when it is clear a rule has not been broken is not helpful as no one can be punished for what happened as no rules were broken. This means that the investigation will merely ruin the view of a sport which has had increasing members in the UK every year since 2008.
Therefore, regardless of the reason for taking the TUEs, it is arguably stupid to be looking into the case as it is just picking a hole in events which are needless. It is like building a road through a field, instead of just travel-ling 200 metres down the road to travel around it. Not only is the field ruined, but all those who use the field and may even rely upon the field for their income and life have to find something new. The investigation is only tarnishing a legacy, which by all accounts, involved lots of hard work and dedication to achieve.
Noah Sims
The New Musical Express has been at the
forefront of the ever-growing music
industry for over 60 years, entertaining
and informing the youth through the
generations. It was most popular in the
1970’s, with over 306,000 copies being
distributed. Crowds would anxiously
gather outside stations, all eagerly
awaiting the next weekly edition of NME.
To so many, the New Musical Express was
so much more than a magazine, its
physical pages forming a unique bond
and relationship between the reader and
their music, as they could see exclusive
photo-shoots and interviews with their
favourite artists, proudly hanging the
posters on their walls, like an exhibition
of what’s current in the music scene.
However, with the introduction of music
streaming sites, new music could be
discovered in a matter of seconds.
Additionally the culture of constant
accessibility in the web puts a large strain
on all journalistic enterprises, as infor-
mation and content is assumed to be free
to the consumer, thus creating a large
drop in sales of print edition magazines.
NME is yet just another magazine to
follow suit towards the online focus, that
supports itself with advertisements on the
site, as we have recently bid farewell to
other classics such as Glamour magazine,
the UK’s top 10 paper magazine that
stopped its monthly production late last
year. But without further ado, here are the
3 most notable covers to grace the front
pages.
3 In December 1980, NME
dedicated their issue to the
shooting of the legendary John
Lennon in New York, bringing a
whole community into
mourning, a week off from the
hyperactive hustle and bustle of
the music scene to pay their
respects for the tragedy.
Farewell NME Another print edition bites the dust
2 The all-too-well-known
Britpop rivalry was always
going to be a legendary
cover for NME. The great
fight between Oasis and Blur
has still not been concluded
as their respective loyal fans
will defend them to the
grave. This clever cover fur-
ther fuelled the rivalry of the
two biggest names in 90’s
rock whilst appealing to the
widest possible audience,
with supporters of either side
rushing to grab themselves a
copy.
1 Amy Winehouse’s death
also ranks highly as a mem-
orable cover, also one of
the most recent as it was
printed after her death in
2011. The powerfully strik-
ing wordless cover appears
as mostly black with a grey
scale photograph of Wine-
house with a faint smile,
capturing her at her
happiest - a touching
tribute.