Sixth Form Mercury Wilson’s School’s newest student‐run publication
Volume 2, Issue 10, September 2012
‘Tables and Plugs’: Welcome to the Future I wouldn’t want to be held It has been compared to a accountable for a decision to ‘bring‐your‐own‐phone’ call ignore the health and safety centre, a Howard League‐ regulations, so I am in no posi‐ approved prison and the tion to criticise this motive for world’s most poorly the move. But it is a great stocked IKEA. shame: just another conse‐ quence of a risk‐conscious Yes, following on from my society held hostage by health one way system rant, I’ve and safety regulations. decided to make moaning about any and every change to the sixth form a But some good news! It ap‐ habit. Call me stingy, but pears that the two‐week trial spending god knows how of freer use at lunch and break much installing meticu‐ times was successful enough lously arranged tables, to continue. complete with two plug sockets, just isn’t worth it. The old common room’s use at lunchtime encouraged people Any resemblance to actual places and situations At the end of last year a to mix more freely between is entirely coincidental number of reasons were friendship groups. However, given to justify the changes. many have already scattered. I thought I would address them all so I The results speak for themselves. 46% of The straight‐backed chairs and narrow can pretend this is a logical opinion piece students with at least three As doesn’t aisles don’t exactly make for laid back exactly scream ‘we need a private study rather than just an outpouring of rage on conversation. It’s a design feature. area’ . Regardless of whether we should a page. I am yet to hear a sixth former praise the be working, those who don’t want to conversion of the common room. Firstly, it was suggested that we needed a won’t work just because you put a table suitably quiet place to study. Funnily and a couple of plugs in front of them. Teachers aren’t meant to be populists; enough, the North Study functioned as but I still find it a great shame. I hope an this just fine last year. It was never too Elements of the sixth form disrespecting alternative can be found for use in the full ‐ surely showing lukewarm demand. It the old common room is one of the bet‐ ‘recognised non‐working parts of the was quiet: quieter than the new study ter arguments that some change was school day’. needed. There was disrespect shown to area, where the hourly senior manage‐ Author’s note: the cleaners, broken ceiling tiles and ment visits pierce the easy‐to‐ignore gen‐ Having negotiated this article’s publica‐ some interesting spectator sport varia‐ eral mutter. The only problem was when tion, I must credit the school’s willingness it was locked or busy during exam time. tions on chess. But that isn’t reason to allow its appearance. I want to make it Surely a far cheaper option would have enough to chuck wads of 50s at it in the clear that my polemic isn’t an attack on been to use the rooms left empty due to middle of a double dip. The logical con‐ any member of the sixth form team, all of clusion to litter isn’t ‘they need tables and exams as private study areas when neces‐ whom I have the utmost respect for and plugs’. sary. gratitude to. It is merely a criticism of the decision to take away the common room. What necessitated the move, however, Then there’s the softly spoken, ‘actually I was not just the desire to get us to work think you’re having a bit too much fun in that common room of yours; perhaps we harder, work quieter and work on lap‐ need a room where you have to work’, tops. It was an insurance issue. The North which is quite funny, because this is Wil‐ Study wasn’t supervised. If someone son’s and half the conversations were broke their leg in a freak private study accident, the school would be at their about the relative merits of Descartes lawyer’s mercy. and Locke anyway. By Louis Woodhead
Sixth Form Mercury, September 2012
2
Dear all, UCAS, Oxbridge, statements, references, modules … these words are becom‐ ing the background music of our existence as the new year begins. While you’re sitting, silently, in the Study Area, this issue of Mercury fea‐ tures a controversial take on the new Study Centre, along with Essex, hu‐ mour, cynicism and a bit of sport to add some colour. It’s something enjoy‐ able that you can pass off as being productive. Enjoy! Nikhil Vyas and Kane Walpole
Article
Page
Tables and plugs
1
A message from the editors
2
Essex causes haemorrhages
2
The slow death of modern comedy
3
Art corner
4
The logic of Lorenzo
4
Essex causes haemorrhages By Ben James I fell foul of misfortune recently. I thought, as all the learned and scholarly do, that I should solidify my knowledge of a popular television show, and that by doing so I would be giving breadth to my otherwise lacking worldly experience. That was the first mistake. Little did I real‐ ise that The Only Way is Essex, also known as the crude and ire‐engendering ‘TOWIE’, would be about to culturally smash my head against the wall. And then tuck in to the entrails. I refer, of course, to the riff‐raff of impec‐ cable imbeciles the show so proudly dem‐ onstrates. Now, having mugs in a show would be no shoddy thing ‐ if it were to deglamourise senselessness. Blackadder, for example, cleverly enlists the help of Baldrick to do just that: provide a chump for us to all‐too‐ conveniently jab at. Amongst other onuses, like providing us with the infamous song educating the masses about guns and mor‐ tar (yes, you know, the one with the sole lyric of ‘boom’), Baldrick epitomises why we should at least attempt to feign intelli‐ gence, even if we possess nout. But whilst Blackadder advocates wit and clarity, The Only Way is Essex supports overt folly and downright inanity. Evi‐ dently, inducting my eyes and ears to such a nightmare was a gaffe. Astuteness is arguably the most important trait we can have. And seeing the hopes and dreams of a wise and sharp world fall face‐flat on the floor, I can’t help being irate. Slamming fist on desk, I start to won‐ der if ITV realises the pain it causes to soci‐ ety.
I scroll down, for I am on the ITV Player online, searching for an answer, and find the following evidence that they blatantly don’t. Honestly, the following is a quote. I have not even edited it to make it seem even more incredulous. I think it deserves its own paragraph for impact. Brace your‐ selves: Tom's quite dishy really isn't he? He can cook, mainly because he was in uni for three years. Oooh educated too, check out this video of him and Joey in pants, bo‐ nanza! It beggars belief. In an attempt to calm my now furious neu‐ rons and restricted blood supply before having ten strokes, a copious number of haemorrhages and several more heart attacks, I turn instead to Channel 4 in search of solace. Well, it was a good idea in principle. Within seconds of turning to the on‐ demand player, to find something rela‐ tively sane to pacify myself with, I spotted a small box with an image of five good‐ looking actors grinning cheesily at the cam‐ era. This would be, naturally, the 4oD alter‐ native to our beloved Essex show – Made in Chelsea. Give some 20‐something‐year‐olds some of Daddy’s twenty brimming hedge funds, let them prance around flashing their wallets, and you have created this show. Brilliant. It’s difficult to imagine creating something more irresponsible than spray‐ painting armadillos neon‐green, but Chan‐ nel 4 has managed it. And you know what?
That’s not even close to the worst part. Whilst I whittle away what little lucidity I still possess, I am all too worried about the effects on Britain. Each week, several mil‐ lion viewers tune in to expose themselves to these degrading TV programmes. And each week they slowly get sucked into this cult of pure juvenile delinquency. Let me be clear, my interests are purely academic: whilst bothersome, the make‐up doesn’t jar me so much as the lack of edu‐ cation. I care not an ounce if your face is covered in bright orange fake tan. Nor do I care if you wear too‐tight brown chinos awkwardly cut off midway at your ankles, or if you pull impish duck faces in Facebook profile photos, or if you decide that you should wear enough mascara to make a fireplace’s soot residue seem paltry. But confuse ‘your’ and ‘you’re’ one more time, and execution it is. Society has no place for morons. If I were the Prime Minister, I would make it a cardi‐ nal sin, punishable by death, to be in collu‐ sion with the ‘Essex’ culture. It’s started grating on my being, and we must reverse it now, lest we all end up walking around like zombies. Let’s start a revolution. Say ‘no’ to Essex, ‘yes’ to sense. I’ve just thought of a reason that demonstrates why we should all pol‐ lute as much as we can. The faster we pol‐ lute, the more likely the place is to be flooded when the icecaps melt. Huzzah!
3
The slow death of modern comedy
Sixth Form Mercury, September 2012
By Nikhil Vyas
You know the culprits as been able to stand it. The well as I do. They’re the excessive usage of cut‐ ones in Hammersmith away gags stops being Apollo, on the endless TV funny after the first epi‐ panel shows, and in wave sode, while the faux‐ after wave of dry, drab sentiment it tries to sitcoms. achieve falls flat on its face. The show simultane‐ Oh yes, ladies and gentle‐ ously tries ‐ but fails ‐ to men, welcome to the fu‐ achieve the emotion of ture of comedy. The Simpsons and the satire of South Park. Stephen King once said about the superiority of Elsewhere, endless panel shows flood our screens ‐ comedy over tragedy: a plague of weak humour. ‘Any fool with a working set of lungs and steady Michael McIntyre: genius wit or style over substance? hands can build a house of The best of these (Have I cards and knock it down, Got News for You, Mock but it takes a genius to make people laugh.’ But something must have gone wrong the Week) are supported by a strong enough cast of comics to create genuine along the way, because now we’ve got This is essentially true ‐ any writer will tell depth, whereas the worst (Celebrity Juice) Russell Howard feebly prodding the Estab‐ you that it is a lot harder to create a comic suffer from the worst possible symptom of lishment, or Lee Evans pathetically at‐ any show ‐ they try too hard. scenario than a tragic one. Comedy re‐ tempting to spin out a set of wisecracks quires wit, on‐the‐spot imagination, the about coming home drunk. The fundamental problem with TV comedy ability to listen to others (harder than you think) and timing. And there’s no denying Not that they’re not funny ‐ they’re cer‐ is that there’s too much of it ‐ too many that modern screenplay writers or comedi‐ tainly capable of the odd wheeze. But they pointless sitcoms, 90% of which are ans aren’t capable of this. There are plenty don’t have any depth to them. doomed to fail without anyone blinking an out there who can pack a couple of gags eye. They all contribute to what A.A. Gill calls into their routine or script, just as there Here’s why shows like The Inbetweeners has always been. the ‘armchair revolution’ ‐ by providing flat are so popular: they pay attention to the gags about Cameron and the Coalition for scriptwriting, crafting situations which are However, the best comedians, the ones the middle classes to chuckle at, who can painfully hilarious, as well as being relat‐ that you remember, are the ones who in turn feel as though they’ve had their leave an impression on you. More impor‐ share of challenging the system, or stand‐ able. tantly, they leave you with a message. This ing up to authority, without any of the could be a brutal political or philosophical messiness of genuine protest. In short, modern comedy is like a pack mule, collapsing under the pressure of too statement that strikes at the heart of man, much dead and unnecessary weight. or, through humour, helps you to under‐ There’s no substance anymore. stand your own flaws as a human. It’s the basic scenarios that are the most It’s not that making jokes about ordinary beloved ‐ for example a group of friends in For the former, you could look towards life is a bad thing. Al Murray and Harry Hill New York City ‐ and the sooner writers legendary American comedians Bill Hicks do it well ‐ but that’s because they focus remember this, the better. and George Carlin. Hicks’s rants about themselves on the issue, rather than trying drugs and consumerism, and Carlin’s mus‐ to mix as many elements as possible into At the same time, great comedy pushes ings on race and politics, are still often their routines. Furthermore, they’ve quoted today because they are so acerbic ‐ crafted a stage persona that is synonymous boundaries, and isn’t constrained by mo‐ splitting the sides of the audience while rality or expectation (which is why internet with those individuals ‐the Pub Landlord, simultaneously forcing them into a position and the bumbling bald guy ‐ who have memes are frequently more amusing than where they agreed with what the come‐ Jo Brand ever will be). Aside from this, a bit both managed to win our hearts and dian was saying. of genuine feeling and thought wouldn’t go minds. amiss. British comics took put a more subtle twist Lee Evan’s sweaty, shuffling character is far on this, with Dylan Moran and Peter Cook, too irritating and dead for me to get any for example, parodying the trappings of personal connection with ‐ which, for any comedian, is hugely important. British society in a painfully amusing way. Not even concerning themselves with high politics, just the day to day passage of life. The problem extends to the world of TV. I’ll Those were the days when comedians start with another of my pet hates ‐ Family were great beacons of society. Guy. While I know most of the known world adores that infernal show, I’ve never
Sixth Form Mercury, September 2012
4
The Art Corner
By Manu Pillai
Like any budding Picasso, our resident artist Manu has de‐ cided to branch out in his style, freeing himself from the shack‐ les of enforced caricaturing. Therefore, this issue’s art piece isn’t so much a Guess Who? as an appreciation of the talents of a future Turner Prize winner.
The logic of Lorenzo
By Lorenzo Wong
Our sports correspondent judges the success of the latest England manager... On the southern tip of Sweden lies the city of Malmö, an access point to neighbouring Den‐ mark and home to around 300,000 people. The city is home to Malmö FF, a football team who play at the Swedbank Stadion in front of 24,000 supporters. On matchday, there is nothing in the stadium that catches the eye apart from a small pocket of supporters who take a banner to all of the home games and hang it in the same place each time. The ban‐ ner reads “Roy’s Hörna”, or “Roy’s Corner”. It is their sign of appreciation for Roy Hodg‐ son, the man who led their club to five suc‐ cessive league championships between 1985 and 1989. Now Hodgson has been pushed into his own little corner by the media scrutiny surround‐ ing his appointment as England manager. Roy with his back against the wall, whilst the na‐ tion screams “where’s ‘Arry?!” With most England fans questioning the whereabouts of Redknapp, our national team went into the Euros not expecting to get out of our group. Except we did. Finished top too. Unbelievably, the Three Lions had exceeded our expectations for the first time since 1966. But why? The answer is that Roy Hodgson is a good
manager ‐ a great one even. He has punched above his weight in a number of countries and with clubs of varying size and ability. In the 1990s, he took Switzerland to third in the world and guided them to their first par‐ ticipation in a major tournament since the 1960s. He has won silverware with Hamlstads, Malmö and FC Copenhagen, and guided Inter Milan to a UEFA Cup Final. He has also had successes in England, guiding Fulham to their first European final in their history and consolidating West Brom’s place in the Premier League. I’ve only given a few examples of Hodgson’s best work from his 36‐year career as a man‐ ager. Yet, despite this vast experience, it seems that Roy is often judged by one thing only: his failures at Liverpool Football Club. Admittedly, Hodgson did a poor job at An‐ field. He left having guided Liverpool to twelfth, with humiliating home defeats to Wolves, Blackpool and Northampton Town on the way. However, in hindsight, we can establish that Roy’s reign wasn’t a complete and utter disaster, since Liverpool are still terrible. But it’s just not fair to judge a manager’s capability according to one job that went sour.
If we judged Brian Clough by his days at Leeds United, he wouldn’t be considered one of the greatest managers ever. Perhaps ex‐Spurs boss Harry Redknapp would have been the better option, but to downgrade Hodgson for not being the overwhelming favourite seems a little over the top. For the first time since the start of the 2010 World Cup, I feel we can be satisfied with the direction in which the England team are go‐ ing. The football was a bit dull at Euro 2012, but we came through unbeaten, showing the resilience and organisation at the back which went missing under Capello. And given that Hodgson will now have more time to select and work with his squads, the quality in the final third should improve. Roy has also spoken of a “revolution” which will take place in the coming months, so ex‐ pect exciting young players to burst onto the scene. Let’s not obsess ourselves with his ill‐fated spell at Liverpool. Instead, look at the reasons why FA chairman David Bernstein appointed Hodgson in the first place. After all, there’s a reason why that pocket of Malmö supporters have maintained Roy’s Hörna for 23 years.
