The Bell #6: November 2014 - Truth

UCM & UCMSA Universalis magazine Issue #6 November 2014

theBell

2 theBell University College Maastricht

UCMSA UniversalisIssue #6 November 2014

3theBellUniversity College Maastricht UCMSA Universalis Issue #6 November 2014

editorial» issue #6

colophon

ABOUT:The Bell is an independent

student magazine by the UCMSA Universalis Magazine Committee for University College Maastricht

(UCM). The Bell is free for students and staff of UCM.

The content of The Bell does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the committee board, the board of UCMSA Universalis or UCM.

POSTAL ADDRESS:UCMSA Universalis

Zwingelput 46211KH Maastricht

The Netherlands

ADVERTISING:We are always looking for

advertisers! Check our webpage for detailed guidelines and

pricing.

CIRCULATION: 150 copies and online

COMMITTEE BOARD:

Finn O’Neill (chair)

Sarah Valeska (secretary)

Dominik Leusder (treasurer)

Lea Schaefer (PR/editor)

Lisette Reuvers (editor)

Eivind Bratterud (layout editor)

CONTRIBUTORS:

Dina Al-Khatib AmrLouise Bicknese

Sergio Calderon-HarkerFabian DantscherLaura Goldberg

Samantha JenkinsViktoria Kamuf

Elena KlaasJan MeijerZoé NumanFinn O’Neill

Nick PapaconstantinouEwa Przybył

Elina SairanenClea SamsonLea Schaefer

Florian SimonsenAlie Tacq

Premysl TrojanLukas Warning

Max Wilken

COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMERAll content © respective authors

contact usQuestions, concerns, wish to send in a letter (max. 100 words) or want to advertise? email: [email protected]: www.ucm-univer-salis.nlcommittees/thebellfacebook: facebook.com/thebellmagazine

As the cold, short, dark winter months descend upon us we thought it was time to turn our thoughts to the simple, relaxing theme of ‘Truth’... An inescapable concept which given the slightest attention in our thoughts can re-ally lead us to question anything and everything, truth provided our contributors with a wonder-ful muse for their creativity.

Coincidentally as I sat in my first Intro to Philosophy tutorial a few weeks ago I was made aware that the first topic we would be studying was ‘Truth’. Having now spent two or three tutorials on the theme of truth and differing concepts about what it is, how it exists (if it does), its importance to us I can say with much con-viction that I still have no idea. What did become apparent was that there are much deeper argu-ments behind the theme of truth and what we conceive as truth which are interesting (if a little bit disheartening).

Given the complex and wide nature of the theme we agreed it would be a good topic to go with for this issue. To that end, this issue deals with everything from book reviews to notions of love; from extreme stories to the sublime - there definitely is some-thing in here for everyone.

I hope in reading this issue you question some of the truths that you experience whilst perhaps realising that you should have more ‘truth’ in your life (or not)! There is so much to discuss with-in the concept of truth and whilst the articles in here only touch on some of these issues, they convey some interesting and stimulating ideas.

A quick disclaimer: I cannot say whether or not anything which has been written here is in fact ‘true’ or to that end ‘real’...

Finn O’NeillChair of the Bell

Finn O’Neill, Untitled

Taken in the bus-tling streets of La Paz, Bolivia last year; this photo illustrates some of the back-wardness of the city’s infrastructure yet also presents the bursting vitality of the city. Having spent three months there work-ing for a magazine, I developed a deef affinity towards the people of the city and the city itself.

Jeremy Olson, Unti-tled, 2010

Copyright © Jeremy Olson 2010. Image not used for com-mercial purposes and strictly under “fair use”policy.

Sweet UCM,

Finn O’Neill, Untitled



overview»editorial

3SWEET UCM...BOARD

introspection

5THE NEOLIBERAL UNIVERSITYMAX WILKEN

7ROBIN JASLET - POSTHUMOUS RETROSPECTIVE ANNOUNCEDALICE TAQC

9HEALTHY TREES HAVE MANY BRANCHES - RETHINKING ECONOMIC STUDIESFABIAN DANTSCHER, JAN MEIJER, FLORIAN SIMONSEN, LUKAS WARNING

10UNDISCOVERED OPPORTUNITIESEWA PRZYBYŁ

truth

12THE TRUTH IN LIE TO MELouise Bicknese

13HOW ARE YOU?ELENA KLAAS

14REVIEW: BIG FISHZOÉ NUMAN

15WITHOUT TITLEELINA SAIRANEN

17DO YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW?NICK PAPACONSTANTINOU

18DUM DUM DOODLEANONYMOUS

current affairs

19SAVE THE TREES, RIGHT?SAMANTHA JENKINS

21EMMA WATSON’S “HEFORSHE”-SPEECHDINA AL-KHATIB AMR

22PLEASE, TELL ME YOUR SECRETSVICTORIA KA

creative24HOLY WARPREMYSL TROJAN

25THE BELL DREAMSCLEA SAMSON

26TRUE SHORT STORYFINN O’NEILL

28YESTERDAY THE LEAFS WERE BROWNERSERGIO CALDERON-HARKER

29THE BELL RECIPELEA SHCAEFER

30POEMSNEIL O’FINN

OH NO, WE RAN OUT OF BUDGETED PAGES AGAIN!


«introspection

- Sometimes staring out of the window can be more productive than reading thirty pages.

This is what my high school philosophy teach-er told me on many oc-casions as I complained about the intrica-cy of philosophi-cal problems. The kind of learning philosophy stu-dents, and for that matter all so-cial scientists, need is not confined to classrooms and books. Having society itself as a subject is a tricky business that requires en-thusiasm, critical thinking and self-directed learning. The main goal of a univer-sity education should be to foster these essential skills. However, this understand-ing of education is under consistent attack by a ne-oliberal redefinition of the

university as a corporation in service of the labour market.

At the heart of the ne-oliberal approach to uni-versity education is what has been deemed ‘new managerialism’. This new mode of governance

deems social and politi-cal issues to be resolved through ‘management’; the ultimate goal being increasing economic ef-ficiency. The methods by which this is achieved are profound and are justified by general state austerity. Under ‘new managerial-ism’ everything has to be accountable. Students’ and employees’ perfor-mance must constantly be

measured through grades and other assessments of performance. At the same time quantitatively meas-urable performance is seen as the yardstick for univer-sity success. Every step in the education process is quantified and streamlined by an increasing amount of rules and regulations.

These developments are in stark contrast to the original idea of the univer-

sity as it was con-ceived during the era of Enlighten-ment. The inven-tors of the mod-ern university saw it as a means to

emancipate people from their ‘self imposed imma-turity’. In this view the goal of the university was to produce autonomous and self-directed individuals, ethical decision-makers and responsible members of the bigger community. For two main reasons ne-oliberal ideology and the associated ‘new manageri-alism’ are diametrically op-posed to this ideal. Firstly,

THE NEOLIBERAL UNIVERSITY

THE GOAL OF THE UNIVERSITY WAS TO PRODUCE AUTONO-MOUS AND SELF-DIRECTED IN-

DIVIDUALS



the original goals of the university can simply not be quantified and are thus bound to be ignored within the neoliberal framework. Indeed, there has been an increasing focus on assessment, which has to focus on quantifiable variables and thus fails to take into account the en-tirety of personal develop-ment. Secondly, neoliberal reforms have reintroduced hierarchical structures be-tween employees and between students and teachers. The university admin-istration has been transformed into a semi-corporate structure, while stu-dents are subject to constant and intense grading as well as a flood of rules and regulations. Increas-ingly, universities seem to be not much dif-ferent from schools or cor-porations in their structur-al setting. This limits the autonomy of students by directing and streamlining education. More impor-tantly, the very idea that there is a need for constant grading and rules is often based on the assumption that students would not be able to educate themselves

without external pressure. Enthusiastic and autono-mous learning is thereby rendered an impossibility. Students and teachers of-ten fail to recognise the

remarkably self-defeating character of such argu-ments. It cannot be in the interest of either party to claim that students are by

nature not interested in what they are learning.

In this context UCM is in a peculiar position. On the one hand there is a terrific freedom of choice in sub-jects and lots of possibili-ties for self-directed learn-ing in the PBL process. On the other hand UCM also has tight schedules and a rigid and pervasive grad-ing system. A remarkable

degree of liberty has been achieved within an en-vironment that does not favour autonomous edu-cation but we still have a long way to go towards

realising the full ideal and poten-tial of university education.

To conclude, it is important to look at the core

of the argument for ne-oliberal reform of higher education. The legitimis-ing basis of these reforms is the promise of efficiency.

However, efficiency is an empty term for itself. The ques-tion to ask is: Effec-tive at what? If we define the goal of universities as pro-ducing workers for the global market than neoliberal re-form is indeed the way to go. Howev-er, if we think of the

ideal university as one that produces autonomous, responsible and critical members of a democratic community then we must resist with all our efforts and energies the ideolo-gies of neoliberalism and New Managerialism.

Max Wilken

STUDENTS ARE SUBJECT TO CONSTANT AND INTENSE GRADING AS WELL AS A FLOOD

OF RULES


The death of photographer Robin Jaslet is to be marked by the opening of a lifetime retrospective at the Bonne-fantenmuseum Maastricht.The exhibition, to be enti-tled Finger in Eye, will fea-ture some of the artist’s most famous pieces and, having already seen an op-timistic 2 tickets reserved under the name Leusder, is bound to be the sell out show of the year. But with his tax returns becoming increasingly overdue public interest has come at a rela-

tively difficult time for the artist himself. Indeed, were he not currently enjoying some bucket / foot inter-action, Jaslet may well ask; are we more fascinated by his work or by his death?

Relatively little is known of Jaslet’s life prior to his first

attempts at photography. School records show that he was a diligent student with a penchant for the cu-linary arts. After graduating he found employment as a scullery maid but it was not until he traded a sto-len onion rind for his first camera, a disposable Kod-ac Fun Flash, that he found his calling:

“I work predominant-ly with the Fun Flash. I feel that to some extent we are all throw-away. That our bodies are sup-posed to be transient, it is as if it is only through our creations that we are meant to live... And I like the clicky wheel thing that you wind around between shots.”

From the outset inspiration was no stranger to Jaslet; it was during these form-ative years that he was to find his artistic muse. By his own admission it was quite by accident that he first caught his own finger in the upper right hand cor-ner of a photograph. But this simple mistake was to trigger a life-long fascina-tion with his images of his own digits; a fascination

which at points bordered upon the obsessive.

The finger, as ubiquitous to Jaslet’s photography as his use of monochrome film, became the artist’s calling card. A smudge of identity

in the impression of a dac-tylogram which, from pic-ture to picture, would wax and wane from view. But, as noted by Sam Toogood, the prospective curator of Finger in Eye, it was this aspect of his works which throughout the artist’s life-time would hamper his chances of popular success:

“It basically gave the impression that Robin was too spastic to hold a camera properly… Te-hehe, that’s bitchy. You can’t print that.”

ROBIN JASLETPOSTHUMOUS RESTROSPECTIVE ANNOUNCED



Indeed, it was only the few images in which Jaslet’s ar-tistic signature was absent which garnered any critical attention. Only when the photograph was ‘unob-

structed’ by the body of the artist would they comment upon his subtle interplay between form, composi-tion and instagram. Jaslet, always a sensitive soul, was deeply marked by the conditions under which he might achieve fame; in a letter to his mother he wrote:

“They don’t want to see me at all. Mummy! They want me to disap-pear! All I wanted to do was finger them a little bit, just the tip… Is that so much to ask?”

But disappear Jaslet did. In a final untitled collec-tion he delivered a series of works dedicated not to the blurred edges of his own hands but the landmarks of the Dutch countryside. These are the images that have since been so preva-lent in the popular imagi-nation and these will be the focus of the Bonnefanten-museum’s Finger in Eye.

Such is the tragedy of Jaslet’s art; it was a cre-ation which required his own absence. In the hours following the release of his final collection the art-ist was seen to purchase a

large packet of notorious-ly dry Albert Heijn brand stroopwafels. That evening without pouring himself so much as a glass of cool milk he ate five of the bis-cuits before choking on the sixth; it was suicide.

The conditions under which this celebrated se-ries of photographs were produced demonstrate the morbid reality of Jaslet’s works. For the artist him-self these images were sig-nificant not of the brilliance of his talent but of his own death. A death in which you, as a member of the art-loving public, are indict-ed; I hope you’re proud of yourself.

Finger in Eye opens 29th Feb 2015 at the Bonnefan-tenmuseum Maastricht.

Alie Tacq


Economic studies have be-come entrenched in a nar-row mainstream perspec-tive, effectively eliminating all other views on this once rich-discipline. This devel-opment is deeply regretta-ble on several levels. Firstly, a social sci-ence requires pluralism (that is a diversity of views and perspectives) to thrive and remain inno-vative and so-cially relevant. S e c o n d l y , students, ac-ademics and practitioners are not being s u f f i c i e n t l y encouraged and equipped to reflect critically on the theories they learn and to question underlying as-sumptions. Economic poli-cy is guided by a social sci-ence that is not based on an open, critical debate, but on blind acceptance and the perpetuation of main-stream, quasi-dogmatic tenets and assumptions. Finally and most important-ly, societal and ecological challenges of the 21st cen-

tury cannot be addressed appropriately due to this dogmatism and lack of plu-rality and innovation. Cur-rently, the urgency of this problem becomes more and more widely acknowl-edge. Critical students all

over the world have taken the initiative to promote pluralism in economics. Plu-ralism in economics entails that a variety of branches and perspectives are taught and critically discussed as well as a much closer link-ing of economic studies to other disciplines including philosophy, history, sociolo-gy, psychology and political science.

At UCM, too, there is

now a student initiative for Pluralism in Economics (PINE UCM). PINE UCM in-vites students and staff at UCM to enter a debate on pluralism in economics and encourages learning be-yond the currently taught

mainstream economic s studies. Lit-erature com-p i l a t i o n s , student de-bates as well as guest lec-tures will be offered for this pur-pose. Addi-tionally, PINE UCM will, in coopera-tion with the A c a d e m i c Council and

UCM management, con-duct independent research to assess the quality of the current economics curric-ulum at UCM in terms of plurality. As a result, recom-mendations for the further development and possible improvement will be put forward and discussed with all stakeholders involved in-cluding students, manage-ment, course coordinators etc.

HEALTHY TRESS HAVE MANY BRANCHESRETHINKING ECONOMIC STUDIES



PINE UCM meets regu-larly to discuss its strategies and progress as well as for intensive working sessions for pursuing both goals. To receive further information or contact PINE UCM write an email to [email protected]

Mission PINE UCM wants to

a) Facilitate critical debate on economics and its many branches;

b) Foster the learning

about economic issues in a pluralist context;

c) Contribute to the diver-sification of the economic discipline; and

d) Prepare students to tackle and address press-ing challenges of the 21st century.

Vision

UCM students are equipped with the neces-sary knowledge to address

economic issues in the 21st century and to engage in a well-founded debate con-cerning economic theories.

A plurality of economic perspectives and theories is taught at UCM and stu-dents are aware of differ-ent economic theories and engage in an active debate about the various perspec-tives.

Fabian Dantscher, Jan Meijer, Florian Simonsen,

Lukas Warning

I am one of those UCMers who got an opportunity (number one!) to make a virtue of necessity by com-bining the greatest interest of my life with getting a degree at the same time. Sounds like fun, right? I would say, let’s make it even more fun!

During my bachelor I focused on Human-ities & Social Scienc-es, more specifically Media & Communi-cation Studies. None-theless, I was always a fan of activities, which enabled me to apply the knowledge

I gained at university into practice. I got involved in the production of Break-ing Maas and with mar-keting of conferences such as Global Entrepreneurship

Week. By trying different things I discovered that me-dia production and work-

ing with creative people is what I want to do in my life. However, I also realized that I needed more skills in order to be a good produc-er. Then, I found out about Video Power.

Video Power is a non-profit organization which aims to stimulate and boost production of

audio-visual material in the region of Limburg. I approached the produc-ers Tim Rutten and Hans van Hezik, hoping to be an editing intern within their organization. Nev-ertheless, sadly as it was summer holiday period there were not many projects going on and nothing for me to edit. Even though you don’t

always get what you want, I always try to make the

UNDISCOVERED

OPPORTUNITIES


best out of what I have and search for new opportuni-ties. Fascinated by the idea of Video Power I thought that more people should know about this initiative. As a result of this, I ended up being in charge of the organization of a wonder-ful two-day short film fes-tival called VIDEO FEST Al-ternatif. If you still haven’t fallen asleep you might have noticed that this has even led to me writing my first magazine article! This is only more proof that op-portunities come knocking!

Since the point of my in-ternship Video Power had managed to add several productions to their port-folio and I thought that we should organize an event where they could proudly present their works, as well as productions from the region, to inspire young creative people and at the same time raise awareness of the existing opportuni-ties. Therefore, we created an exciting program, which consisted of a premiere of a great movie “Nena” by Saskia Diesing, a Q&A ses-sion with the director, dif-

ferent audio-visual produc-tions from the Euregion, a screenwriting workshop and a nice after party. This was a great opportunity for me to learn a lot of new things, but also meet won-

derful and creative people. Filmmaking tends to be

associated with being a graduate of a film school, but this is definitely not the case. We live in a city full of people of different back-grounds, cultures, interests and expertise. Moreover, as a part of the technological culture we live in, we are exposed to vast amounts of audio-visual material every day. Therefore, we are more likely to have a great taste, great visions and im-portantly great ideas.

Perhaps, while reading this article something rings a bell so don’t hesitate to try making it happen. Each and every one of you has a possibility to take part in a monthly pitch event organ-ized by Video Power. In or-der to be able to translate your idea into a screen, you have to convince a jury that it is not only great, but also that you know how to execute it. Once the jury chooses you, you can make a short movie with a small monetary investment, but significantly great help and supervision from Video Power’s producers. Their producers cooperate with many production compa-nies and are usually able to provide the filmmakers with all the equipment they need. Who knows what your future brings? An Oscar or a Golden Globe. Think big!

(For more info about Video Power, check: www.video-power.eu)

Ewa Przybył



I bet all of you have at least once met Dr. Cal Lightman, hero of the popular tv-se-ries Lie to Me. He solves cases by ‘reading’ people with his colleagues Dr. Gil-lian Foster, Eli Loker and Ria Torres. He is your guy when it comes to body language, facial expressions, and talking patterns. He works with several (government) agencies, spotting the lies in criminals’ stories (and being hilarious while at it). The series revolves around Lightman, his personal life - drama is never far away, of course - and mostly his work. Although this read-ing thing sounds very inter-esting, it also sounds too good to be true - but is it?

Even though many peo-ple thought that this is ‘just’ a crime drama, me included, it turns out that Cal is actually based on a real person. The real guy is Dr. Paul Ekman, retired professor at the University of San Francisco. Lightman, however, is in Ekman’s own words, “younger, edgier, arrogant, brusque, and

he’s English” (oh no, not the English!). Paul Ekman has been researching de-viations in behaviour for the last 40 years and has actually achieved remarka-ble results. He worked as a scientific consultant for Lie to Me. This is often used as a small hint of the tiniest possible scientific part in a thing on tv, but accord-ing to Dr. Ekman, about

90%(!!) of the science in Lie to Me is accurate. So what does that mean?

It means that none of your secrets are safe.... just kidding. The technique is far from perfect, but it is being improved. One of the main aspects of Ek-man’s research (and the speciality of Lightman) is a concept known as ‘mi-cro-expressions’. These tiny leaks in your carefully-kept

mask flash for only 1/15th to 1/25th of a second on your face, but they show your honest response: an-ger, contempt, happiness, surprise etc. None of these have to be definite indica-tors of a lie, but they can tell you (or the police) a lot more. Such an obvious indicator of deception is impossible to find, Ekman says, but these micro-ex-pressions can still give someone away. Darwin al-ready introduced the idea of miniscule expressions being universal, but this is the first time someone has actually done something with that. However, these micro-expressions are ex-tremely hard to spot. Some people are ‘naturals’ in rec-ognising them, but they are very rare. Through inten-sive training it is teachable, though.

Some other ‘hot spots’ - signs that indicate some-thing is wrong - include “a momentary conflict be-tween the words spoken and the sound of the voice, the gesture, or the facial ex-

The truth» in

NONE OF YOUR SECRETS ARE

SAFE...JUST KID-DING


pression”. However, show-ing such a hot spot does not necessarily mean that you are lying or have an intention of doing wrong. People at airports are often nervous or annoyed by the screenings, which could cause a hot spot to occur. This technique can be use-ful in public places but cau-tion has to be taken in easy judgments.

Apart from the theoret-ical, sciencey stuff, Paul

Ekman also advises some pretty relevant agencies. Just like Lightman, he ad-vises anything from the FBI, the CIA and Homeland Se-curity to Pixar, Disney and Dreamworks. Unfortunate-ly, he does not actually help with individual cases (how cool would that be); he just trains people to recognise deception. You can hire him for a training or buy an online package (there is a demo! See www.paul-

ekman.com/products). So, if you want to extract the exam questions from your tutor or if you are desper-ate to find out who stole that last cookie, you now know where to go!

Louise Bicknese

Sources: www.paulek-man.com http://www.

popularmechanics.com/science/4300722

The truth» in

How are you?This sentence is probably one of the first you learned in English. Or - if English is your native language - it is a sentence you learned really early in life. It is also one of the phrases you use or hear most often every day - your roommate in the morning, your friends in the common room, other students in your tutorial, your professor or even a random person you meet in

the streets says it. And now think back: the last few times you have been asked this question, how often did you reply with anything other than:

Good, how are you?

Exactly. Good has become such

an automated response that it would be really un-usual to hear anything else. And this is a shame be-cause every single one of us

is never just ‘good’. There are so many emotions, feel-ings, moods and thoughts we have every day - why would we settle for good?

Of course, there are cer-tain situations where we just do not want to elab-orate on what is actual-ly going on in our life, or situations where we sim-ply don’t have the time to elaborate. However, there are also many cases where “Good” is just the wrong answer, but we don’t dare



to say anything else. Be-cause it seems like a weak-ness to admit that we are anything else but good. Everyone else is doing well. Why shouldn’t I be? Is there something wrong with me? Do people even care if I tell them I am not good today? Is it too intimate to just tell this person I am not particularly close to, that ‘I feel shit today’ because of something really personal?’

But people are con-cerned. And people do care. Because believe it or not - you are not the only person who is not good. You would probably be the only person who is good.

This is not supposed to mean that you should pour your heart out to every per-son that asks you how you are. But, if there is some-thing that really affects you, just try and answer in an honest way for once. People will probably be sur-prised at first and not really know what to answer. But surely, in the end, the re-sponse will not be “I don’t care” but rather a com-forting and encouraging thought. And you will most definitely feel so much bet-ter afterwards.

Naturally, there will also be situations where you are more than just good -

in a positive way. And this is something we should all talk about more. The an-swer “I feel fantastic today because the sun is shining so brightly and was warm-ing my back on the way here” will probably light up the mood of everyone you are speaking to. So just get rid of the fake smile and the “Good, how are you?” for a day and just tell the truth. Because, let’s be honest - this is also the only way you can be completely true to yourself.

Elena Klaas

When I first watched Big Fish, I found it very differ-ent from all the other Tim Burton movies. The mov-ie wasn’t the tale; the tale was in the movie. Indeed, two different stories are melted into this film where the characters and the environment are dis-tinctly differentiated: the “real” story about the son, Will, and his father Edward, and the “tale” of Edward’s youth. This film shows the desperate research of a son to know his father behind his sto-ries before he dies,

but the truth is always con-founded with the tale. Will feels like his father has nev-er been honest with him, has always had something to hide; and he feels like his father has always been presenting himself, like an

actor does, without giving anything back to Will. Their relationship resolves itself at the end of the film when Will finishes the story of his dad as it has begun, in a fantastic world.

As Edward dies, Will fi-nally begins to understand him. He realises that his father was in fact the sto-

ries he told, that they were a reality as deep and valuable as day-to-day experiences. We finally understand with Will the moral of a life tale; that stories can reflect more our truest self than our real lives. His father didn’t lie to him, he just described his life

REVIEW: BIG FISH


as an epic adventure. And what can be life but our greatest adventure?

As Tim Burton said “Big Fish is about what’s real and what’s fantastic, what’s true and what’s not true, what’s partially true and how, in the end, it’s all true.” Life is not just about facts, it’s also about feelings and perceptions. How you perceive your life is putting feelings on its progress, and that’s how a true personality can be shown. To describe events certainly gives us truth and reality, but once we have

this truth, what is interest-ing about it? By exagger-ating some details of his life and transforming some people into fantastic crea-tures, Edward must have protected himself from the deep, down-to-earth reali-ty, but he also found stories as the better way to touch people. Indeed, the charm of a good storyteller is his most powerful asset, espe-cially because what he says doesn’t have anything to do with truth or reality, and nobody cares. What makes a good story is all that we draw from it, it touches us

deeper than reality because we have the possibility to let ourselves completely go into it, without the limita-tions of reason. What Big Fish tries to tell us through this father and son relation-ship is that the true morals and values we learn about life since its beginning are found in tales, stories, fan-tasies and how we deal with them, but they cannot be found in the truth of re-ality.

Zoé Numan

It happened some years ago. We were fighting again. We had been fight-ing long enough for me to realise, that what I once thought would last forever, was coming to an end. The breakup symptoms were there and I was in agony. My heart hurt, every single cell of my body was in pain. First came sadness, than anger. You know the breakup step, I presume: denial, desperation, departure.

I was completely unwill-ing to face my situation. This, however, is not a story of a breakup, but about the aftermath of one. You see, some weeks later I found myself typing a message. I

wanted to hurt him. I want-ed him to feel my pain, the pain I thought he alone was responsible for. So I typed. I lied. Oh man, it was not an innocent little white lie. It was not an ordinary, “no mother, I did not take any cookies from the jar” type

of a lie. It was a disgusting big fat lie, the kind of lie that requires a great deal of desperation. I knew lying to him was wrong, I knew it was an antithesis to love and respect. Upon that mo-ment I always considered myself as an honest person.

You know, the type of a gal who has her shit together most of the time.

I should have anticipated his detailed, extensive ques-tions. He did his research and asked more questions. I answered, played along. I came to realise that it was

too late for me to tell the truth. There were times when I started to believe my lie was true, and afterwards I be-

came disgusted by the en-tire situation. What started off as a deliberate attempt to hurt the person I had adored and loved to an extreme, escalated into a delicate tragicomedy. What did I think would happen? I hoped that he would

I KNEW IT WAS WRONG LYING TO HIM

IT WAS NOT AN INNON-CENT LITTLE WHITE LIE



choose to love me again, forgive my annoying habits and tolerate my extensive smoking. What a naïve, silly girl, you might think. Sure-ly those attributes describe me, but what is there to ex-pect from a romantic who spent her teens watching romcoms and reading Jane Austen?

Had I thought about the consequences? No, of course not. The only person I considered was myself and my pain. Now, I found myself fac-ing a cul-de-sac. He was still utterly concerned about my well-being, and I was disguised by my de-cision to follow such a low route. Time went by and I learned to live with my lie. But, eventually, I realised that my duty as the leading actress was to give this sto-ry some kind of an ending. As the happily ever after ideal was out of the pic-ture, I took the easy road and called the whole thing off. I didn’t have the balls to

tell him the actual truth, so I told him that everything was going to be alright and that he has no reason to worry anymore. I thought I could pretend that the lie never existed by terminat-ing it. This, obviously, was not the case. Call it con-science or whatever, but I was constantly confronted

with ‘the why questions’. Why did I do it? Why did I lie to the person I had loved more than anything? I felt guilty and ashamed and I was never fully capable of understanding my deci-sion to lie. In retrospective, I guess I felt it was my last option. Anger and sadness may lead to disastrous out-comes. I thought I would get my revenge by hurting him as much as he hurt me.

At some point I realised it didn’t really matter why I had done it. Telling such lies is always a selfish act; in my case it was both a call for attention and an at-tempt to revenge.

After nine months of playing emotional Russian roulette, I decided to do the unspeakable thing for

a drama junkie like me, to tell him the truth. He didn’t forgive, and I don’t think he ever will. It’s fine, I didn’t ex-pose my lies to him in return for forgiveness.

I did it for myself. And to be honest, telling the truth was not that difficult. Diffi-cult was the way he looked at me after I told him. His look exemplified to me what it means when love turns into detester. But I was so heartbroken, I said. There aren’t any excuses, he replied.

Elina Sairanen

WHY DID I LIE TO THE PERSON I HAD LOVED MORE THAN ANYTHING

ELSE?


Picture the following: you are a brilliant scientist at some point in the future, whose intellectual ability is greater than that of the next hundred persons com-bined, and you have ac-cess to the most advanced pieces of technology ever known to man. Your life as a super scientist is great, but you soon discover that a meteor is set on a direct course to crash into Earth, in approximately one year from now. Because of the nature of this meteor (size, trave-ling speed, etc.) you are also certain that when this meteor collides with Earth, it will wipe out everything in exist-ence, leaving no sur-vivors. You also are also blatantly aware of the fact that mankind does not have the technology available to deal with the incoming threat; no way to change its trajectory, or take shel-ter from the impact, or even seek out to set colo-nies in space. Despite your best hopes and efforts, you have found no mistakes in your measurements and it is beyond any reasonable

doubt that the end of the world is inevitable.

You are now faced with a moral dilemma: whether or not to share this informa-tion with the world.

Do you let people live in blissful ignorance for the remainder of their short lives, unaware of their im-pending doom? Or do you believe that people have the right to know how short their future is?

Instinctively, you might

immediately want to let the world, and especially your loved ones, know about this. This is something per-fectly normal, as you would want to spend what little time is left with them. But the problem is what hap-pens after this information is out there: chaos. By let-ting this information out into the world, you will sin-

gle-handedly cause the col-lapse of society as we know it, and lead humanity to an even earlier grave. Consid-ering your findings are be-yond any reasonable doubt, people will have no reason to continue living their lives as they did. People working in food delivery would stop working, policing would decrease massively, and an-archy would run rampant. Consequences of our ac-tions would no longer mat-

ter because of the little time there is left. Enough could be written about how society would come to a collapse to fill this whole issue, but I think that my point is clear by now.

“Alright, so I guess not telling people is the way to go, right?” Unfortu-nately, the answer is not that simple. People have

the right to know about what little time they have left, so that they can enjoy their lives to the fullest. Peo-ple should be grateful, for you have discovered how much time people have left of their lives. Besides, why must you house the burden of this information alone. It is not your fault you made this discovery, nor is it now

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:DO YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW?



your responsibility to keep it a secret. What greater torture is there than to be forced to continue living your life as you do, while not telling those you hold dearest that they will die soon. Just as a doctor must break the news to a termi-nally ill patient, you need to inform people that they don’t have a long future to look forward to.

Although it is a fairly ex-

treme example, this dilem-ma make you think about whether knowing the truth is really what is most ben-eficial to us. Would know-ing government secrets (conspiracies, aliens, etc.) be something good, or would these secrets that were meant to protect us ruin the trust we have for our own country? Would you want to know a secret about your significant oth-

er half that would ruin your otherwise happy relation-ship? Do you really want to know what your favorite meal is made from? Often enough, we want to know the answers to these ques-tions, but as soon as we find out the answers we wish we hadn’t.

Nick Papaconstantinou

I love fairy tales. The museum is full of them so I know quite a few. My favourite is the Emperor’s new clothes. The Emperor is me in reverse, but that’s another story. Do you know how it goes on? After his demasqué the Emperor sat on his throne wearing his old pyjamas, staring sulk-ily out the window, alone but for his two loyal coun-sel. She called my bluff, he sighed, and I didn’t

even know I was bluffing. Such a painful truth... The fair-haired counsel with the turtle neck jumped up from his stool. Truth is just another five letter word, sire, it’s just an idea. Look, the people have already forgotten! And you are still Emperor! But they have seen, the Emperor said, they have seen the naked truth. And maybe they want more. Truth can be addictive.

Then give them more, his fair-haired counsel said, give them a chance to re-mind each other of the truth. A podium, a stage, a place to spread their deep-est thoughts. The counsel got all excited. Their fifteen minutes of fame! Then the second counsel spoke, the shy one with the fork in

his beard. Yes, he said, and they will have discussions about their thoughts, and it will be marvellous – be-cause ideas start in heads, but grow in conversation – and everything will be bet-ter. His colleague however disagreed. No! No sharing, no talking. Waste of time and messy to organise. And besides, one never knows what comes of talking! But still, they will leave inspired, and work on the new idea quietly, and many a great thing will come of it, the shy counsel proffered. No! His blond colleague ripost-ed. They will leave inspired thinking I want to be on that stage, too!

With this the Emperor stood up. He donned his most marvellous robe and smiled. Now that’s an idea worth spreading, he quoth, and strode outside.

every issue

DUM DUM DOODLEshares its thoughts!


SAVE THE TREES, RIGHT?‘Finite resource,’ a buz-zword used by global warm-ing aficionados and climate change fanatics across the world to emphasise the imminent loss of exploited resources, typically coal, oil or wood. With plummeting oil reserves and rocketing CO2 (carbon dioxide) levels it is clear that, like the re-sources we rely upon so heavily, our consumption is unsustaina-ble. But it is not solely these sol-id, quantifiable assets that are balancing on the precipice of ex-haustion; with an exponen-tially growing population, the infiniteness of other, previously considered inex-haustible resources may be put to the test.

Oxygen, (O2) is one of the most universally fun-

damental elements on the planet. Without it, not only humans but almost every other form of life on Earth would cease to exist. But like so many things that we depend upon, we take it for granted. The phrase ‘lungs of the planet’ is of-ten used to describe the ever dwindling forests and plant life that, until recently,

were considered the main source of atmospheric O2. However, another rather underappreciated source of O2 lies on the surface of the oceans; phytoplank-ton. Most may know them as the discoloured of areas

of water sometimes visible during an algae bloom. However, this fascinating sub-group of plankton are much more than the irritat-ing algal plants that infect ponds; they are microscop-ic animals with the ability to photosynthesise in much the same way as plants do, turning energy from the sun and CO2 into sugars,

which they use to survive, and O2 as a by-product. Not only are phytoplankton tiny O2 factories, but by fixing large amounts of carbon that would other-wise be released into the atmosphere as CO2 they act as vacuums, replacing the CO2 in the at-mosphere with O2. Phytoplankton are in essence the trees of the ocean, but on

a potentially larger scale; many scientists believe they produce up to 70% of the Earth’s atmospheric O2. Since the 1980s it has been theorised by James C.G. Walker that without phytoplankton the O2 lev-

«currentaffairs



els of Earth would become unable to sustain life. A daunting prospect given that their numbers are de-creasing.

For many years the ocean was considered an endless rubbish bin; with buffering capabilities of water that can, to a certain extent, counteract ocean acidifi-cation, it seemed that the seas were invincible to the abuse of humanity. Yet de-spite these buffering capa-bilities, this proved to be drastically incorrect and whilst CO2 in the atmos-phere causes global oce-anic temperature to rise, ocean acidification poses another threat.

Ocean acidification has been termed the ‘evil twin of climate change,’ the excessive amounts CO2 released into the atmos-phere by humanity are ab-sorbed in the oceans and transformed in carbonic acid. The ocean has expe-rienced an average drop in pH of 30%, this rapid increase in acidity of the oceans is having disastrous and deadly effects on many sea creatures, primarily the delicate, calcium based physiologies of certain phy-toplankton that react bad-ly to acidic conditions and essentially dissolve - 70% of the atmospheric O2 we need to survive is dissolv-ing. But the bad news does

not end there, the dead phytoplankton release any CO2 stored in their bodies as they decay, adding to the cycle of acidification, increasing acidity and de-creasing oxygen output.

The so called “Oxygen Crisis” is a phenomenon that certain scientists have studied in extreme detail and their research supports the theory that O2 levels are indeed decreasing as a result of declining phy-toplankton populations. Professor Robert Berner of Yale University studies the O2 levels of prehistoric eras with the help of amber. By analysing the air bubbles trapped inside the atmos-pheric conditions of the pe-riod when the amber was formed can be determined. The method is very simi-lar to the method used to study climate change using ice cores. It is believed by Berner that the concentra-tions of O2 70 million years ago were as much as 30% compared to the 20.95% O2 levels experienced to-day and that this could be a reason for the ever in-creasing number of health issues.

Clearly, with phytoplank-ton producing so much O2, their lack of media cover-age is wildly disproportion-ate to their importance. This is most likely because there is no way to make

money from oxygen. Oil, wood and coal shortages have caused panic and the front pages of newspapers are regularly occupied by headlines like “SAVE THE TREES!” “OIL CRISIS!” and “New Fossil Fuel Strategy!” rather than “SAVE THE PHYTOPLANKTON!”

The solution to the issue of the phytoplankton dis-solving and taking our O2 supplies with them is the same one that we all know and love; to lower carbon emissions, but allows to raise awareness for all the plankton in peril. Already steps are being made to reduce the amount of CO2 being released by fossil fu-els; electric cars, windmills, hydro-electric dams and a multitude of other areas concerned with sustainable energy. But we are far from becoming sustainable, and unless sudden changes in lifestyle occur soon it is like-ly the results of decreasing oxygen levels will be felt; performing physical tasks may become harder, brain function can decrease, the effects would be similar to living at a high altitude with low O2.

So, save the trees? Of course, but we mustn’t for-get our microscopic friends in the ocean. SAVE THE PHYTOPLANKTON!

Samantha Jenkins


Hipster as I am, I spent three days very ardently trying not to watch Emma Wat-son’s speech about femi-nism. After the 27th post, I failed and the distaste-fully mainstream speech is now a part of my memory. She was acting as an am-bassador for a campaign, and her eloquent speech highlighted the aim of the campaign: to invite men to participate in the fight for gender equality. In oth-er words, she was inviting men to identify openly as feminists in this campaign, “He for She”. This video of her speaking at the He for She campaign launch met worldwide recognition and applause. Popular websites lauded her courage, and called the speech ground-breaking, game-changing. However, many feminist critics found that a few of her points are as problem-atic as they are helpful in advancing gender equality. In this piece, I will highlight some of those points.

Ms. Watson starts the speech by describing how she became a feminist her-self. It is a heartfelt descrip-tion of some of the prob-lems that men and women

face because of their gen-der identities. One of the problems she mentions is the fact that she was often sexualised by the media at a very young age. Many of her male identified friends did not feel comfortable expressing their emotions and they do not feel like that is a manly thing to do. The first thing that crossed my mind as a fem-inist is that Emma Watson is drawing a strange paral-lel between the inequalities that women and men face. This was only one of many points in the speech where she either claims or implies that there is a similarity be-tween the proportion and kind of inequalities that women and men face. This is problematic because it’s not true. Looking at things such as the gender wage gap, and the difference in rates at which men and women get raped (world-wide, these are facts that do not favor women), that becomes very clear. Howev-er, the fact remains that at the essence of feminism is the acknowledgement that gender inequality affects women’s lives negatively from almost every direction

and every facet.The second problem is

that she uses those par-allelisms to justify men’s participation in the move-ment for gender equality. She claims that since gen-der inequalities affect men as well, it is now time that they join the movement that attempts to put an end to those inequalities. Oth-er feminists have objected to this because it assumes that the only reason why men would participate in the struggle against gen-der inequality is because it would also benefit them as well as women. First of all, this is untrue. If men get more money for do-ing the same jobs as wom-en are doing, then men at least sometimes benefit from this arrangement of gender inequality. Second-ly, women’s social and in-stitutional equality should be enough reason to join the movement. Convinc-ing people to join because of their own benefit should clearly be framed as just a bait for men to join, rath-er than what should be the actual motivation for men to join. All these problems mainly revolve around one:

COMMENTS ONEMMA WATSON’S “HEFORSHE”-SPEECH



making men the center of a movement that, some-times, rids men of their gender based privileges.

This is not the only in-stance in the speech where there is rather straightfor-ward marginalisation of the people who suffer the most from gender based inequality. People of colour, non-gender-binary-con-forming people, transsexu-al and transgender people, and many other catego-ries suffer invisibility in her speech. She claims that it is time to start thinking of gender as a spectrum, while in her speech she

only refers to two gender identities and the campaign is named “HeforShe”. This seems to me as if she is un-intentionally and perhaps out of good will, perpet-uating the disease which the campaign is trying to mend, and marginalises those who suffer the most from gender inequality. As a final remark, I only see these points as a problem because the speech was blown out of proportion in how astounding it was. I see these points as a prob-lem because they highlight how low the standards are when it comes to main-

stream rhetoric on gender equality.

Finally, I would like to emphasise that these are points that stand out as problematic, but there is at least one positive aspect to it: People listen to Emma Watson. She has contrib-uted at least a bit to the popularisation of the word feminist, and giving a little feminism 101: it’s about gender equality, and it’s about time you mobilised too!

Dina Al-Khatib Amr

“War is Peace. Free-dom is Slavery. Igno-rance is Strength.”

You are looking at the slo-gans of Oceania’s one and only party in George Or-well’s famous book ‘Nine-teen Eighty-Four’. The novel tells the story of a dystopian future without-privacy but a state machin-ery that observes, oppress-es and controls its citizens. It is commonly appointed one of the most important books of the last century and received a sort of of cult status. Even people, who have not read it, often refer to the ominous ‘Big

Brother’. Till today, Orwell’s fictional world appears everywhere, whether in newspaper articles on ‘the NSA affair’, it inspired graf-fitis or other artist’s works (the list of songs inspired by “Nineteen Eighty-Four” is incredibly long).

Yet, the year 1984 al-ready passed and the dic-tatorships of Hitler, Stalin and Franco, which mainly inspired Orwell to write “Nineteen Eighty-Four”, ended several decades ago. Although there is still a lot which has to be improved, it seems like the world is becoming a less violent and a more democratic place.

People stand up for their rights instead of blind-ly following their leaders. Thanks to media and the Internet, news can spread much faster than 50 years ago and are able to reach people all over the world. Thus, it became more dif-ficult for governments to hide information, so their citizens and other countries can hardly ignore what is going on out there. Gladly, an Orwellian world seems to be far away from our everyday life.

Recently this optimistic view was proven wrong by a man named Dave Eggers. His book,“The Circle” out-

PLEASE, TELL ME YOUR SECRETS


lines a dystopian future, where the Internet, but also political and social life are controlled by a com-pany, called ‘the Cirlce’. Some people might say, that Eggers’ book is an up-date of Orwell’s ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’, but this would underestimate its quality and distinctiveness. How-ever, it is nearly as alarming as Orwell’s dystopia. Eggers tells the story of Mae, a young wom-an who starts her new job at ‘the Circle’. This company frequently introduces new solu-tions to make all parts of people’s lives easier – to observe. Mae ex-periences a new and exciting world, where one has access to every piece of information one seeks. Through omnipresent cameras, smartphones and screens, privacy has become alien and is seen as a drawback for a world, which could be free of wars, crime and hu-man rights violations. You might find this thought disturbing and disagree with it. Of course, in our today’s world observance has still a very negative connotation and is mostly associated with totalitarian regimes. But what if every-one is observing everyone? When crime is not perse-cuted by the police but by

the neighbours who saw the burglar on a live cam from your living room? What if you immediately knew when your boyfriend or girlfriend is betraying you or that your grandma did not have a heart attack but is just napping on her couch – through live cams? “The Circle” builds a world, which seems to be perfect,

complete. With every inno-vation comes a wide range of advantages, which seem to be undeniable. And what is most important: the people contribute vol-untarily to the system. They like to be watched and to watch others; they do not even have the incentive to commit a crime anymore, because all their friends would see the embarrass-ing act on screen. “Secrets are Lies. Sharing is Caring. Privacy is Theft.” are the slogans of the future.

Does this sound strange

to you? Just think about your own actions. When you meet someone at a party, you look for them on Facebook. When you eat something delicious you post it on Instagram. When you want to be recognised by someone, you click the “Like”-button. We do not admit it, but we already

are part of a system of observance. Eggers’ utopian world is not that utopian at all. By joining social networks we contribute to it vol-untarily and we are still ignoring the dangers of this development. A totalitarian regime would be tangible for us, the Internet is not. Whereas wars and tor-ture lead to huge pro-tests, social pressure

and the control of our pri-vacy rarely does. Therefore we drift towards a new society of control, where ‘Big Brother’ does not have one, but many faces. There might be no crime – but there will be also no free-dom. Maybe, our world should always stay a little bit incomplete, perfectly imperfect, to ensure, that people keep their minds and eyes open and engage in social and political pro-cesses.

Viktoria Kamuf



HOLY WARThat black bastard, ever advancing, ravaging everything in its path. Heedless of others, the black’s path of destruction consumes all, and does not give way to the light. We know they all deserve to be killed, knocked off the face of the earth, but the black’s advance is simply too over-whelming. At every move, at every turn, try as we might, our whiteness, our purity, succumbs to the black’s mischievous and deadly ploys. Ever since the beginning we have been locked in mortal combat, trying to establish one pure world, without the smudge of imperfection that black is, to no avail.

It all started simply with a small nudge from our end. Then came the coun-ter-nudge, and another, and another. As the white, we tried to fight back, slow-ly, trying to establish some kind of foothold against this eternal scourge. Clos-er to the beginning it was

much more simple, we were able to hold the black bastards back and protect our own. At one point we even thought that we had it, that finally we had achieved what we came to do; a glorious genocide was within our reach. One brave knight made it closer to the heart of their oper-ations than expected. Too soon, however, we realised that the black’s animalistic senses were too powerful; alas this brave knight was martyred.

The longer we pushed against the black plague, the more casualties we gathered in our holy cru-sade. Many good whites fell to this disease, from the small to the large. We re-member them all, may they forever enjoy the pleasures of Valhalla. Songs will be written, epics will be sung, all for the glory of those who sacrificed everything to maintain the purity of our reich.

Standing on the battle-field, I look over our troops who are dwindling in num-ber. Still, I can tell from the

looks on their faces that they are determined. They know what is at stake, and recognise the consequenc-es of their actions today. Although ragtag, we rep-resent something greater, something worth standing up for. The black bastard is on the other side of this open field, the determi-nation in its face matches ours. But it is simply not as beautiful and true. I turn to my troops, and pause.

“Our actions today will echo throughout history. The martyrs of this fight have been plentiful, and we revere and remember all of their efforts. It is our responsibility, nay, our call-ing, to ensure that once and for all, our world is freed of this black monster we are facing here!”

“Let us make today count, let us make this final stand and show them that we, the whites, are the only ones who belong on this field, in this universe!”

A loud roar ensues, and turning around again, I be-gin our deployment. We strike, again and again, but

creative»


again and again we are cut down mercilessly; a testa-ment to the cruelty of our adversary. Slowly but surely, the black bastard’s troops move in, finally reaching my royal guard. Red cer-tainly does not look good on white.

Even these elite troops, however, do not stand a chance, and suddenly I feel a knife in my belly. Could it be? Is it possible that the black bastard, an in-ferior entity, has achieved my dethroning? I have not enough time to ponder this

as I topple over. That is it, we have failed

in our task, and as the world around me turns black, I re-alise it is checkmate.

Premysl Trojan

Don’t tell me you don’t re-member what happened yesterday night! You were there, with me, climbing up a tree to escape from those pirates. You know, the pi-rates who ended up get-ting us free beers at that festival, right before the mean giant came to town and destroyed everything. I still tremble at the thought of the evil that was roam-ing the streets of that un-known yet familiar place. You do remember when we went to get my foreign friend –whose name just slipped my mind- from the train station, right? That station that turned out to be a huge nightclub as well as a therapy room. You don’t remember? You don’t remember anything at all? But it only happened last night. Oh wait, maybe it was all a dream.

For a second, I believed all this was true. Although the morning has come and

gone, I still have clear mem-ories of those mad adven-tures that took place in my mind. And like one opens the red curtains of a thea-tre to reveal a stage to the

public, I close my eyelids and become the audience of my own unconscious.

But I think my uncon-scious has some serious mental issues.

I guess you could say my dreams are very odd. Most of the time I am afraid for my life, because some ran-

dom witch I do not even know, tries to murder me. It can be quite traumat-ic. But some dreams are more pleasant. No, not those dreams, you little rascal. Sometimes I dream of meeting friends I hav-en’t seen in a long time. Other nights, I dream of fun times and sunny af-ternoons, with rainbows and butterflies dancing together in the prairie of a million tulips. It all seems so nice, this bliss I can al-most touch. But the night comes to an end and I awaken, with for only re-membrance, blurry shad-ows of people I met and

places I have been. But I want to remember. I

believe that dreams are un-dervalued. Yes, they take place in the most crooked corners of our minds, yet does that make them less-er? The events and people we dream of at night may vanish in the morning, but

THE BELL DREAMS



there is always an aftertaste. Haven’t you ever dreamt of something frightful or sad, and woken up in tears or distress? Those mind-made movies may sometimes feel real, as if everything that happened behind those closed curtains happened in ‘real life’. Those dreams were not real to the rest of the world, yet they did have an impact on us. And that impact, that aftertaste, whether bitter or sweet, is the proof that dreams are real.

They have a real effect on us, on our mood, on

our perspectives. They have the power to make us re-think concepts, friendships, sentiments towards certain people or opinions. Dreams are not part of the real, material world, but they are nonetheless part of our own, mental space. And why discard such incredible adventures on the sole ba-sis that they only happened in our minds? I think this is food for thought. We shouldn’t leave our dreams on the bedside table; we should cherish the expe-rience we gain from them and try to learn from it,

or simply enjoy it. Dreams might only happen when we close our eyes and be-come a prey to our uncon-scious’ creativity, but they can and do affect us in many unknown ways. As a wise, bearded man, that did not exist, once said:

“Of course it is happen-ing inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?”

–Albus Dumbledore.

Clea Samson

An extract from the biography of Scrampy Thomason Robertson Williamson

It was about 3 min-utes past 4’clock in the morning when the grey-haired man walked flimsi-ly down the dark-ened hallway in his spectacuhouse in CentraLondon. He made it to the end of the corridor with its hallucinating blullow wallpaper (like those op-tical illusions that make it look like things move when

they are not) - except this wallpaper did genuinely move. With one massive breath he then took to

the task of descending the shimmering spiral staircase, which stood at the epicen-tre of the colossal mansion

he called his ‘home’. Final-ly, he made it to the kitch-en, having walked through the vast array of animals,

which littered the ground floor of his MarvelHouse; he had to step over the chickens (5 of them), duck un-der the two rain-bowous parrots and then meander past the dogs, cats, snails and the Sca-

latrix course. When he entered the

kitchen at 3:45 in the morning after the slight-

TRUE SHORT STORYACTUAL FACT (NOT FICTION)


ly tricky descent from his CoolRoom where he slept, he decided it was probably time for his supper. Some-times it would happen at 4 AM or 3PM or 2GM; it re-ally depended on what was going on with the weather forecast as shown on the telebox which he used. Out came the flaptop and onto the interwebs he went:

What can I eat for dinner at 3:45 in the morning after a long descent from my SleepingArea and stepping on my cat?That was the ques-

tion proposed to the Tru-thEngine, which had over-taken the GoogleFinder and Yoohaaa!!!! A few years ago.

Having settled on the ‘Most Viewed Item For This Search’ the man took the cheetahs for a walk round the playground in the back garden. Joël and Michael loved running around the playground and swinging on the MonkeyBars but they recently had taken

some time out to spend more time with the man’s recent addition to the Mar-velHouse — 44 cans of finely chopped tomatoes. The two cheetahs felt Re-aLuv towards the cans of

finely chopped tomatoes and looked after them as if they were their own Apple Car (Luxurious).

Anyway, after 3 and a quarter more years the man fell ill from the dead-ly BlairVirus but made a remarkable recovery after ignoring doctors requests and choosing to buy some Sunny Delight off of eBAY and injecting it into his eye.

After his Close Death, the man decided it was time to take life a little bit quieter and it was only fair on his body and the spectacu-house by the Park that he spent more time in it and caring for it and less time throwing useless merchan-dise at tourists near the King’s House.

Scrampy Thomason Rob-ertson Williamson was to spend the rest of his days caring for the animals and eating Chinese food in his house every day. He lived a remarkable life and it was the pinnacle of his charis-matic political life when he was chosen to lead the lo-cal swimming team in the bi-annual ‘Race Against Ducks’ on the river. The legacy lives on.

Until Part 43 of this re-markable true story of a true British political and en-vironmental stalwart who has a place in the hearts of millions.

Finn O’Neill

Illustrations: Laura Goldberg



He entered his keys into the lock and softly opened the door. The room re-vealed itself. A glimpse of the sun appeared to escape through the dusty curtains, shyly illuminating the room. Standing at the threshold of the door he stuck his left thumb in the back of both boots; first right, then left. His thumb stroked the wet, dark-brown leather. Shoeless now, he stepped into the room. He sat down on a skinny wooden chair and cleaned his bare feet, now covered with dead flies and yellow-ish dust stains. He turned around and there he was, sitting outside on the bal-cony. Smoothly inhaling the smoke of the cigar, placed upon his broken lips, the old man sat outside staring at the sun. Like a plant that is going through photosyn-thesis, he simply sat there, doing nothing, thinking of nothing, saying noth-ing. He wondered what was going through the old

man’s mind, what thoughts flooded his brain. After a deep breath and having cleared his throat, Samu-el stood up carefully and walked towards the balco-ny.

He moved the grey silky curtains and continued to open the balcony door. Not

even the cracking sound of the door woke the old man up, who had seemed to drown his stare in the sunlight. Samuel did not say a word, but simply looked into the old man’s face to somehow catch his attention, to make him aware of his presence. He did not even sigh. Then, Samuel took a folded chair, unclipped it and proceed-ed to sit on it. A tense si-lence filled the empty room, as he just started to

look around to inquire into what seemed to be the old man’s cave. The ceiling that covered the balcony was cracked, and the paint that was once white became pale grey. Its corners had become a spider’s nest, and bugs crawled upon the dirty walls. The place, to any ra-

tional, clean human be-ing, would be a hell; a hell where the dirt was the king and the old man its slave who simply sat there, there-by ignoring the rest of

the world around him. Sud-denly, finally, words came out of the old man’s lips.

“Do you come here be-cause you care or because you pity me?” he chal-lenged.

Somewhat perplexed at the statement, Samuel thought of a pertinent an-swer.

“I’m here because you’re my father. More of a blood tie, I would say.”

It sounded sarcastic, it sounded exigent. The old

YESTERDAY THE LEAFS WERE BROWNER


man smiled. “Tell me about your

wife,” he asked, in a much less uptight tone.

“She’s beautiful to me. She always has and always will. But she’s a woman, women seem to be com-plicated creatures, I’ve learnt.”

“What a discovery you have made, son,” humor-ously, the old man said.

Both of them laughed, in a shy manner, but they laughed.

“Look. I didn’t come here to give you a lecture, but this place is horrible. You see the dirt, the cracks, the dead flies, the smoke, the broken wine glasses, the smell of dust? It’s rotten.”

“Almost as rotten as the world out there,” assured the old man.

He continued: “You know, it’s colder in the shadow, but I like it like this. Sometimes, when it’s sunny, you get to stare at the sun. Your eyes feel like they are burning, but you feel human. You face it, you feel vulnerable, you feel it blaze your insides and burn your skin. But that’s what it’s all about, feeling it.”

He inhaled the smoke from the cigar, and turned back to stare at the hori-zon. Samuel was unsure if he had understood it right. His father, an old man, ra-tional in all his senses, pre-ferred to live in the most precarious circumstances of all, in the most rotten state a human could live. Nevertheless, he was there, smoking, smiling, laugh-ing, living. Samuel shook

his head in disapproval, but was promptly interrupted by the old man.

“Samuel. The truth of life lies not within one’s hand, not within one’s physical state nor one’s place in the real world. The truth lies within each of our souls. It’s there, hiding, crying out for you to look for it.”

He took out his pack of cigarettes, took the last one and placed on in his lips. The old man grinned.

“I know,” the old man said. “Yesterday, the leafs were browner.”

Samuel struck the match against the box, lit up the tip of the cigarette, and in-haled.

Sergio Calderon-Harker

BELLRECIPEA discussion at the dinner table with a vegetarian or a vegan is not always easy. Sometimes they are not sure about the reasons for following such a rigid eat-ing habit: “sorry, just cu-rious, but is it a habit or do you care about animal rights?”. Sometimes they look at you first, then over

to your side of the plate; you might be right, there is some jealousy in their eyes, they truly love the smell of meat, or it might just sim-ply be disgust. When the discussion ends in condem-nation or pity, it is usually time for the third glass of wine, for the both of you.

Either way, such a mo-

ment is a reminder that it is simply not necessary to stuff yourself with meat every day. A satisfactory meal is not always a dish, where the greater portion of the plate is a vegetarian’s nightmare; a truth, the fol-lowing recipe will hopefully reveal….

Illustrations: Lea Schaefer



Brussel sprouts with sweet chestnut and baconFor two people:

• 500g Bean sprouts• 2 garlic cloves• Olive oil & salt & pep-

per• 150g Cooked sweet

chestnut• 80g Bacon or Pancetta• 7 juniper berries• Juice of ½ lemon

Water the brussel sprouts and peel them afterwards. Remove the outer leaves,

cut off the stem and quar-ter them, cut the garlic into thin pieces and heat it up with oil in a pan for about 3 minutes. Remove the gar-lic from the pan, put it to the side. Now it is time for the bacon. Heat the bacon in the same pan until it is crispy, remove it and put it also to the side. In the end, heat up the bean sprouts in the same pan with a lit-tle bit of salt, for about 5 minutes. Add the chest-nut, leave it for about 10

minutes with the cover on but stir regularly. By now the bean sprouts should be cooked. Add the garlic and the bacon to the pan. After adding some some lemon juice, pepper, juniper ber-ries, heat up the pan one last time – Dinner time!

Recipe taken from Das Zeit Magazin, October 2014 by Elizabeth Raether.

Lea Schaefer

True. Maybe

I don’t quite know what to say,Or how to say - it.

There’s more, I promise.It’s coming; it’s not as easy as it seems.

Words on this page resem-ble bloodon a stone - profound.

Insatiable desires make it hard-er to keep going.

Going, going, going;Somewhere, anywhere -

Possibly everywhere.

Dreams - The truth. Truth in dreams

Vice versa. Both seem to beindefinite yet the most definite

Of anything we know. They existirrevocably. I think -

Untitled #2

Doubtlessly I’m indisputa-blywalking away. Awayfrom here - towards -there. Seems fair.

Unfair for those around, fair to

myself. Ego - first. Tryingto find that not so omni-present ingredient - peace.

Try and write a book called‘A piece of peace’ - that wasa waste of time. Just find-ingpeace would cure the hunger.

Hunger strikes hark back tothat great figure. He found peace - I think. To be held in such regardwould be… peace?

Neil O’Finn

POETRY


RES

TAU

RA

NT

3 CO

URSE

MEA

LFO

R 2

A CA

RAFE

WIN

E€

37.5

0

Documents

The Bell #6: November 2014 - Truth