#21 I hate being a cripple

25th December 2012 - 8.37pm. Family holiday house, Middle-of-Nowhere, FRANCE. It happened as I was walking up and down the bottom step of our big staircase, trying to do some exercise to burn off calories from Christmas lunch. 

(Erm NO I was NOT going to go jogging because a) it was so cold outside I risked freezing my nose off and end up looking like Michael Jackson, b) I couldn't be bothered, c) it was pitch black which, in the middle of nowhere, means you end up running into Dementors or Big Foot or werewolves or all of the above - have you seen Harry Potter??? Honestly, Dementors are TERRIFYING! Although I guess that if you replaced their heads with Pikachu's face and pretended they were a new Pokemon, they'd be relatively cute.

 

*blink*

That's even worse.)

ANYWAY! So that is how, as I was stepping BACKWARD down the POLISHED WOODEN STAIRCASE in my SOCKS as any sane person would, I twisted my ankle with a big loud 'CRACK', fell to the ground, and then thought I should probably start screaming my head off in order to attract my parents' attention and elicit some sympathy. Which was a pretty dumb thing to do because it made my mother react in the way she knows best, which is to run around screaming in panic and flailing her arms for 10mins like a headless chicken. Except chickens don't have arms. 

Or do they...?

In A&E that night, the French  doctor was like, 'Hon hee hon, oui, it eeze le sprain. Sacrebleu, your tendons are torn, hon hee hon. Zut alors, you need ze crutches and vous cannot walk for three weeks, hon hee hon. Le camembert, baguette, mais oui, hon hee hon!' (I may have paraphrased a bit for the purpose of accuracy) (Why was he speaking English to me, anyway? Weren't the fact I have a FRENCH name, a FRENCH accent, spoke FLUENT FRENCH, and kept saying 'Stop speaking to me in English with that stupid accent, I am FRENCH' in FRENCH, a bit of a giveaway? Maybe he was scared of my step-dad who is English.)

So now, after having spent many weeks at home in London drooling over my New Look sparkly 10-inch heels in tormented anguish because I can't wear them, and after various hospital visits, some new X-rays have revealed that my ankle is not only sprained but is in fact FRACTURED and is going to take months to heal. Seriously. Couldn't the NHS see the GIANT CRACK in my vestal pedula, and I dunno, make necessary recommendations for my recovery????

(OK yes, I guess the fact I used the cross-trainer at the gym for weeks despite the shooting pain in my ankle and the fact I frequently hobbled to Sainsburys without my crutches to buy lifetime supplies of Maltesers despite warnings from everyone not to... may not have been a great idea.)

But to make matters even more amazing, I have now sprained my wrist while showing off my amazing Jedi moves with my crutches to strangers staring at me in the street because I was awesome, then have fallen down the stairs again, causing me to pull my back. Perhaps in the future I will try NOT to experiment hobbling down the stairs safely with my eyes closed just to see if I have psychic powers or not.

So the lesson is...

ORGANIC GREEN TEA TIME! Hmm Maltesers.

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, 31 Jan 2013, London, UK

#20 Gym Rats.

You may remember my article The Library, True Love & Testosterone from my juvenile university days when I had just come out of a uterus. I expounded on the purpose of libraries which, it seems, is to cater to the needs of acne-ridden post-pubescent males in their desperate search for girls. 

 Errrm.

But...

What about us women??? Where was our daily dose of male eye candy when we needed it? Why did I waste three years of my life at a top albeit hot-guy-less uni (except for the Business and English male students. They were fit) getting a degree when I could have been doing something more productive with my life, like stalking and taking photos of hot men from behind bushes (oh wait, I did that anyway)? Why weren't there any fit guys in the Library's Chaucer section? Why did the chicken cross the road? What is the mechanism responsible for breaking the electrowek gauge symmetry, giving mass to the W and Z bosons? Why do people sneeze with their eyes closed?

Basically, why are there no hot guys in public places?

(Not that I care, seeing as I have a super hot boyfriend of my own [aka Baby Man. Yes that's what I call him. No he is not one of those weird baby mutant things. Shut up. Poo heads.]. Indeed, after dating various blokes I wasn't really interested in [sorry if any of you are reading this, it's nothing personal. I'm sure you're all wonderful and not boring at all], I finally acknowledged Baby Man's numerous attempts to woo my amazing self [including one time when he showed up at my student house in final year to serenade me with his guitar - MEGA LOL, OK it was quite romantic - then asked me out, causing me to do my Nelson-from-The-Simpsons laugh and say 'No'] [perhaps I should cool it with the parentheses]. Certes, a few months after graduation in July 2011 [with my FIRST CLASS WITH DISTINCTION THANK YOU VERY MUCH TAKE THAT MISS WOODRUFF], Baby Man and I got together in London and have now been in what they call 'a relationship' for the past year and a bit [Relationships. EWWWWWW]. To think that two years ago, I was actually cool and had boasted about wanting to end up a strong, independent, feminist business tycoon spinster with nine cats, a pink private jet and a butler in a thong. WHAT HAS MY LIFE COME DOWN TO???)

But I digress. The topic of discussion is in fact GYM RATS.

(AWWW THIS IS ACTUALLY SOOOOOO CUUUUUUUUUUTE!!!!! LOOK AT HIS WIDDLE EYES AND WIDDLE EARS AWWWWW)

There seems to be a higher proportion of good-looking women than there is of attractive men, making life difficult for the awesome chicks of the world. After all, how are we to get any OPTICAL respite from the harsh lives we lead? We can hardly do any chatting up due to the serious lack of eye candy, so we get chatted up instead. Which is all very nice and everything, but seriously, at the gym???

I mean, can you name one woman who LIKES answering the question 'How you doin' when her legs are spread at a 180° angle on the outer thigh machine? Or feeling your hard... BICEPS (OMG I know what you were thinking, you filthy-minded person!!!), when wearing so little to no make-up that she looks like Uncle Fester from the Addams Family? Or agreeing to go on a coffee date afterward wearing her oversized, tea-stained SpongeBob t-shirt and Oxfam pyjama trousers used as trackie bottoms?

OR when she looks and smells as if a giant Golden Retriever had relieved himself on her?


No-oh. I didn't THINK so.

Guys, just leave us alone.

I will now go make myself some organic green tea.

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, 24 Jan 2013, London, UK

#19 'Spring Awakening': I just wasted two hours of my life

Today, my friends Miss Jo, Monsieur J. and I went to see our university's production of the acclaimed musical Spring Awakening.

For which I auditioned... and wasn't cast. Grrrrrrrrrr... They obviously can't recognise real talent when it hits them in the face like a pile of poo. Seriously. I thought I'd done a pretty good job, just take a look at my audition tape.

Spring Awakening is an American musical based on a 1891 play of the same name written by the German playwright Frank Wedekind. The title is an allegory for the discovery of sexuality and adulthood, and as the finale song The Song Of Purple Summer suggests, new beginnings and new life (despite the theme of death which is inherent).

Basically, the musical is about sex. Teenagers discovering plain, raw sex.

The basis of the plot should be quite interesting to be honest. Shocking, even, which is how I usually like my plays/musicals.

Indeed, some (*cough* Miss Jo *cough*) gasped in absolute horror at various scenes  (ie. when the hot guy playing Melchior pulled his breeches down so you could see his bum; suggested sadomasochism and masturbation; two males kissing passionately. I won't go on for fear of disturbing sensitive souls.)

The singing and dancing were good (Miss Jo particularly enjoyed the leadman's singing and his bum)

I think that what surprised me the most, however, was how uncomfortable the musical made the audience feel. After all, aren't modern-day audiences used to all this sexual outwardness and swearing via the media and the expansion of pornography to the extent it becomes practically fully acceptable?

"We are used to sex scenes on TV or in films," says Miss Jo, "but when you see it on stage, you can feel the tension in the audience. Especially when the fit guys pulling down their underpants on stage are fellow students."

HOWEVER. 

OK yes, it was pretty awesome that I got to laugh for an hour or two at my friend shielding her puritan eyes from these abominable images before her (except when peeking at Melchior's bum a couple of times). 

But other than the fact the musical elicited some gasps and claps (most of the audience were friends of the cast), I found it...

PRETTY. BLOODY. BORING.

Honestly. I'm sorry, Uni Musical Theatre Soc, but I could BARELY stay awake. The plot was slow, disconnected and predictable. The musical numbers had nothing to do with the subject matter, which made the story untenable. The decor was boring. The costumes so bland Mother Theresa could pass off as Lagy Gaga next to them. All in all, there was NOTHING to titillate my emotions or curiosity.

Maybe I'm just not a fan of musicals I haven't starred in, simply because they could have done with having me in them.

Ah well. Organic green tea time.

You can listen to the entirety of the soundtrack on Spotify: Steven Sater – Spring Awakening

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, Kenilworth 05/02/11

#18 Hairdressers Are Psychos ©

Do not trust hairdressers. Hairdressers are evil psychos. The lot of them.

Here is a transcript of the dialogue which took place at my hair salon this morning. (I may have paraphrased a bit for the purpose of accuracy.)

Caffeine Bubbles: Good morning, O beautiful hairdresser. I'm so sorry to bother you on this lovely day but -

Evil Psychopatic Hairdresser: WHADDAYAWANT.

CB: Well I was just wondering if I could please have a haircut if that's OK? I'm sure you must be very busy, so I understand if you don't have time, it's just -

EPH: WHADDAYAWANT.

CB: Could you please cut off 5cm? Observe my really long brunette-Blake-Lively-meets-Penelope-Cruz hair [cue millions of multicoloured butterflies and soft violins as CB's beautiful mane is softly rustled by the wind]. I want it to remain that way, just 5cm shorter.

EPH: RIGHT YEAH. 5CM. NOT 20CM.

CB: That's right. Thank you so much for your understanding, you are a wonderful, talented human being with so much kindness in your heart.

EPH: I UNDERSTAND PERFECTLY. [unsettling psychopathic smile as EPH holds up a shiny pair of lacerated scissors]

She cut off 20cm.

Me before

+

Me now

Well, sort of.

*blink*

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

It is as though part of my soul has been ripped from me. Life will NEVER be the same again! Indeed, I am facing a bad hair year!!!!!!

(Note to self: in the future, cut your hair yourself.)

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, 31 August 2010, Brussels

#17 Blank Space © Caffeine Bubbles

I thought the title of this article was super awesome and indie and cool until I realised the song by The XX that I was trying to make a pun out of was NOT called "Blank Space" but is in fact called Basic Space. Yeah. I'm a failure at life.

ANYWAY.

This article could be about The XX (following an email conversation with my friend Miss Smiley Face about the sexual innuendoes in the first track of their album) but... IT IS NOT.

The purpose of this article is to commiserate the fact that you all desperately miss me due to my extended hiatus from angry blogging. Seriously, sunning yourself on the beach with your friends all summer doesn't leave much room for mocking stuff. I've tried to antagonise people by doing my Nelson-from-The-Simpsons laugh at their failed prowesses but finding stuff to make fun of outside of uni is pretty hard. 

It's not that easy poking fun at your dad's cooking. Or at your dog.

Or your mum's choice of footwear.

But do not despair! For I will begin to write again at some point in my life if I don't find anything more interesting to do, like practising fitting my foot in my nostril (oh wait, I already do that). Indeed once back at uni (my main source of blogging inspiration), I will begin to get angry at stuff again. 'Whehay,' I hear you rejoice, 'My life has no meaning without you, Caffeine Bubbles!'

So... expect lots of angry stuff about things normal people don't get angry about, like:

- your mum,

- fluffy bunnies,

- trees,

- Mickey Mouse,

- hot guys (except hot guys don't really make me angry. Unless they knock on my bedroom door every morning dressed in a sparkly Tinky Winky costume and do the Chicken Dance for an hour while singing the Macarena. That'd just make me sneeze my brain out of my face)

Also, I may be getting a new camera (but probably not) so expect lots of inappropriate photos of random things/people that I stalk from behind dumpsters (but chances are I'll actually splash all my money on make-up, clothes and chocolate so don't count on it).

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, Brussels 27/08/10

#16 The Story Of How I Went Mad © Caffeine Bubbles

A summer internship is a great opportunity for university students. You get to explore the workings of the professional world, you begin to make a name for yourself, and most importantly of all, you earn dosh that you can splash out on that BMW you've always dreamed of.

Or on a pony.

Errmm... This just came up when I typed 'cute pony' into Google Images... :

WHAT THE...?

But I digress.

SO. INTERNSHIPS. Basically, you get to do something other than lying in bed all summer watching old episodes of The Hills wearing your Snoopy pyjamas while eating deep-fried Oreos.

But when you realise that you are somewhat over-qualified for some of the stuff you're doing, like organising business cards by alphabetical order or labelling files, things turn to snot.

You try to find ways to attenuate the boredom, one of which is purging your anguish through writing. Normal people use a private journal. But as you may have guessed, I'm not exactly normal. I use email.

From: Caffeine Bubbles
To: Caffeine Bubbles' Colleague

Subject: This Is The Story Of How Caffeine Bubbles... Went Mad

« I am so bored, » typed Caffeine Bubbles into Microsoft Word in a cathartic attempt to express her agony. Having finished most of the work she had to do for the day within the first hour she got to the office, she now had practically nothing to do, except for a bit of research on the Treaty of Lisbon. In the past hour and forty-four minutes, she’d tried to find multiple ways of entertaining herself, including spinning around in her chair until she felt dizzy, throwing paper balls into a bin, making a cup of organic green tea every fifteen minutes, using the labeling machine to print out "Caffeine Bubbles is very bored" labels, and other fascinating things.

The internet was now proving to be troublesome, refusing to load various pages that were necessary for her mental well-being, namely the BBC news website, Youtube and Facebook, and for her job, namely the EU Commission webpage.

“MOVE YOUR FAT ASS,” scream-whispered Caffeine Bubbles at her computer as she repeatedly hit the screen with a purple ruler she’d found on the floor. You might have guessed that she couldn’t really allow herself to audibly yell at the PC, as not only would it hinder the work of various executives working down the corridor but it would also make them think she was completely insane, resulting in a loss of career brownie points (for Caffeine Bubbles was no Ulysses – she WANTED a job).

So instead she resorted to scream-whispering -- the action of whispering something that could sound like a scream were it amplified on a super-powerful megaphone -- at various objects which were unfortunate enough to cross her path, such as a rubber, a phone-book, a phone, and the gateway to the alleviation of her suffering: the DELL computer. But the DELL computer would not budge and a brutal sign lit up the screen: “INTERNAL PORTAL ERROR”.

“AAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH,” scream-whispered Caffeine Bubbles once more as she typed this into Microsoft Word. “This is horrendous! I can’t get on with doing research for my EU Commission magazine and I can’t even watch stupid Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly videos in order to instill feelings of ardent cynicism and anger at bigotry in this mind-numbingly bored skull of mine!”

Two hours later, my email had unfortunately been forwarded to all the executives in the office to make them understand they weren't keeping me busy enough. Well apparently, they appreciate my honesty, and will do their best to give me more business cards to organise by alphabetical order, and more ink toners to stock up in the supply room.

(Note to self: stick to scream-whispering)

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, Brussels 23/07/08

#15 Everybody Loves Glenn Beck © Caffeine Bubbles

This article is dedicated to a man whom the world should revere.

Indeed, you have rightly guessed that I speak of Glenn Beck, whose prowess is demonstrated in this video.

Oh, Glenn Beck. What a man.

So for all you Glenn Beck lovers out there: the first installment of my 8,909,897,000-word historical novel praising Glenn Beck. Enjoy.

New Beginnings: An Objective History of Glonnie Buck's American Revolution

A 8,909,897,000-word historical novel by Caffeine Bubbles

One: Sewing The Seeds Of Revolt

“I just love my country...,“ choked Glonnie Buck as he stared straight into the camera lens, his glittering blue eyes releasing a cascade of tears, conveying all the hopelessness of his soul and the purely unselfish affection he felt for the US citizens who would later be watching his programme on Fox, a can of beer in hand and a wholesome Walmart ready-meal rested on their plenteous bellies. Yes, that was the illustrious American dream as they and Glonnie saw it… but it was at risk of being shattered into oblivion by evil hands. “... and I fear for it.”

Ever since the dishonest rise to power of Obamin, the malicious socialist Muslim Kenyan who had claimed to want to reestablish the US’s economic and social welfare but who had in fact destroyed everybody’s hopes by turning the nation into a Communist dictatorship, nothing had been the same. In the early months of his administration, a deadly virus – Socio-Political Hypochondria – had mysteriously swept the entire country, threatening to kill off a significant proportion of the population, and more particularly people who had an inclination for tea and grand old parties. Those who had contracted the virus continued to dwell in terror of rotting away, but an act of God had somehow made it possible for them to live, albeit while suffering from horrendous side effects, including baldness, paranoia, halitosis, and deteriorating sexual potency.

Glonnie began to sob into his heart-patterned handkerchief while retaining every ounce of his eminent dignity. A dribble of golden snot trickled out of his right nostril… a symbol of American despair and of the chaos that had ravaged the land. He wiped it away quickly and put his sodden handkerchief away. He solemnly stood up from his chair in the manner of a great monarch who had just finished making a distinguished speech, like Dumbledore III of England (yes, he remembered the name he had read in “An American Guide to European History” by Bill O’Reillo.)

“My fellow Americans,” Glonnie called out in his melodiously patriotic voice, his thick blond hair glowing in the studio lights, his graceful, well-endowed physique radiating the heat of revolt, “the situation has become more than we can bear. My 'circle theory' has now been proven correct, although I genuinely wish it hadn’t, and –.” He was interrupted by another sob which rose up in his throat, his face contorted in disillusion. “We –.” The pain was too great, he was at a loss for words. “We must -.”

He looked up to the ceiling above, envisioning the blue skies over them and repeatedly blinking to chase the tears from his eyes. Glonnie closed his eyes and took a deep breath. When he fluttered them open, his glare of steel pierced the camera, inducing a fierce desire for insurgency in whoever looked upon him. “We must fight.”

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, Brussels 22/07/10

#14 Poetic Thoughts

The football World Cup started last Friday. Excitement filled my heart. All would have been wonderful had it not been for... EXAM REVISION. 

ARRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH.

Out of the nine matches so far, I have only watched five. FIVE. SERIOUSLY.

Why are university departments so cruel as to impose exams at the end of the academic year? Can't they find a way of letting us take them,? Do they not have an ounce of humanity left in their 1980s-goggles-wearing, shrivelled, social-life-less hearts of stone?

I have had my nose buried in Lord Byron and Coleridge poems for god knows how long. I've just written online short articles (under a different name) for some Romantic texts I'm studying.

I know what you're thinking. 'Beauty, confidence AND brains? Phwoar Caffeine Bubbles, you're so amazing and sexy. I wish every girl were like you.' What can I say? I was just born awesome.

Cup of organic green tea, then more revision. If I don't get that First Class degree, I will emigrate to the caves of Guinea Bissau and worship broccoli. 

So here are some thoughts regarding Coleridge's 'Rime of the Ancient Mariner'.

Many critics have attempted to decipher the meaning of Coleridge's 'Rime of the Ancient Mariner' (first published in 1798 in "Lyrical Ballads"), but still it remains unclear.

However, the moral can be more easily identified. As Coleridge himself stated in his reply to Mrs Barbauld in "The Road to Xanadu", the poem 'ought to have had no more moral than the Arabian Nights' tale of the merchant's sitting down to eat dates by the side of a well, and throwing the shells aside, and lo! a genie starts up, and says he must kill the aforesaid merchant, because one of the date shells had, it seems, put out the eye of the genie's son', suggesting that The Rime was over-moralistic.

The moral of the entire poem seems to be stated in the lines "He prayeth best who loveth best / All creatures great and small". We are reminded of one of the Biblical commandments, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" (Matthew 22:34-40).

Several examples within the poem point to this claim.

Firstly, the Mariner's arbitrary shooting of the Albatros at the end of Part I is followed by great torments which afflict the whole crew. (Whether the two events are intraconnected or not is another question altogether, however). We are never told of the reasons for which the Mariner shoots the Albatros but some critics have compared his action to Judas's betrayal of Jesus.

Secondly, the Mariner regards the "slimy creatures" in the sea with great contempt and disgust, only viewing them as beautiful beings at the end of Part IV (when the Albatros falls from his neck and sinks into the sea).
Thirdly, the Wedding Guest's initial wariness of the Mariner through his appearance reminds us of the notion that one should not judge a book by its cover.

The Albatross does play a large part in the poem. Not only is it the object of the Mariner's crime, it also becomes a symbol of his guilt. The reader is again reminded of the crucifiction of Jesus and of Judas's betrayal in (Matthew 27). The 'cross' is alluded to in polyptotonic form at the end of Parts I, II and III, and the Albatross is indirectly compared to a Messianic figure, notably by one of the voices in Part V: "'Is it he?' quoth one, 'Is this the man? / By him who died on cross, / With his cruel bow he laid full low / The harmless Albatross."

And some thoughts regarding "The Giaour" by Lord Byron:

I disagree with the unfounded claim that Byron emphasises a mysogynistic point of view through his exploration (or lack thereof) of various characters.

In my opinion, the reason for which there is little or no description of Leila is because, contrary to the Oxford Companion to English Literature's synopsis of The Giaour, the focus is not on Leila but on Hassan's and primarily The Giaour's motives and idiosyncrasies.

Firstly, this leads us to think of the notion of Orientalism (coined by Edward Said in 1978 'Orientalism'), which in Said's opinion, was a solidly Western interpretation of Eastern mores. According to Said, Orientalism was a movement which emphasised the distinction between Western powers and Eastern civilisation, with little regard to the accuracy of their claims. It can thus be argued that Hassan, who originates from the Ottoman empire, and The Giaour who comes from "the cold clim" are symbols of Western and Eastern conflicts of ideas and mores.

Secondly, it can be argued that Leila is merely an object which denotes the conflict encompassing the Greek War Of Independence. Leila, it has been suggested by various critics, is a symbol of Greece under the power of the Ottoman Empire (represented by Hassan). The Giaour could be a symbol of the European powers allied with Greece. Due to the fact that Leila plays no significant part in the poem, the focus here is again brought on the conflict between the two powers, represented by two men. Thus the conflict between West and East is highlighted.

Thirdly, one of the main reasons for which there is little focus on Leila is that the poem is more an exploration of the torments of the Byronic hero, and the psychological ordeal he is put through. Romanticism plays a major part here, bringing to the fore the notions of the self, of love and of tortuous guilt. One must remember that the Romantic hero puts little emphasis on the effect of events on others, but rather on the effect of others on him or herself. We can suggest that The Giaour is a reflection of Byron himself and of the 'illicit' love affairs he had, notably one with his half-sister Augusta Leigh.

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, 14 June 2010, Warwickshire, UK

#13 Eyebrow-Less Men With No Hair ©

About a month ago, my friend Token Science Nerd announced that he would be ridding his scalp of hair and his face of eyebrows to protest against the University's controversial Life Sciences merger.

Unwilling to accept the fact that TSN would take such a drastic measure, and unsure as to why in the name of Richard Dawkins anyone would mutilate their looks in such a manner, I laughed. I dismissed the idea and forgot about it.

That is, until one fateful April morning, two weeks ago, when I received a text from my other friend (I have lots of friends, yes) Miss Smiley Face:

"Oh my god. TSN has just shaved off all his hair and eyebrows. It's all over Facebook."

I was stunned. Although I had known that it was in TSN's capacity to do something so frightful, I hadn't actually thought that he would GO AHEAD AND DO IT. I mean, shaving your hair off, I understand. Britney did it, so it's cool.





But SHAVING OFF YOUR EYEBROWS?

WHY WHY WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT ???

There has been quite a hype around TSN at Uni. Well yeah, it's not everyday you see an integrally hairless blob walking around campus.

Intrigued, I therefore decided to investigate the reason and circumstances of his sacrificial deed. Why DID TSN rid his head of hair?

Caffeine Bubbles: So, Token Science Nerd, where has all your hair gone?!

Token Science Nerd: I shaved it all off, I'm afraid.

CB: But... but... Why?

TSN: In protest of the merger between the Department of Biological Sciences with the Horticultural Research Institute. The merger is a justifiable attempt at cost-saving which goes way too far, conducted in a destructive manner that exaccerbates the inevitable problems you get when you drive off a large number of staff.

CB: Why is it destructive?

TSN: The University has threatened to outright sack over 30 staff in the Biology Department and HRI. The undergrads aren't going to realise what's going on until it's too late, so I felt the need to attempt to get them involved, while also demonstrating the folly of cutting too much and expecting nobody to notice the difference.

CB: Wow, that's a cleverly symbolic gesture. So what actions has the uni taken so far? Has anyone actually been sacked yet?

TSN: In the week before the third term started, all the staff got told whether they were safe, or 'at risk'. Those 'at risk' have a choice between leaving voluntarily, or fighting for their jobs. If they fail, they will be sacked. Over 30 are 'at risk', around 1/3 of the current staff across the two departments.

CB: How would Life Sciences undergrads be affected by that measure?

TSN: Staff in the department still have to conduct research, run the place, support all the current and incoming research students, and teach the modules they have advertised. The more people we lose, the fewer people there will be to share that burden. Furthermore, everyone is having to do more teaching even if they have no experience. We can predict a general reduction in teaching quality at least over the next two years.

CB: So basically you're saying that Life Sciences undergrads will suffer from a lack of teaching personnel and a degradation of teaching quality. That's quite uncool. Tell me, what were you hoping to achieve by shaving off your hair and eyebrows ?

TSN: Shock people into reading up on it! I don't think anyone can doubt how sincere our concerns are. I hope they will become more supportive of the staff, and more criticial of the situation. I want people to get to know their rights as students here, and find out how they can sort out the problems we are predicting.

CB: What kinds of reactions have you been getting from students and staff?

TSN: Shock, amusement and support. A lot of people, even those who think it's a bit silly, seem impressed. I think we are achieving our aims of getting people more interested.

CB: What's the funniest thing someone's said to you about your new look??

TSN: I found it amusing that everyone in the Union has said I look like Tommo [Ed: epic former Student Union President... no hair or eyebrows] ... except for one person who said I looked like a more handsome Tommo.

CB: HAHAHAHA. Who said that?

TSN: Hehe, never you mind.

CB: FINE. So do you miss your hair and eyebrows?

TSN: I miss my eyebrows. Part of the point I wanted to make was that if you take away too much, you lose the character of what you started with. I think I made that point with the eyebrows. The character of the two departments is being obliterated, and it seems unlikely that we will have anything worthy of Warwick when the merger is finalised.

CB: Any regrets?

TSN: Worth it.

CB: By the way, please don't be offended if I happen to compare you to Uncle Fester in my article.

TSN: Haha, that's a new one, it really is. I've mostly been getting "skinhead", "slaphead", "cancer patient", "war criminal"... "Tommo"...

I've always thought that wanting to look like Uncle Fester from the Addams Family is really rather crazy (well, OK, I'd never really thought about it until TSN's stunt).

But after my informative chat with TSN, I realised that he did it not as a whim, but as a quasi-altruistic symbolic gesture to uphold students' rights to a good-quality education. Indeed, TSN is a young man who firmly believes in his convictions and is not scared to express his views in the most original (sometimes shocking) ways.

I guess all we can do now is wait for his eyebrows to grow back.

Which might take a while.

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, 4 May 2010, Warwickshire, UK

#12 Should the French curriculum include the study of religion? (original French version) ©

Here is the original French version of my essay on religious education in French secular schools, which you can read in English here.

L'école laïque républicaine doit-elle aujourd'hui assurer un enseignement des religions?

« Comment comprendre le 11 septembre 2001 sans remonter au wahhabisme, aux diverses filiations coraniques, et aux avatars du monothéisme ?, » c’est la question que pose le Professeur Régis Debray dans son rapport sur « L'enseignement du fait religieux dans l'Ecole laïque » réalisé en février 2002[1]. Effectivement, la religion, que nous le voulions ou pas, nous entoure, et est utilisée pour justifier la fin et les moyens de nombreux actes. Le fait religieux doit-il donc être enseigné dans les écoles laïques françaises ?

Il existe de nombreux arguments pour l’intégration de l’enseignement du fait religieux dans les établissements scolaires français. Premièrement, comme Debray le souligne dans son essai « Le "fait religieux" : définitions et problèmes »[2], la religion est omniprésente et nous aide à comprendre les civilisations du monde, le fondement de l’histoire de l’humanité, ainsi que nos motifs politiques. La religion ne peut donc être ignorée.

Deuxièmement, on a pu constater une amplification du débat sur la religion ces dernières années, disputé entre deux camps principaux : les religieux et les sceptiques. La polémique est illustrée par l’article « God vs. Science » (ndlr : « Dieu contre la Science ») de Dan Cray dans l’édition du magazine « Time » en novembre 2006[3]. Dan Cray, dans son article, nous rappelle l’importance croissante des points de vue créationniste et darwinien dans le débat, et que la légitimité des religions est de plus en plus questionnée face aux avancements de la science et de la technologie. Nous pouvons aussi observer un essor dans la pratique religieuse, notamment de l’Islam en France[4]. L’importance du débat souligne l’emprise de la religion sur notre société. L’enseignement théologique dans l’école laïque devient donc nécessaire. Afin de pouvoir se former une opinion ou une croyance, ne faudrait-il pas d’abord s’être informé sur tous les angles? Avant de se proclamer chrétien, ne faudrait-il pas avoir au moins lu la Bible ? Avant de se dire athée ou agnostique, ne faudrait-il pas avoir étudié la théologie ou du moins avoir réfléchi aux origines et à l’existence de l’univers ? A moins qu'une politique d’indifférence face à « la grande question » soit prônée, l’enseignement neutre et aconfessionnel du fait religieux est nécessaire.

Cependant, bien qu'il y ait de nombreux raisonnements en faveur de l’enseignement du fait religieux, il existe aussi plusieurs arguments contre. Premièrement, certains affirment qu’une éducation laïque vise une absence totale du fait religieux dans un établissement. Quand bien même il serait objectif et de nature purement anthropologique et historique, l’enseignement de la religion n’aurait pas sa place à l’école. En effet, elle devrait être enseignée au catéchisme, à la synagogue, dans une mosquée. L’absence du fait religieux à l’école renforcerait donc l’idée de pluralisme et de laïcité de la République française.

Deuxièmement, l’enseignement du fait religieux pourrait influencer les croyances (ou manque de croyance) des élèves. De plus, certains déclarent qu’une objectivité complète face aux différentes religions pourrait offenser les élèves pratiquants, quelques solides que soient leurs croyances, car elle prêterait moins d’importance à leur(s) Dieu(x). Pourtant, s’ils se disent réellement religieux, ces individus ne devraient-ils pas être sereins face aux explications anthropologiques, sociologiques et scientifiques de leurs croyances ? D’autres ajoutent que cela pourrait même engendrer une indifférence face à Dieu chez certains. C’est possible, mais n’est-ce pas un ‘risque’ à prendre dans un monde en constante évolution, où les idéologies et croyances abondent, tellement que nous pouvons chacun changer d’avis à tout instant ?

Nous pouvons donc constater deux camps dans le débat sur l’enseignement du fait religieux dans l’école laïque républicaine. Il y a ceux qui s’y opposent : ils déclarent que la religion n’a pas sa place à l’école car son enseignement peut offenser et que ce genre d’enseignement peut être trouvé en dehors de l’école (encore qu'il soit difficile de trouver un établissement qui enseigne la théologie d’un point de vue anthropologique, sociologique, historique et scientifique pour les écoliers, collégiens et lycéens…). Puis il y a ceux qui y sont favorables : la religion est une partie intégrante de notre société depuis des millénaires ; loin de l’ignorer, nous devons l’assumer. De plus, afin d’adopter une opinion fondée, il faut s’informer et « être éclairé »[5]. Assurément, nous devons accepter que l’éducation religieuse devient importante dans le monde où nous vivons, sans qu'elle devienne subjective. Les polémiques grandissent, ainsi que les conflits au nom de la religion. Pour pouvoir vivre et comprendre ce monde où nous vivons, nous devons comprendre la religion et la science, et rejeter l’ignorance. Pourquoi la religion devrait-elle donc être taboue ? Richard Dawkins, biologiste revendicateur de la logique et de l’athéisme, se pose la question dans son ouvrage « Pour en finir avec Dieu »[6] qui fait rage. La plupart des gens répondront du tac au tac qu’il faut éviter tout conflit. Mais admettons-le, ces personnes n’ont pas vraiment réfléchi à la question. Car la réponse est simple : l’être humain a peur de toute vérité qui n’est pas la sienne.

[1] Régis Debray, Rapport à Monsieur le Ministre de l’Education Nationale « L’Enseignement du fait religieux dans l’Ecole laïque », http://lesrapports.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/BRP/024000544/0000.pdf, février 2002

[2] Régis Debray, Publications : Actes des séminaires et universités d’été - Le « fait religieux » : définitions et problèmes », http://eduscol.education.fr/cid46334/le-fait-religieux-%A0-definitions-et-problemes.html, novembre 2002

[3] Dan Cray, God vs. Science, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1555132,00.html, novembre 2006

[4] Frédéric Chambon, Le repli communautaire des quartiers, vingt ans après la mobilisation pour l'intégration, http://www.lemonde.fr/old-societe/article/2003/02/11/le-repli-communautaire-des-quartiers-vingt-ans-apres-la-mobilisation-pour-l-integration_308815_3226.html, février 2003

[5] Régis Debray, Publications : Actes des séminaires et universités d’été - Le « fait religieux » : définitions et problèmes », http://eduscol.education.fr/cid46334/le-fait-religieux-%A0-definitions-et-problemes.html, novembre 2002

[6] Richard Dawkins, Pour en finir avec Dieu, Ed. Robert Laffont, mars 2008

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, 11 March 2010, Warwickshire, UK

# 11 Should the French curriculum include the study of religion? ©

It's been a while since I last wrote anything. Here, I mean. Because I write prolifically. Incomprehensible gibberish most of the time. Except for the occasional golden nugget here and there.

ANYWAY.

Believe it or not, being a student, I have been busy. With work.

I KNOW, RIGHT? Student + work = huh ?

But that is not the issue at hand. Far from it.

I have written a paper in French on the question of religious education in the French school curriculum. You may be aware (or not) that secularism is actually a pretty big deal in France.

And now Ladies and Gentlemen, for your enjoyment, a translation of my paper into English (the original French version will be published in the next post):

Should the French curriculum include the study of religion?

"How can we understand the attacks of 9/11 without a knowledge of wahhabism, of the various Islamic denominations, and of monotheist avatars?,” asks Professor Régis Debray of the Université de Lyon III in his 2002 report to the French Ministry of Education on religious education in secular schools (Rapport sur « L’Enseignement du fait religieux dans l’Ecole laïque », February 2002). Indeed, religion, whether we like it or not, is all around us and is used to justify the ends and means of many actions. So should fait religieux therefore be taught in French secular schools?

There are many arguments in favour of the integration of religious education in the French school curriculum. Firstly, as Debray points out (Publications : Actes des séminaires et universités d’été - Le « fait religieux » : définitions et problèmes », November 2002), religion is omnipresent and supports our understanding of civilization, the foundations of human history, as well as our political motives. Religion therefore cannot be evaded, because to evade it would be to embrace ignorance and live in denial.

Secondly, recent years have seen the amplification of the debate on religion between two main groups: those who are religious and those who are sceptical. The polemic is illustrated by Dan Cray’s article

God vs. Science

(Time Magazine, November 2006). In his article, Cray reminds us of the intensification of the case for Creationism and the case for Darwinism in the debate, and that religious legitimacy is now increasingly questionable in the face of technological and scientific advancements. Just as the case for the vindication of Science grows, there has recently been an escalation in religious practice, notably of Islam in France (Frédéric Chambon, Le repli communautaire des quartiers, vingt ans après la mobilisation pour l'intégration, February 2003).

University is also the stage of a rise in theological disputations, namely between Christian Unions and Atheist-Agnostic societies in the UK. The significance of the debate underlines the hold of religion on our society. Thus the teaching of theology in secular schools is becoming necessary. Admittedly, in order to shape an opinion or a belief, shouldn’t one question and inspect every possible aspect? Before claiming to be a Christian, shouldn’t one have read the Bible, allegedly the Word of God, in its entirety at least once? Before claiming to be atheist or agnostic, shouldn’t one cogitate about theology or at least reflect on the origins and the existence of the universe? Unless we want to advocate indifference vis-à-vis the Big Question, an objective study of religion is essential at school.

On the other hand, there are those who stand against religious education in French secular schools. Firstly, some claim that a secular education aims at a complete lack of religion in schools, and that religious education, albeit purely anthropological, historical and sociological, does not have a place there. As a matter of fact, these people add that religious education should only be found at Sunday school, at the synagogue or at the mosque. Furthermore, they affirm that religious education would shake the foundations of pluralism and secularism of the French Republic. But surely, teaching the history of mankind and its various faiths and civilisations would only uphold the notion of pluralism? Moreover, isn’t secularism a movement toward the acceptance and tolerance of all faiths, ethnic groups and all beliefs?

Secondly, the case against religious education maintains that such an academic subject would influence and alter pupils’ faiths (or lack thereof). Additionally, some declare that a completely objective approach to various beliefs could offend some religious pupils as it would devalue their god(s). Yet, if these individuals claim to be true believers, shouldn’t they be untroubled in the face of anthropological, sociological and scientific explanations of their faiths? Others throw in that they could end up atheist or agnostic at the end of the day, which, of course, would be horrendously apocalyptic. That is always a possibility, but isn’t it a ‘risk’ to be taken in a world in constant evolution, where different ideologies and beliefs abound, so much so that we could each change our mind at any moment?

And so the debate on religious education in French state schools rages on, and is disputed by two main teams. There are those who are against: they insist that religion does not have a place at school but solely in other institutions (although it is difficult to find academies which take an objective approach in teaching all faiths to primary and secondary school pupils… and I'm not entirely convinced that a twelve year-old pupil would venture into a mosque of their own accord to hear about the sociological significance of Hallah).

Then there are those who are in favour of religious education: religion has been an integral part of our society for millennia; far from ignoring its study and the debates over it, we must welcome them. Besides, in order to adopt a solid opinion, one must be informed and éclairé, as Debray says (Publications : Actes des séminaires et universités d’été - Le « fait religieux » : définitions et problèmes », November 2002). The polemics are developing, and so are the conflicts caused in the name of deities. With a view to understand and live in this world, we must first understand religion and Science, and reject ignorance. So why should religion be considered a taboo? That is the question that Richard Dawkins, the world-famous evolutionary biologist and proponent of logic and reason, asks in his controversial book The God Delusion (Bantam Press, 2006). Most people will be quick to answer that it is because we must avoid altercations. But let’s face it, these people haven’t really thought about it. Because the answer is simple: humans are scared of a truth that is different from their own.

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, 10 March 2010, Warwickshire, UK