Lot's Wife Edition 4

Lot’s Wife • Edition Four

lot’s wife

EDITION FOUR

1

Art by Brienna Emily

2



contents

Creative

Analysis

6

10

11

16

18

24

31

32

40

50

54

58

64

These Words Are Not Action Not Justice

By Riya Rajesh

In Unseren Laken

By Cody B Strange

Looking Out the Window

ByYancho Huang

Suitcase

By Chiya Belwal

Moms

By N.Thierry

Unrequited Thoughts

By Agnes Benjamin

How to Respond When You Find Out Your Friend Is

a Sexual Assualt Perpretrator

By Riya Rajesh

Crow

By Sophie O’Donovan

Sunday

By Esme James

A Progression

By Lydia Strohfeldt

Bespoke Patina

By Conor Ross

Wordless

By Rose Wilted

We Just Are

By Oliver Cocks

9

12

13

22

28

39

53

57

60

68

72

Development of COVID-19 Vaccine: The Complex

Process and The Challenges We Face

By Kai-Chin Le

Hot Take: The Palace Letters, Kerr, Whitlam and

Queen Liz

By Kelly Phan

The Crown Wins, But Does It Save the Governor-

General?

By Claire Peter-Budge

The Collapse of the American Empire: From the

Greatest Superpower to a Failed State

By Gursewak Singh

Print More Money, Solve My Problems

By Jeanne Cheong

The Fall of the Fourth Estate

By Xenia Sanut

Why I Don’t Want to Be ‘Wife Material’

By Lily Van Berkel

Fashion’s Role in Achieving the Sustainable

Development Goals

By Hamah Hosen

Are Politically Active Women A Threat?

By Riya Kiran

Face Race

By Patrick Lobo

Reckonings During a Pandemic

By Zayan Ismail

70

Frau Trude

By Michael Walton

Culture

Campus

Art by Siobhan Stephen

15

26

46

67

The Must-See Classics to Watch in Lockdown 2

By Britt Munro

The Last of Us: A Towering Work of Art

By Austin Bond

Dating Trends: Breaking Down the Frivolous,

Problematic and Non-Committal

By Meg-Mel Dean

How Swerving From Non-Fiction to Fiction Books

Changed My Life

By Julian Keller

Lot’s Wife is the student magazine of the Monash Student Association (MSA). The views expressed herein are not necessarily the views of the MSA, the printers or the

editors. All writing and artwork remains the property of the creators. This collection is © Lot’s Wife and Lot’s Wife reserves the right to republish material in any format.

17

43

It’s About Empowerment, Not Employment - the

Value of an Arts Degree

By Hannah Cohen & Emilio Lanera

Monash Uni Student Theatre presents MUST

Olympics

By Emma Anvari

3


lot’s

wife

Lot’s Wife acknowledges the traditional custodians of the land, the people of the Kulin Nations. We pay our

respects to their Elders past, present and emerging. Sovereignty has never been ceded.

Recently I realised that the only time we see another

person’s face now is on the internet. Admittedly

there is a sense of disconnection and isolation not

being able to smile, show some teeth to a stranger, make

their day, even. Our point of communication is now bulky

through screens, pixels and delayed voices. At this point

of lockdown 2.0 none of us are strangers to the feeling of

loneliness. It’s difficult not to fixate on this, so for this issue

we want to give our readers something else to turn their

minds to.

Lot’s Wife Edition 4 is a reflection of all we have been

through together over this turbulent year. Articles, creative

stories, opinions, and poems all born in the bedrooms of

isolated souls. We are locked away in the tallest room of

the tallest tower waiting for Covid-19 to be slain. It’s okay

to need a distraction. It’s okay to need a break. It’s okay to

lose yourself in a book, a short story, a poem - we invite you

to find that solace here, amongst the words and thoughts of

Monash students.

In saying this, the world outside does keep turning. It

doesn’t feel like it inside our homes, unable to leave

without permission and reliving the same day over and

over. Fostering your mental health is important, but we ask

you to keep yourself informed to the best of your ability.

Marginalised communities have been locked in their houses

long before Stage 4 restrictions befell Victoria, as we saw in

the Flemington and North Melbourne housing blocks. The

unfolding events over the last few months prove to us how

much larger the world is than ourselves despite being trapped

behind our screens, stuck inside our four walls. #BLM

reminds us of that. George Floyd’s death reminds us of that.

We want to draw your attention to the words of Riya Rajesh

who we have republished in this edition, and the incredible

artwork by Siobhan Stephan and Maria Chamakala on our

front cover and opening pages. Your work inspires us.

So before you dig in, I want to make a final note on

something that’s been lingering on my mind during these

times: youth. I’ll admit mine makes me feel invincible - my

agility, fitness, capacity to push my body to all sorts of limits

and still be considered healthy. I am not elderly, and to my

privilege, disabled or immunocompromised. My fear of the

virus stems from the fear of spreading it rather than what

it will do to myself directly if I contract it. I have tried to

be as cautious and considerate as possible, and have abided

by state restrictions. But I do believe I can be doing more. I

feel that there are many young people who stand alongside

me on this. I am not here to call people out, or boast of my

privilege, but acknowledge it and my mistakes. If you feel the

same, then it’s more than time to up your game. Let’s extend

this respect and compassion fully and properly to the people

who are elderly or otherwise vulnerable, who are scared that

this virus will end their life. A large portion of our readers

and contributors being a university magazine sit in this

margin of young people. In reality, we are not invincible, and

our youth won’t necessarily protect us. Let’s get through this

together.

Keep safe, healthy, warm and cosy in your homes, curled up

with a copy of Lot’s Wife Edition 4 to get you through. Keep

your loved ones close and your Lot’s Wife closer, and we’ll

see you on the other side.

With love,

On behalf of the Lot’s Wife team,

Milly Downing

Creative Editor

EDITORIAL TEAM

Dao, Ryan Attard, Austin Bond, Milly Downing, Weng Yi Wong, Anna Fazio, Charith Jayawardana, Vivien Tran

Co-managing Editors Content Editors Marketing/Communications Editors Visual Editor

4

EMAIL WEBSITE INSTAGRAM FACEBOOK TWITTER LINKEDIN

msa-lotswife@monash.edu lotswife.com.au @lotswifemag @MSA.LotsWife @LotsWifeMag Lot’s Wife


Art by Evelyn Chan

Art by Maria Chamakala

5


These Words Are Not Action Not Justice

Words by Riya Rajesh

oh,

so

you want to see colonial rage bloody a page

to see a woman, teeth bared, write fire

want lyricism and poignant pain

too bad

today, I can’t

today, I am pointed

gnitirw ton m’I yadot

uoy rof

not when people are dying

in poverty

incarcerated unlawfully

a fucking juxtaposition

not when we’ve watched

and accepted

not when champagne sippers sing virtue

sweet mouths bubble, boneless and cursive

this story was not made for Instagram this is no one’s soap opera this is fear and vitriol

remember remember

the real people in your posts

remember remember

this is pain I can’t claim and neither can you

so don’t

unless you can

and if you can

if being ground into concrete by protectors of privilege

is your story

i am sorry

we did not do better before

6


Art by Charlotte Elwell 7

8



Development of COVID-19 Vaccine

The Complex Process and The Challenges We Face

Words by Kai-Chin Le

The world has witnessed the rampant spread of coronavirus, causing the

loss of thousands and thousands of lives worldwide. Amid this terrifying

situation, COVID-19 vaccine development has gradually come under

the spotlight of political discussions. Although many people understand

the urgency and importance of quickly developing a COVID-19 vaccine,

many do not appreciate the long and hard processes of vaccine discovery,

validation and clinical trials. While it is very encouraging to see public

enthusiasm for more funding for COVID-19 vaccine research, it is

equally important for the public to appreciate the scientific processes

behind the scenes.

Like any other novel pharmaceutical products, a vaccine has to pass

through a multi-step journey before it can be safely administered to

patients. In general, novel drug development starts with a basic scientific

discovery wherein the novel biological functions or processes are

uncovered. Based on this information, the scientists start to search for

compounds or molecules that can interact with key proteins in the newly

identified biological processes in order to regulate its activities. If such

molecules are found, they will move on to the pre-clinical testing phase,

where the effectiveness, mode of actions and safety of proposed molecules

will be tested in cultured tissue (in-vitro) and live mammalian animals (invivo).

If molecules continue to be effective at this phase, they will then

move on to human clinical trials, where the therapeutic effectiveness and

safety of proposed molecules in humans are assessed for their suitability

for further development as potential drugs. If by luck one of the proposed

molecules is shown to stop the disease progression significantly, and at

the same time does not lead to significant adverse effects in humans, this

molecule is then submitted to the regulatory agency (the Therapeutic

Goods Administration (TGA) in Australia) for approval. If approval is

obtained, the drug can then be manufactured and distributed in large

quantity, and prescribed to patients.

As we can appreciate here, the journey from basic scientific discovery to a

government-approved pharmaceutical product is a stringent, multi-phase

process. As a result, very few proposed molecules, or in some instances

none of the proposed molecules, successfully pass through the entire drug

development pipeline. COVID-19 vaccine development is no different.

Following this principle, the whole process of COVID-19 vaccine

development starts with sequencing SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes

COVID-19. Soon after obtaining the genetic sequence, scientists have

started to hunt for potential antigens. So far, multiple antigens have been

demonstrated to be critical in triggering an immune response, including

parts of viral DNA, RNA and protein subunit. With all this information,

multiple pharmaceutical corporations have started to manufacture the

vaccines in-vitro and are ready to proceed into pre-clinical mammalian

animal trials, with the hope that they can pass through and enter human

clinical trials.

Although the future outlook seems promising, there are significant

roadblocks to this process. Like all other drugs, the failure rates of

COVID-19 vaccine development is fairly high. Unfortunately, many

proposed vaccines that show therapeutic effectiveness in pre-clinical

animal models do not produce the same effect in humans, or cause

severe side effects in humans. Due to the genetic differences among the

population, it is also likely that even approved vaccine may fail to show

therapeutic effectiveness in some individuals. Additionally, as the disease

progresses, the coronavirus will gradually mutate, which causes vaccines

to lose effectiveness.

One of the problems of conventional vaccine development is that it is a

linear process. If COVID-19 vaccine development were to follow this

approach, it could take more than ten years to develop a vaccine, which

is certainly not fast enough to tackle the current pandemic. In order to

accelerate vaccine development, governments across the world should

pledge more funding to trial as many vaccine candidates as possible. More

international collaborations among researchers, funding agencies and

industry partners are critical to promoting quicker vaccine productions.

Additionally, in order to expedite COVID-19 vaccine development,

various governmental regulatory bodies should consider streamlining

regulatory approval processes so that promising vaccine candidates are

able to move into clinical use faster. Finally, the pharmaceutical industry

should plan to scale up manufacturing capacity as soon as possible to

meet the demand of patients.

The basic principles behind the use of a vaccine is that certain components

of the virus, known as antigens, can trigger strong adaptive immune

responses against the viral infection, which can be retained as a memory

of immune system ready to fight against the virus when re-infected. If an

antigen can be modified to remove its virulence but retain its ability to

activate an immune response, such an antigen can then be manufactured

in large quantities as a potential vaccine.

Art by Ruby Comte

9


In Unseren Laken

Words by Cody B Strange

rive my jaw from my face

pour your light into mine

be my life of little things

dredge my mind from my head

meld your Geist into mine


snare my heart from my chest

thread your beat into mine


10

Art by Joseph Lew


Looking Out the Window

Words by Yanchao Huang

Looking out the window

I can’t help but wonder

How long this will last

No reason to rush

No quests to best

The pace I decide

Social distance

I abide

Glancing out the window

I can’t help but ponder

If I’m being selfish, to

not want this to end.

Treasure connections

we have, rather the

places we fly or the

things we buy

Gazing

out the

window, I

search for

the link. How

does this GDP

help us be happy?

The work we bury

The paper we chase

The economic growth

we strive for, but the poor

are struggling to survive?

Staring

out the

window, I

started to

deeply think.

Did we really

need the old

normal, or are we

just scared of the

change? This concept

others called normality

Does it make us happy?

11


Hot Take - The Palace Letters, Kerr,

Whitlam and Queen Liz

Words by Kelly Phan

PRO-REPUBLIC

If you’re anything like me, recent thoughts of the Queen of England have only included

binge-watching Netflix’s The Crown or reading gossip columns about Harry and

Meghan. Nonetheless, the Queen’s influence over Australia extends far beyond the realm

of pop culture. She is Australia’s head of state and has a representative holding Australia’s

highest seat of power – the Governor-General. Australia’s situation as a constitutional

monarchy is a long-running debate, with notable events including the 1975 dismissal of

the Whitlam government and the 1999 Australian republic referendum. The exposure

of the “Palace letters” is the latest episode in a show that has been playing out for decades

in Australia: Republic v Constitutional Monarchy.

Australian constitutional law can get complicated quite quickly, so this is a basic

breakdown for the uninitiated of the Whitlam dismissal, the Palace Letters and how it

relates to the movement for a republic.

Let’s start at the beginning of this story.

For those unfamiliar with the Whitlam dismissal, here’s the TLDR: On 11 November

1975, the Governor-General Sir John Kerr sacked Gough Whitlam as Prime Minister.

The sacking was the climax of months of tension between the Government and its

conservative opposition – who were using their majority in the Senate to block any

appropriation bills, effectively preventing any funds reaching federal development

projects. The infamous Palace Letters, which have been private records up until now,

show that Kerr wrote to the Queen’s private secretary to signify an intent to sack

Whitlam and dissolve Parliament.

As a side note for avid fans of The Crown: I have disappointing news that it is unlikely we

will see a Whitlam or Kerr impersonation on Netflix anytime soon. This episode in the

English monarch’s history was apparently not dramatic enough for Netflix, as it failed

to make an appearance in Season 3, which stretched until 1977.

How could Kerr sack Whitlam?

Glad you asked! Australia is a constitutional monarchy, meaning we still have dear old

Queen Liz as Australia’s head of state. Her powers are delegated to Australia’s highest

position of power in government – the Governor-General. The Queen appoints them

at the recommendation of the Prime Minister for a term of five years. Once they get the

royal stamp of approval, they are awarded highly significant powers such as giving final

approval (Royal Assent) to a bill after it has been passed by the Parliament, and acting as

Commander-in-chief of the Australian Defence Force. Whitlam’s dismissal was a legally

valid exercise of Kerr’s power to dismiss Ministers.

What was said in those spicy letters and why do they add fuel to the republican fire?

Firstly, Martin Charteris (the Queen’s private secretary) confirmed Kerr’s powers to

dissolve Parliament contrary to ministerial advice. This is a “reserve power” and at

the time, the very existence of this power was contentious. They are called “reserved”

because they are not outlined in the Constitution, but are conventions generally

accepted to be within the power of the Governor-General. Although the Queen (and

thus the Governor-General) is obliged to follow the advice of their Prime Ministers, the

power exercised by Kerr went against that obligation.

But hold up, Charteris did advise Kerr to “only use [reserve powers] in the last resort

and then only for Constitutional – and not for political – reasons.” This follows the

Queen and Governor-General’s obligation to stay politically neutral. This leads

us to question: did the blockage of appropriation bills in the 1975 Senate require a

constitutional “last resort”?

One spicy excerpt from the letters that has been noted by commentators is that Kerr

made clear that even if the Solicitor-General or Attorney-General advised him that

the powers do not exist, he would not necessarily follow their advice, as “it does not

follow that in an extreme constitutional crisis [he] would accept that”. As pointed out

by Monash University’s Professor Jenny Hocking, who led the bid to uncover the Palace

letters:

Time and again these letters show that the Queen engaged in intensely

political discussions with the Governor-General, including the existence and

possible use of reserve powers against the government. Far from remaining

above politics, it is difficult to imagine a greater level of political involvement

than this.

What is absent throughout these letters is any recognition from either

Charteris or Kerr of the Governor-General’s most fundamental duty, to act

on the advice of elected government, specifically the Prime Minister.

Secondly, several letters show just how much Kerr felt he had to protect the Queen’s

interests. Kerr justified his decision to dismiss Whitlam in a sudden fashion to the

Queen, who would have similarly sacked Kerr if Whitlam had requested it first. This

is because the Queen must dismiss the Governor-General at the Prime Minister’s

request, meaning that a Kerr-Whitlam stand-off would have led to, as Kerr described:

“an impossible position for the Queen”. In Kerr’s humble opinion, “I simply could not

risk the outcome for the sake of the monarchy.”

Charteris responded to Kerr’s notice of the dismissal (which was only sent after the

decision was announced) with the equivalent of a Royal Palace gold star: “I believe in

not informing the Queen of what you intended to do before doing it, you acted only

with Constitutional propriety, but also with admirable consideration for Her Majesty’s

position.”

*Ba dum tss*. When we pit the Queen’s interests against the Governor-General’s duty

to follow the advice of his Prime Minister, Kerr’s letters make it unclear who comes

out on top.

Thirdly, the letters shed some light on a question that has been plaguing us since 1975:

did the Queen involve herself in the Whitlam dismissal? Constitutional law expert

Anne Twomey has argued that these letters are a mere reflection on Kerr’s thoughts

leading to dismissal, rather than a smoking gun on the involvement of the Queen in

Australian politics. This is because there was no direct advice to dismiss Whitlam and

the Queen was not even notified until after the fact. If you agree with Twomey, this leads

to this question: if the Queen is unwilling to get involved in Australian affairs publicly,

then why does she still have a representative in Australia with the highest powers in the

land? As the Australian Republic Movement chair Peter FitzSimons puts it: “If her role

is to oversee, she needs to see what is going on, surely? Otherwise, what is the point?”

Disagreeing with Twomey, Professor Hocking wrote: “These letters, with their clear

and direct political prescription, make a mockery of the claim that the Queen played

‘no part’ in the decision that Kerr then made just days later.” In my humble opinion,

the letters at the very least reveal that in deciding to dismiss Whitlam with no prior

warning, Kerr thought that protecting the integrity of the Queen was more important

than protecting the integrity of a democratically-elected government. The excerpts

outlined before also show a Governor-General that valued the opinion of the Queen

over the opinion of Australia’s Attorney and Solicitor General.

In a year where Australians are continuing to witness the impacts of a devastating

bushfire season, a global pandemic and a worldwide reckoning with racism, bigotry and

intolerance, a 1975 constitutional crisis may seem rather irrelevant. Not to mention, the

odd gossip piece or Netflix drama about the British monarchy is a great distraction from

the real-life dramas of 2020. However, the Palace letters offer a critical lens through

which we can ponder upon unresolved questions of Australian democracy and its

relationship with a former colonial power. In any case, we should reflect upon the events

of 1975 with the brighter perspective of hindsight – lest history repeat itself.

12


The Crown Wins, But Does It Save

the Governor-General?

Words by Claire Peter-Budge

PRO-MONARCHY

For forty-five years, the controversial decision that saw a democratically elected

government sacked was scrutinised, but commentators lacked the exact details that

instigated the event – until very recently. On Tuesday 14 July, the National Archives

made public a collection of correspondence known as the “Palace Letters”, that detailed

the exchanges between Queen Elizabeth II and Sir John Kerr regarding the dismissal

of Prime Minister Whitlam. With the release of the “Palace Letters”, this moment is

not only getting a resurgence but also being introduced to a generation who had not

witnessed the event. For those not present to the period, the significance of the letters

between the Crown and its representative risk being considered without proper context.

In considering the context of the time and the legacy of Kerr’s decision one may find

reassurance of the systems and people that govern Australia, with the constitutional

crisis serving as a case study of what sort of leadership the nation needs.

In the lead up to the release of the Palace letters, the question that persisted was whether

Buckingham Palace had direct involvement in the Whitlam-Labor government

dismissal – that is, did the Queen and her advisers give permission for Kerr to sack

Whitlam? This was the contention promoted by Jenny Hocking, the emeritus professor

at Monash University and Whitlam historian who fought to have the letters made

public; this was granted by the High Court in May. Speaking to Today, Hocking

asserted that the 211 letters and 1,200 pages of documents provide new insights to the

constitutional crisis and a plot of “royal secrecy” in Australia. Hocking’s endeavour to

allow public access to these documents is commendable because it will allow discussion

to move beyond assumptions of unscrupulous involvement by the Crown. However,

the problem with Jenny Hocking’s assertion that the Queen had direct influence in the

dismissal of Whitlam is that it lacks reason. It could only suggest that Her Majesty had

ill-feeling toward Whitlam and had something to gain from his demise in which there

is no evidence for.

Moreover, it can be argued that a greater agenda is at play with the release of these

documents: a renewed debate of the Republic question. Indeed, Hocking is a member

of the National Committee of the Australian Republican Movement, and has argued

the letters provide a case for Australia to be an autonomous nation beyond the

Commonwealth realm. However, this political goal does not take into consideration the

challenges that Australia could face in such a transition, and the Republican movement

has already presented a series of failures that reinforce the hesitancy of Australian voters

to leave the Commonwealth.

Australia’s Republican Movement gained traction under Paul Keating’s government

when in 1993, he established the Republican Advisory Committee to address the

Republican question more formally. The Republican question was put forth for a

Referendum in 1999 after the Howard government set up a Constitutional Convention

for 1998 to further consider the public interest. During the referendum, the “Yes”

campaign was helmed by Malcolm Turnbull while the “No” campaign was led by Kerry

Jones of the Australians for Constitutional Monarchy (ACM), a role he took over from

Tony Abbott in 1994 when the latter entered Federal politics. Of the 12.4 million

who voted in the referendum, the “No” campaign emerged victorious with 55% of the

vote. The failures of Australia’s Republican Movement, at least in the context of the

1999 referendum, can be understood in three hypotheses according to Helen Irving, a

constitutional scholar and Republican advocate. Irving contended that the main factors

of failure stemmed from insufficient voter knowledge, lack of cross-party support, and

notions of “elitist” appeal. However, one key factor of failure is often ignored – how

willing is Australia to sever its ties with Britain? In addition to the prospective challenges

posed for an Australian republic, reflection is also required in our understanding of the

historical events that culminated in the end of Whitlam’s tenure as Prime Minister.

Gough Whitlam became Prime Minister in 1972 and as leader of the Labor Party,

his victory saw an end to a period of continuous Liberal leadership that had lasted 23

years. The Whitlam Government paved the way for a number of policy changes and

social reforms that solidified a positive legacy for Whitlam – elimination of military

conscription, withdrawal of armed forces from Vietnam, the removal of discriminatory

criteria imposed by the Immigration Restriction Act 1901, advocacy for Indigenous

rights, and an end to tertiary education fees. However, trouble began brewing a year

after the election given that the opposition held the Senate while Labor held the House

of Representatives, with the passage of bills being blocked by the Liberals. This split

resulted in a double dissolution of the Parliament in 1974 with Whitlam re-elected for

a second term, but still without a Senate majority. The blocking of legislation meant

that money supply to the government was disrupted, yet this disruption stemmed from

Whitlam’s costly agenda that was heightened in the wake of the recession of 1974 and

the impact of the 1973 oil crisis. This event proves significant in the constitutional crisis

of 1975 as it sowed its seeds.

Furthermore, the acts of Minister for Minerals and Energy Rex Connor and Treasurer

Jim Cairns exposed unconstitutional conduct that makes Kerr’s decision to sack the

Whitlam Government significant even just in hindsight. It began as a financial scandal

when it was revealed that Connor and Cairns were seeking to borrow billions of dollars

from Middle Eastern countries that had amassed a loan pool from the rise of oil prices

from the crisis of 1973. The deals were done through an agency run by a London-based

Pakistani banker called Tirath Khemlani and it was his involvement which led to the

scandal being dubbed the “Khemlani Affair”. The purpose of the loans, estimated to be

at around $4 billion, were mainly to allow Connor to fund his energy initiatives, which

included the construction of a national pipeline grid and ports for coal exportation.

This revelation of the Labor government proved scandalous because not only were the

loans going to cause massive debt (the loan was to expire in twenty years and incur 9%

interest – including 2.5% for Khemlani as commission) but it was also unconstitutional

as it by-passed protocol of the Australian Treasury. When word got to the Opposition

in May 1975, Liberal leader Malcolm Fraser questioned Whitlam of the loans, to which

Whitlam said that the Loans Council had not been advised nor had approved. He even

revoked Connor’s authority to seek loans but nevertheless he maintained contact with

Khemlani while denying any interactions since the scandal broke. However, this was

to cause the Whitlam Government further embarrassment when Khemlani presented

evidence of communication between himself and Connor which effectively shook the

integrity of Labor’s leadership. Furthermore, as the opposition maintained a majority

of Senate seats, Fraser was able to help block budget legislation and call for an early

election. The Government was in crisis and the nation had to rest on a higher power.

Although Whitlam was sacked, allowing a Fraser-Liberal caretaker government to take

over, he still had an opportunity to reaffirm his influence given that a general election

proceeded afterwards. Unfortunately, the landslide victory of the Liberals showed that

public redemption was too late for Whitlam yet, ironically, it was Kerr who bore the

brunt of public contempt in his decision to challenge the Government. In hindsight,

one could argue that Kerr did have the interests of the Australian people in mind and

their right to political and economic transparency. Furthermore, it begs the question

of whether or not Australia truly has the clout to be a Republic while asserting that the

Monarchy serves as an agent of intervention.

Australia frequently encounters an often conflicting position when questioning its

national identity. The historical and cultural influences that frame it are themselves tied

to our dispositions, particularly in the split between Republicans and Monarchists. If

not Republicans, Whitlam proponents would interpret these letters rather cynically

and will not redeem a man whose job is to show allegiance to the Queen while Her

Majesty must remain a neutral head of state. However, the dismissal of the Whitlam

Government was neither a conspiracy or spontaneous event, but the outcome of a series

of interactions and decisions that culminated into a historical moment. It was not that

Whitlam was doomed by Kerr or the Crown but from his own ambitions and those

who sought to achieve them at whatever cost. For Kerr, the letters present a man in

conflict over a fateful decision to remove a charismatic and radical leader from his role

that would lead to a public reckoning.

13


Art by Charlotte Elwell

14


The Must-See Classics to Watch in

Lockdown 2

Words by Britt Munro

If you’re anything like me, your new idea of a hot date on a Friday night is the

couch, remote primed in your palm, trackies and a good cup of tea (or perhaps

a slightly stronger beverage if your mum isn’t by your side). I may as well be

honest; this was my typical Friday night before COVID hit… but hey, let’s just

say I’m a trendsetter. Now that we’re stuck in Lockdown 2.0 and Masterchef

is over, I’m here to give you my best classic films to keep you company and far

from the depths of Bachelor in Paradise.

Heat up the popcorn, drum roll please…

1. EXERCISE MOTIVATION – DIE HARD (1988)

If you’re looking for some exercise motivation, look no further. This action

thriller will get your heart pumping as a fit and pre-balding Bruce Willis

attempts to single-handedly overpower German terrorists who have taken over

the Nakatomi Plaza. Think pumping biceps, gun battles, superhuman chin-ups,

pull-ups and awesome one-liners. Every time I watch this classic, the next day

I’ll find myself researching self-defence and taekwondo classes… you know, just

in case I ever find myself in Bruce’s situation.

2. IT’S TIME TO CALL YOUR BESTIE (AND JOIN THE NAVY) –

TOP GUN (1986)

This film needs no introduction. Pre-Scientology Tom Cruise in aviators,

a ripper leather jacket and a US Navy uniform, flying around bomber jets at

lightning speed. Throw in an intelligent and strong female played by Kelly

McGillis to share the lead (who also rocks a leather jacket). You’ll be banging to

the 80s tunes and considering whether it’s too late to apply for the Navy. Add in

an all-time classic bromance, and you’ll be calling your bestie to know whether

they’d be willing to be your co-pilot and wingman (in my case, it’s a very firm

yes). So, do yourself a favour and let Top Gun take your breath away.

3. REMEMBERING THE GOOD OLD DAYS – COOL RUNNINGS

(1993)

I was mindlessly flicking through the channels one dreary Wednesday night

and found Cool Runnings. Boy, was I glad I stumbled on this gem. Nothing

takes me back to the carefree days of primary school more than the true story

of the Jamaican Winter Olympics bobsled team. You knew holidays were

coming when the teacher gave up on learning for the day, wheeled out the telly

(exposing my age here), dimmed the lights, and turned on the exotic paradise

of Jamaica. Seeing the dreadlocks, palm trees, and bongo drums will instantly

transport you from fog-filled Melbourne and have you planning your first post-

COVID escape. You’ll be laughing, you’ll be inspired, and you will be chanting

loudly for the Jamaican bobsled team.

4. THE GUILTY PLEASURE – THE PRINCESS DIARIES (2001)

Everyone has that one guilty pleasure film (or in my case multiple – did

someone say Mamma Mia! 1 and 2?). The pick me up that instantly brings

a smile and helps us when we’re having a rough time. In lockdown, my go-to

guilty pleasure has to be The Princess Diaries. This, of course, has nothing to do

with the fact I am still waiting for my mum to announce that I’ve been right all

along: I actually am a princess! What a lovely surprise after being trapped in

my humble abode to be told that I’ll be upgrading to a gigantic castle in some

faraway magical land to rule. And as Princess Britannia, my first royal decree

will be that everyone treats themselves to their very own guilty pleasure movie

night where they watch whatever makes them feel fuzzy on the inside. And if

you choose to wisely follow my lead and watch The Princess Diaries (you are

very welcome into my kingdom). I would highly recommend watching with a

crown and DIY royal robe.

5. THE SING-ALONG – GREASE (1978)

Even though my singing is best left for the shower (apart from when I

surprisingly rock out in key to Queen), who can resist a good sing-along? With

John Travolta rocking the hair gel and Olivia Newton-John giving us all further

exercise motivation (seriously who can look that good in tight leather pants?),

you’ll be hand-jiving and screaming ‘TELL ME MORE’ at the top of your

lungs in no time. You might even consider purchasing a leather jacket (which

would really match your new aviators and complete your Top Gun wardrobe).

6. WE WILL GET THROUGH THIS - PADDINGTON 2 (2017)

I may be slightly stretching the definition of a ‘classic’. Nevertheless, in a time

plagued with so much uncertainty and scary news on repeat, we all need

something to restore our faith that everything will be alright. Cue a talking

bear (again, promise I haven’t gone crazy in isolation). Paddington 2 is laughout-loud

hilarious. It shows that good will always triumph against evil and

celebrates the power of humanity as strangers unite to help a bear in need.

Even in these dark days, the kindness and resilience of our society has energised

me. Paddington 2 will inspire and reassure you that together, humankind can

overcome all obstacles.

***

There is nothing quite like the hush and anticipation as the cinema lights

dim. For a few precious hours, we are transported from our reality, from the

humdrum, and escape to a new world where hopefully we may learn and grow.

We owe ourselves this little pleasure of escaping, of being swept away. Immerse

yourself in the wonderful world of film. At a time when it is so easy to feel so

alone and lost, let characters and stories remind of your place, your purpose,

your connection, and most of all, your true self.

15


Suitcase

Words by Chiya Belwal

Suitcases are in both of my hands and I look at my family one last time. The

picture imprints deep inside my heart: mom, dad and my little brother side by

side.

Departing, I feel my mother’s arms around my neck. Her embrace tastes of

all the unaccounted sacrifices she’s made, the homemade remedies for when

I’m sick in bed, and all the times she heard me whine about apparatus in the

laboratory. The hot summer days glazing her almond skin as she watches her

daughter come from school complaining about her day, a refreshing drink in

her hand.

My father pats me on the back, proud of my journey lying ahead. He doesn’t

speak much; his silence fading into oblivion for his confidence in me is enough.

The warmth of his smile is comforting; my safe place for every time I’ve lost

sight.

Little arms are hugging my waist. I look down. It’s my brother with wet eyes.

We share a bond so sacred, so hard to explain; he’s made me laugh every

time I hadn’t even wanted to smile. Staring at his beautiful little face, recalling

the times he’s helped me get through life in his own whimsical ways. I wipe the

tears off his face, for today I’m making him cry.

We are packing my bags on the night before. We are packing up the seventeen

years we have shared. For the one-hundredth time, they are telling me to be

careful and aware. They are afraid and so am I. Through the glass doors at

the airport, they reach to touch my hand. Standing so close yet so distant. They

can see me but they know I’m gone.

Suitcases in both hands, I board the flight with my eyes closed. I open them

only to take a peek at my family one last time. That picture imprints deep inside

my mind, my heart.

Art 16 by Kathy Lee


Art by Ruby Comte

It’s About Empowerment, Not Employment

The Value of an Arts Degree

Words by Hannah Cohen & Emilio Lanera

Editors’ Note: The opinions expressed in the piece are not necessarily

representative of Lot’s Wife.

Even if you have no intention to study arts at university, the Government’s plans

to double the price of communication and humanities subjects should concern

you.

While the Government may frame an arts degree as a worthless qualification

that lacks a clear career pathway, we can say from personal experience that

studying our arts degrees has been the most valuable decision we have made.

Studying an arts degree has broadened our horizons and taught us to be critical

thinkers. It has shown us not only how the world works but has dared us to ask

why. From our very first tutorial together, our teachers have always encouraged

us to question everything deemed to be a social or industry norm. This kind of

critical thinking drives social change and holds positions of power accountable

Yet, the Government’s decision to funnel students into industries they deem as

“job-relevant” and will drive economic growth illustrates they have no interest

in educating young people, because they clearly do not want to be challenged.

It’s a denigrating slap in the face that instructs us to shut up, get to work and

exploit us for all we are worth.

The UN Declaration of Human Rights says education should be accessible

to everyone and “promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among

all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the

United Nations for the maintenance of peace.” The Government simply fails to

acknowledge that education is about empowerment not employment.

In conversations with different groups of friends, a clear pattern of thought

is agreed upon consistently. We keep circling back to the notion that a ‘carrot

stick’ approach blatantly disregards the various levels of privilege budding

university students come from and consequently marginalises those who are

forced to choose between crippling debt and their right to learn.

Hiking up the cost of a Bachelor of Arts by 113% won’t make a student

interested in a range of humanities subjects suddenly want to give a STEMbased

degree a red hot go. It would only leave the budding arts student either

copping the ridiculous price and sacrificing themselves to debt for their right

to tertiary education or giving up on the idea of attending university entirely;

an utter detriment to their personal development and a profound loss for our

society.

This motion effectively limits the potential of those who can’t financially

prioritise study in the areas of humanities they are passionate about. With these

increased costs, we envision a bleak reality where mature aged students who

want to further their education and high school graduates with so much fiery

potential to analyse, question and challenge the society we live in are forced to

confine their futures to immediate full-time work, neglecting their aspirations

due to a lack of accessibility.

The broad scope of opportunities within an arts degree is exactly what draws

young graduates to study in the first place. Very few seventeen-year-olds know

exactly what they want to be when they grow up and studying a Bachelor of

Arts serves as an opportunistic playground to trial multiple areas of study

which enables them to learn about the world around them and see what lights

their fire moving forward.

These costs would leave behind our future scholars, leaders, journalists, non-forprofit

organisers, CEO’s, philosophers, historians and sociologists and discredit

the current professionals completing instrumental progress in these imperative

fields among others.

Arts students are tired of being constantly overlooked by the Liberal

Government. We are more than job-ready, we are the future, and it’s time we

are treated as such.

17


Moms

Words by N.Thierry

cw. themes of child abuse, neglect, animal abuse

Wilson the maid agent* sits across the glass dining table from Dad. He slides

a Manila envelope across the table, dabbing his forehead with the sleeve of

his polyester suit; the AC unit is broken and it’s always summer in Singapore.

Rubbing his temples, glowing cigarette stick balancing between his fingers, Dad

inspects the envelope’s contents. Mother used to do these things.

I release the rabbit into the living room, watching it weave in between chairs

and tables, squeezing into the gap beneath the couch, leaving little pellets of

excrement in its wake. Following the rabbit on all fours. What’s it like to be

like that?

Maria plucks a Java apple from the tree in our garden next to the driveway,

rubbing its plump and cherry skin against the fabric of her black t-shirt. From

overseas, she brings with her nothing but loose, weathered t-shirts, and sports

shorts that ride seven or eight inches above her knee. Short shorts, barely

covering the skin of her thick upper thigh, a brown that is three shades lighter.

Pudgy. Her head is shaved.

Mother steps out of a yellow Ferrari idling outside of the front gate of our semi,

high heel cracking against the tarmac. She is wearing big Italian sunglasses. The

car doors swing upwards rather than outwards and its windows are tinted so

you can’t see the man inside. She moves to the back of the car. Klop klop klop.

Popping open the car’s trunk, she pulls out a cardboard box. She slaps the tail of

the Ferrari and it speeds away, leaving a set of skid marks and smoke as Mother

stands before the front gate, frozen, watching it disappear. In the driveway, a

galaxy blue Lexus coated in dust.

The box has holes poked into its flaps. Claws scratch within. I set the box on

the living room floor and open it. “It’s for you,” she says, “the rabbit inside”. Her

breath reeks of gin. Cuckold’s Comfort.

Maria joins me for lunch sometimes, watching cartoons beside me. She teaches

me how to play cards. Bluff, Blackjack, Poker. We walk the neighbourhood. I’m

saying this for a reason.

I hide things. Midnight. Creeping down the stairs into the living room. Feeling

the wall and furniture in the darkness. Fingertips tracing the scratchy fabric of

our rolled arm sofa. On my knees, I slip my fingers underneath the sofa and

pull it up a few inches, reaching for my Gameboy. Beside the handheld console

is a pack of playing cards, DVDs, and a rattan cane. The kind that’s too thin

for walking. I hear sobbing through the kitchen door. There, Maria sleeps in

the storeroom.

I knock on her door. Movement.

“It’s me.”

The door cracks open.

Reaching in, I trace the tiny bumps forming its spine, feeling its plush, white

fur. Blood red eyes.

“I hate it,” I say.

Mother calls me an ungrateful shit. She shoves me. My head hits the corner of

a coffee table as I fall. Her afterimage mounts me and I cover my face with my

forearms and my ears are ringing and my eyes wet and blurry. This is normal.

Maria sprints through the kitchen screaming.

“Let me in.”

She locks the door after me. She falls onto her mattress and covers her face.

By her side, a portable lamp and desk fan. No windows. I lie down beside her.

Her hair has grown out, jet-black whirls splayed across her pillow. Crying again.

I trace the water spots forming on the ceiling with my finger. Earlier today,

Mother threw the AC remote at Maria.

“Truth or dare. You start.”

Dad goes on business trips, Mother comes home late, I spend the afternoons

with Maria. I swing open the front door and dump my backpack on the floor.

In the living room before the couch, a foldable table. Piping, hearty, porcelain

bowl of congee. Strips of shredded pork, diced carrots, chopped spring onions

floating in soupy, rice porridge. On its side, a metal disc with halved century

eggs, cut side up; yolk semi-cooked, ash-grey and gooey, egg white a translucent

black jelly. Scars shaped like pine branches etched within.

She turns to face me. Warm, acrid breath caressing my cheek. I ran away from

home. I’m sixteen. I hate it here. I dare her to hold me. To never leave me.

I dream of being twelve. You, stroking my face, waking me up. You’re late for

class.

18


I’m in the backyard. Inside, Mother stalks Maria with a stopwatch, silk skirt

flitting in the air. Maria runs up and down the stairs. Mother comes home now.

She’s pregnant.

I bend down and regard the albino rabbit through black heavy gauge wire. The

cage door opens upwards. The rabbit inches through. I release it. The door

crashes onto his nose and he scrambles into the playpen wall. Laughing, I pull

up the grating once more.

Sticking its twitching whiskers through the entrance. Then its neck. Release. It

stops being funny when the gate jams into its neck and it lies there motionless

and gurgling, kah-kuh. It rains.

Dad yells, “I HATE NOISE”. When he gets angry, his eyes pop out, his veins

bulge, and he takes off his belt. Night falls and Mother talks about Maria’s

carelessness.

I spy two figures in the garden by the Java tree. It’s pouring. Dad’s holding an

umbrella. Maria digs up a carcass. Loud voices. A set of ears peeking through a

pool of mud. She runs.

The lights are out in the kitchen. Rainwater-dappled kitchen windows render

her movement watercolour through the free end of the semi. Bursting through

the back door into the backyard, I step into rain. Coated by the night, we meet.

Drenched hair covering her eyes and falling past her neck. It pours. I’m

shivering. The outline of her breath escapes from her lips, her chest moving in

sync. Her wet and yellowing work tee sticks against her figure. Her fists are

clenched. My toes curling and bracing against concrete as she steps closer.

My eyes are runny. She holds me. The incandescent lightbulb above stirs and

flickers yellow. Feeling her warmth permeate through her thin and slick clothes.

Her body. Blinding bright spills from the kitchen through glass sliding doors

facing the backyard. Tangled shadows like Rorschach inkblots splashing against

a backdrop of concrete and trimmed grass. Eyes closed. Red voices call. The

insides of her hot and sour mouth.

*Maids agents are individuals working in maid agencies that help families

contract the service of a maid. A common feature of upper-middle class

households in Singapore, the term maid refers to a female domestic worker

employed by a family to perform a variety of household tasks including

cleaning, cooking, and caring for children or the elderly.

Art by Milly Downing

19

20



Art by Alicia Sach 21


The Collapse of the American Empire:

From the Greatest Superpower to a Failed State

Words by Gursewak Singh

250 years.

The average age of an empire, from conception to crumble. Some empires live

a short life and end up as a mere sentence in the pages of history, while others

endure for centuries and have nowhere enough pages recounting their rise or

fall.

The last empire that fell was the Soviet Union. Born amidst war and from a

revolution of the people, the Soviet empire endured the Great Depression, an

invasion from Nazi Germany and a bloodbath on the eastern front of World

War 2. But it could not sustain an ideological war against the west. It could no

longer instigate conflict in bordering regions to maintain its sphere of influence

and it could not maintain its own integrity. Thus, one by one the republics

declared independence. With nothing more to be done, Gorbachev resigned

and rendered all Soviet institutions defunct.

In 1991, in the wake of the fragmentation and dissolution of the Soviet Union,

the unipolar moment was here and there had never been a country with such

immense power.

The United States stood poised, the western world flanking it, without any

other country to rival it. Ancient empires and old kingdoms could not even

compare to the might of the US. As the Twin Towers fell in September 2001,

the country was able to rally allies and old foes to its side and could swing its

diplomatic and military weight as it willed.

In 2003 it did, despite more than 36 million people protesting against war,

the US with its ‘Coalition of the Willing’ invaded Iraq on claims that they

had weapons of mass destruction (a claim that was later proved to have been

manufactured). The status of the US as a superpower in a unipolar world

empowered them to make this move. The Iraqi invasion also marked the most

interventionist the US had been.

To reach this unipolar moment, the height of the American empire, took

travelling on a long road.

With the Declaration of Independence in 1776, the US has sought to expand

not only its territory but its influence as well. The ‘Manifest Destiny’ took

the original colonies westwards subjugating and slaughtering many Native

American nations, coming into conflict with the colonial powers of Europe,

and purchasing vast swaths of land for an absolute bargain. The Monroe

Doctrine established an American sphere of influence over both the Americas,

forbidding any European country to interfere on the continent. Later in the

century, the US waged war against Spain and took control over Cuba, Guam,

Puerto Rico and the Philippines, establishing footholds across the Pacific and

asserting their dominance in the Americas.

By the end of the 19th century, the American empire had already established

itself as a military great power. In the 20th century, it would become an

economic and cultural great power despite trying its best to remain isolated.

The New York Stock Exchange plunged the world into darkness as the

Great Depression brought economies crumbling, pushing millions into

unemployment and starving many more. It also resulted in significant social

and political changes in many countries, for better or for worse.

The American entrance into World War 2 turned the tide for the allies, from

the D-Day landings to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As the world

sought to recover and rebuild, Americans used the opportunity to fashion

the international order so as to entrench their hegemony. The Marshall Plan

funnelled American money into western Europe through grants and loans,

tying Allies and former Axis countries to the US, rebuilding their industries,

and re-starting international trade. The construction of the international

monetary, governance, and security systems was led by the US, ensuring they

sat at the head of the table, and American culture was broadcast through

radio, television, and on the upcoming internet—American power was to be

protected against the onslaught from communism and the Soviet Union.

And we know the American empire endured the Cold War.

Nonetheless, we have seen cracks form in these systems and in the American

projection of their power as their domestic politics shifted. This was first

brought to the forefront with the election of Barack Obama who promoted

a less interventionist foreign policy, denouncing the Iraq War and proposing

to withdraw American troops from active fronts. As conflicts arose and

international relations fractured, Obama’s reluctance to immediately take

leadership which the US had historically assumed meant it diminished

American relevance, on the battlefield and during peace talks. The greatest

failure of all was Obama’s failure to respond to the Syrian Civil War—the nearly

decade-long insurrection continues still. Other conflicts have broken out in the

Middle East. Authoritarian governments have risen in Europe and in South

America, suppressing civil liberties and freedoms, unopposed by the ‘leader of

the free world’. Chinese foreign policy is moulding the international system to

their advantage without anybody rivalling it.

Through the Obama Administration, the American empire began withdrawing

from the international stage, and his successor has only helped accelerate this

process. Donald Trump’s presidency, despite all differences, is on the same

trajectory as his predecessor.

What non-Americans failed to see during the years of Obama was that despite

outward appearances of progress, hope, and change, the domestic issues

underlying the election of Obama continued to grow. The global financial

crisis of 2008 only served to exacerbate them. Economic, social and racial

inequalities—coupled with systemic racism pushed the richest American

further away from the poorest every year. While the stock markets make

headlines with record-breaking corporate valuations and profits, the American

working class and poor lack access to affordable healthcare, do work for an

abysmal minimum wage and little benefits, all while the basic cost of survival

goes up.

These conditions have been laid bare as the coronavirus pandemic spreads

like wildfire—more than 2 million American have contracted COVID-19

and more than 156,000 have died as of writing this. More than 20 million

Americans lost their job and had to rely on an insufficient social safety net—

some with little or no savings had no other option than to continue working to

put food on the table even as it posed a risk to their own life. Forced to make

a choice between staying at home to protect their health or going to work to

make ends meet, produced a tinderbox vulnerable to going aflame any time.

22


Then an unarmed George Floyd was mercilessly killed by the police in broad

daylight.

More than a month since, the chant ‘no peace, no justice’ still rings out in

cities across the country. Thousands are still on the streets, police brutality

has only worsened and has been exposed through social media, the White

House complex has been fortified, reminiscent of a country experiencing

an insurrection. There was the Occupy Movement in 2008, but the current

protests have surpassed it both in size and significance.

The government is now paralysed to either address the pandemic or the

protests—partisan politics prevents any bipartisanship, and a heightened

distrust of the government means there’s little political capital for a resolution.

With further decisiveness being propagated from the White House when

people need a clear and distinct voice, the tide is turning.

The American empire is now hurtling towards becoming a failed state.

And all of this is happening during a presidential election year—no one has

more on the line than Trump. Election Day in November will decide the future

course of America.

A Biden victory would sweep the Democrats back into power, the side of politics

in America more sympathetic to addressing racial inequality and the economic

and health crises, but Biden also represents the Obama Administration, a time

where inequalities grew nurturing the conditions for Trump to get elected in

the first place. The health, racial, and justice crises currently in full swing speak

to deeper systemic causes—issues which require root and branch reform and a

review of everything that is American society. Would Biden and the Democrats

be up for that challenge or would they squander the opportunity to do so like

they did addressing the GFC—sustaining the conditions that caused the crisis?

A second Trump term would lock in the current trajectory of American

democracy—distrust in government institutions and faith in the democratic

system would be damaged beyond repair, especially if he is elected without a

majority of the popular vote again. The past six months have shown Trump’s

inability to level with the American people and speak with integrity or

honesty—in the face of protests at the front doors of the White House, he

hid in the bunker; to visit St John’s Church, police tear-gassed and assaulted

Americans indiscriminately; asked questions about his response, he shuts up

journalists and simply walks away from press conferences.

This year Americans will celebrate the 244th anniversary of their independence

and there is very little hope that the course of the US will shift dramatically no

matter the election result. The once great empire, both wager of war and keeper

of peace, is no more.

This piece was originally published in PIVOT, the official student

publication of the Monash International Affairs Society.

23


Unrequited Thoughts

Words by Agnes Benjamin

Among these clustered cities and tumultuous thoughts

I wander on

It is deafening noise

Hunched over your books, lost in your art

You have not turned an ear

To the pebbles at your window

Sheltered I am in your blind spot

Perhaps this is for the best

I am s-s-plintered and my leaves have w-withered

My gn-gnarled wings I can-n-not free

Over the h-horizon of mellow h-hues

Cupid’s arrow unstruck, yet m-my heart is zealous

Had I chosen to whisper these thoughts into your ear

Only then would I have found solace

But this, only a mere dream, for it is too sweet

I shall not entertain these artful ideas

Perhaps fate will let us stay,

and then you will hear me say

You have b… have b-become my quiet

I wanted to t-t-tell you so

But you see

I have a st-st-stutter

24


Art by Tatiana Cruz 25


The Last of Us - A Towering Wo

Words by Austin Bond

cw. violence, death, and SPOILERS

Our story opens on ‘Outbreak Day’, when a fungus outbreak has started to

infect (i.e. zombify) the human population. Our protagonist is Joel, a father

trying to escape the Texas suburbs with his young daughter, Sarah. He doesn’t

hesitate to shoot a rabid-looking man running towards her, and once on the

road, he ignores his hitchhiking neighbours; all that matters is his daughter.

Traffic stalled, the pair scramble through chaotic crowds and dodge the growing

numbers of ‘infected’. They make their way up the hills outside the town, Joel

carrying Sarah in his arms, before a US soldier halts them, rifle raised. Through

a little voice in his ear, the soldier receives a grim order, something about

‘controlling the perimeter’. The soldier challenges his superior for a moment:

‘She’s only a child, sir! They aren’t infected! Do I still… yes, sir.’ The soldier

readies his weapon. Joel realises what is happening, and in one motion dives to

the ground and pushes his daughter away from the line of fire.

He scrambles up. His brother has arrived in time to stop the soldier, but

something is terribly wrong. He hears her frightened sobs, sees where the bullet

passed through her. He clutches his dying daughter, and his panicked pleas turn

to raw sorrow.

This is the opening sequence of The Last of Us, a 2013 video game developed by

Naughty Dog Studios. In 15 breathless minutes, players form a deep emotional

connection with Joel and, as the player controlling his actions, feel the maw left

in his heart. From here, Naughty Dog Studios will expand its intense, characterdriven

storytelling, taking Joel – and the player – on a journey of hope and

redemption.

With rich characterisation and a morally complex narrative, The Last of Us

more than earns a place in the canon of great post-apocalyptic works. Indeed,

it is easy to see why Naughty Dog’s harrowing tale is often regarded as one of

the greatest video games of all time, heralded by fans as proof that games are as

much an artform as any other.

The main plot begins twenty years after the heartbreaking prologue, with most

of the population now ‘infected’. The world has been largely reclaimed by

nature, and the humans too have reverted to their base, wolfish ways. Most of

the world is left to anarchy, with pop-up juntas controlling disparate quarantine

zones challenged by a rebel faction known as the Fireflies. Joel is now a smuggler

in what remains of Boston, with the decrepit city and gloomy atmosphere

evoking Alfonso Cuaron’s Children of Men. The story takes shape when he is

tasked with smuggling a very different ‘package’: Ellie, a girl only slightly older

than Sarah. Ellie, he learns, is immune to the zombie-like infection. He must

safely transport her to Salt Lake City, where the Fireflies have scientists ready to

develop a vaccine. And so begins an odyssey across a ruined America, filled with

brutal zombies and even more brutal humans.

While there are plenty of brain-chomping obstacles to overcome, The Last of

Us is ultimately about the relationship between Joel and Ellie. Although he

initially views Ellie as nothing more than cargo, Joel’s cold demeanour thaws

over time and they form a close bond. In this regard, The Last of Us takes

influence from Cormac McCarthy’s The Road, foregrounding a father-child

relationship against a ruined Western landscape.

Playing as Joel, we too start to form a bond with Ellie. This is in part because

the relationship builds in real-time, unfolding naturally through dialogue as

you, the player, guide Joel through the world. For example, as you are climbing

through the rubbles of Pittsburgh, Ellie finds a joke-book, leading to the

following exchange:

Ellie: Okay, we need to lighten the mood. Ready? “It doesn’t

matter how much you push the envelope, it’ll still be stationary.”

Joel: What is that?

Ellie: It’s a joke book. No Pun Intended: Volume Too by Will

Livingston.

Joel (sighing): Let’s keep going.

Ellie: “A book just fell on my head, I only have myself to blame.”

Oh wait, I said it wrong! Hold on, let me read it again. “A book

just fell on my head... I only have my shelf to blame.»

Joel: That’s awful.

Ellie (playfully): You’re awful.

While there are various scares and set-pieces, the story never loses sight of this

relationship at the centre. Indeed, as their bond develops, it becomes clear that

Joel views Ellie as a surrogate for the daughter he lost, and a new opportunity to

find meaning in this harsh world.

Ellie is the key for a cure, and the game ostensibly is a quest to save the world

from this deadly infection (timely, I know). However, the narrative subverts

our expectations of the genre by asking: does a world so brutal even deserve to

be saved? The various characters Joel and Ellie encounter in the game - military

factions only concerned with obtaining power, a lone wolf living a paranoid and

solitary existence, charming scavengers who (in an inevitable post-apocalyptic

trope) are revealed to be cannibals - go to such extreme lengths to survive

that they lose what makes them human. Elsewhere, when our heroes stop in

a thriving settlement built by Joel’s brother, we are presented with a vision

of humans starting anew, rather than preserving old systems of conflict and

oppression.

This thematic concern comes to a head in the game’s stunning climax. Having

made it to the Fireflies in Utah, Joel and Ellie are separated so her immunity can

be researched. She remains unconscious throughout, having passed out from a

near-drowning. Kept under guard, Joel is then told the doctors will operate on

Ellie shortly to develop the cure, but there is a cost: she will die in the process.

Worse yet, the scientists have given Ellie no say in the matter.

Philosophy students will of course recognise this as the ‘Trolley Problem’, which

asks if it is morally justifiable to kill one person to save ten (or a million, or all of

humanity). One may intuitively feel such a sacrifice is necessary for the greater

26


rk of Art

good. However, after witnessing so much inhumanity in the name of survival,

the message appears clear: we don’t save humanity by killing the little girl; we

save humanity by letting her live.

I will not reveal exactly what actions Joel takes, but I will say this: the genius of

this conclusion is that the moral questions raised by the situation are not merely

philosophical for Joel, but deeply personal. Indeed, this concluding section

mirrors the prologue; similar to the soldier that killed Sarah to quarantine the

virus, Joel faces a military authority that believes some ‘greater good’ gives them

the right to decide who lives and dies. Moreover, Joel has grown to love Ellie. In

a world so nihilistic, she is the only thing giving his life meaning. Even if losing

Ellie meant the world was saved, his world would be lost.

This existential, character-driven storytelling makes The Last of Us transcend

the medium of video games – a medium too often dismissed as juvenile – to

become something approaching high art.

the decaying remnants of civilisation with nature; city streets are green and

overgrown, while collapsed freeways have evolved into waterfalls. The beauty

of nature’s resurgence furthers the notion of seeking a new start for humanity,

rather than trying to save a world of brutality and endless conflict. The acoustic

guitar-led score, composed by Gustavo Santaolalla of Brokeback Mountain

fame, is also evocative. Quiet and tranquil, his music evokes a sense of human

connection persisting through the darkness.

However, what ultimately makes The Last of Us a masterpiece of storytelling

is the connection the player forms with Joel and Ellie. We have been with

them for every step of their long journey, through the moments of pain and

tenderness. When the Fireflies are preparing to kill Ellie, we feel like we are

losing our own daughter, and we share in Joel’s rage as he fights his way through

to the operating room. This intuitive connection players form with their avatar

not only makes The Last of Us special, but demonstrates the unique emotional

experience only games are capable of creating.

I would be remiss not to discuss the aesthetic elements of the game, all of which

heighten the story’s themes. The design of the game’s environments melds

27


Print More

Money,

Solve My

Problems

Words by Jeanne Cheong

Editors’ Note: The opinions expressed in the piece are

not necessarily representative of Lot’s Wife.

Everyone’s a Keynesian – still! And if you don’t know what that is, you’re

probably still one anyway. Maybe you were like me before I started my

degree and when you read Keynesian in your head, your brain mumbled an

incomprehensible sound or, immediately thought of Keiynan Lonsdale from

the underrated Australian TV classic, Dance Academy.

So what is a Keynesian you ask? Taking its name from Keynes – John Maynard

Keynes, Keynesianism is a macroeconomic theory that considers how aggregate

demand in an economy affects output. Truthfully, I don’t think I can summarise

the *key* theory of his seminal book The General Theory of Employment,

Interest and Money (1936) better than what has already been said, so I will

do as economists do (which is to maximise efficiency) and quote Tom Butler-

Bowdon (2017) instead:

Elegant models of how economies work are often wrong. Markets are

not self- correcting, but need constant intervention and management

to ensure high consumer demand, investment and employment.

In other words, policies by (usually) governments, or their agencies such

as a central bank, are needed to achieve positive outcomes for the economy

as a whole. This differs from the belief that the economy (‘the market’)

can inherently fix its own problems, problems such as low employment or

inflation. Think of the market like you and your sister fighting over the remote;

constrained by network programming and with different viewing preferences,

you might spend the whole night bickering over who gets control. However, a

better strategy may be realised by your mum when she storms in telling you to

change to advertisement-riddled Channel 93 because Midsomer Murders is on

in five minutes and that’s what you all wanted to watch anyway. Because of her

experience, authority and knowledge of the Green Guide (does this still exist?),

a satisfactory outcome is able to be achieved more quickly than if you decided

yourselves. However, this analogy does also bring up questions about the actual

ability of governments to make the ‘right’ decisions, as well as how to avoid

paternalistic policy overreach.

Nevertheless, because we live in Australia, where the Government fulfils this

mother role and we generally agree when it does, it’s difficult to contest the

validity of Keynesianism. As such, rather than rejecting Keynesianism, Modern

Monetary Theory (MMT) takes its ideas further.

Despite being an Economics 1 major, I only discovered MMT recently whilst

live streaming a discussion with American economist Stephanie Kelton.

Although logging on late (sadly, the switch to online events has not improved

my punctuality), I was quickly intrigued. Deficits are historical records while “a

budget…is a moral document”, she explained. Earlier, fellow panellist Richard

Denniss mused that an election promise to bring the budget back to surplus is

a promise “to collect more in tax than… spend[ing] in healthcare, education

and other government services.” If true, these statements show government

budget decisions to be constrained only by political will, rather than actual lack

of access to funds. Consequently, these statements are a challenge to rethink

the parts of ‘the Economy’ we accept as immoveable and amoral but are not.

This motion and morality that Kelton presented is of course Modern Monetary

Theory, as discussed in her book The Deficit Myth (2020).

1 I want to shout out my Human Rights major too because Arts degrees are

underrated (and underfunded if the changes go ahead).

28


I’m aware that I’m yet to explain what MMT is actually about. I’m no

economist (yet), so I’ll do my best to summarise the points in Kelton’s book

and by extension, the broader tenets of MMT and other MMT economists.

That’s it.

1. Spending by the sovereign currency issuer – such as the Federal

Government by way of the Reserve Bank of Australia, should not

be constrained and indeed, is not constrained by the level of debt

recorded on the books, i.e. shown by the budget surplus or deficit.

The primary reason for this is because the sole issuer can

simply ‘print more’ money. This means that spending

is only restricted by the real implications 2 of inflation

within the economy. The impact on policy is then that the

Government should invest in spending that boosts socioeconomic

development, environmental outcomes, health

and education without fear of running out of money

Just kidding. Of course, there are a number of intricacies that comprise MMT,

such as a universal job guarantee, but each by and large stems from this

conception of deficit. This is a contention that seems strange to even verbalise:

how can we pay for things if we don’t have the money? But this is the point:

MMT says we just do. It merely has to be written into existence through the sale

and purchase of bonds by the highest accountant in the land, the Reserve Bank.

The Government doesn’t have to “budget like a household” because Australia

isn’t a household. Its function as currency issuer renders it on a different

operational plane altogether. Moreover, taxes are not actually used to fund

expenditure as money for wages is created by the Government in the first place.

Rather, taxes are used to provision people into working for governmental aims.

By imposing a requirement to pay a certain amount, there is now motivation to

work to have money to fulfil that obligation. This isn’t to say we dispense with

tax – after all, labour may be employed to produce public goods, but Kelton

notes that tax also keeps inflation in check, redistributes wealth to reduce

inequality and encourages/discourages certain behaviours.

So how does MMT relate to Keynesian theory? Basically, it’s a souped-up

version that gives even greater capacity and justification for the Government

to invest (or interfere, depending on your stance) in the economy. Although

traditional Keynesian policies have improved overall economic outcomes for

most of the Twentieth Century, MMT claims they’re inadequate to achieve

substantial development goals, as they still prescribe to the artificial constraint

of the budget being a limited source of funds. At a time when all areas of life

seem to be under pressure – healthcare, education, business big and small –

the only solution appears spending the big bucks. Under budget constraints,

would one of these areas have to sacrifice more than another? Would one

section of society have to shoulder a larger burden? Perhaps it may be a section

already marginalised and facing co-morbidities in health and socio-economic

opportunity. It’s easier to compromise when it’s not your sacrifice to make.

MMT says that these are not compromises we need to make at all and to do so

is politicking plain and simple.

At this point you may be thinking, if MMT has all the answers (and all the

money), why don’t our governments just use it!? Perhaps this is where we

remember that politics is rarely plain and hardly ever simple, although at times

egg-cellent. There are two possible responses – the first being pretty depressing,

and the other, slightly more optimistic.

If budget decisions are examples of political will rather than scarcity as MMT

claims, we may be resigned to the reality that those in positions of power do

not actually want to promote a system that invests in community services that

improve health, education and social outcomes. They may thrive off inequity –

consciously or not – because they perceive that keeping others (including the

environment) down keeps them ‘up’ in positions of power, or in the favour of

those with political, media or financial support. Other examples could include

inequitable tax cuts or unbalanced education funding. These decisions are

likely to amplify the voices of the status quo, while keeping marginalised groups

away from initiatives and services that we all deserve in this Lucky Country. I

admit it, this is a pretty pessimistic perspective and I don’t want to invoke the

dreaded phrase ‘not all ___’ but yes, I’m still hopeful that not all politicians

are blinded by power, political games and point scoring (some just want their

constituents to enjoy a kebab). Perhaps instead, they’re simply unaware of the

alternatives. While possibly disconcerting, it’s also good news.

Politicians and the economy have something in common: they’re both

supposed to work for the benefit of the people, and they’re both mouldable.

We expect our representatives to respond to our needs and if we don’t think

they are we vote them out. We also want our economy – as created, shaped and

maintained by those in power – to facilitate our objectives. It may seem strange

to think of any of us having power over The Economy but the fact remains that

it’s comprised of concepts that are written into existence. We don’t have to look

far to see this as we compare the differing economic policies of our neighbours

across both states and international borders. More obviously, we can also

contrast conceptions of capitalism, communism or socialism - the list goes on.

At the heart of it, economics is about describing the choices people make about

what they’ve got and what they want. There may be a better way of describing

how the economy works but rarely is there just one way. Occasionally, changes

to economic activity come from the top down to incentivise or disincentivise

certain behaviours. Other times it must be demanded by the people themselves.

Just as we are seeing increasing pushback about the efficacy and equity of our

current political and institutional structures in relation to protecting the rights

of First Nations people or freedoms for those seeking asylum, it would not be

remiss to also question the broader economic decisions upholding or justifying

these policies.

Bringing what isn’t working to the attention of our lawmakers is the first step

to not just survive the economic challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, but

also fix existing socio-economic inequalities inbuilt into the current system in

a way that benefits everyone.

Although economic systems and theories are essentially created, it would

be disingenuous to imply they are pulled from thin air. Rather, they’re built

upon assumptions and perceived goals of human progress. However, like

most assumptions, they can occasionally be wrong and require a conception

that’s totally new. Because the theory doesn’t seem to contradict the most

basic nuts and bolts economic logic, I admit that I’m compelled but not yet

fully convinced by MMT. The latter because going against the dominant

economic orthodoxy of saving and spending seems frightening and I’m riskaverse.

Nevertheless, as I explore MMT more, I’m reminded that sometimes

the conventional ways are best. Sometimes they hold us back. Either way, this

period of involuntary, unprecedented uncertainty is as good a time as any to

test the alternatives that will allow us to begin rebuilding the society we need.

2 Where real refers to the practical impact on society’s buying power, living

standards etc.

29


30

Art by Joseph Lew


How to Respond When You Find

Out Your Friend Is A Sexual Assualt

Perpetrator

DO:

- Believe the victim

- Fight the urge

- To be a misogynist

- It’s hard, I know

- But we don’t have time for

- apologists

- Believe the victim

DON’T:

- Ignore reality

- With band-aids and blindfolds

- With privileged frivolity

- And locker room jest

Figure 1: For the Confused Among Us

Words by Riya Rajesh

31


Crow

Words by Sophie O’Donovan

Cw. physical violence

It first happened just days after her fifth birthday. She had started primary school a few weeks before; an introduction to a world of straight lines, knee

length dresses and Mary-Jane shoes with bright metal buckles on the side. She awoke one morning before the sun, and a pain gripped at her stomach and

refused to let go. She begged and cried for her mum as she writhed around in her sheets, but her mother only scoffed at her and put it down to nerves.

Placing a firm hand on her shoulder, she led her daughter to the kitchen table and wove her hair into braids and tied them with a green ribbon, ignoring

her whimpers of pain.

She learned to ignore it for the most part. It was always there, spreading itself up into her chest, but her life simply continued to move around it. Her hair

grew down past her shoulder blades. Her body seemed to grow around it too; her breasts swelling with the pain, her hips widening to accommodate its

mass. She grew up biting her tongue, trying to keep it firmly hidden inside of her. She had tried to explain it to her boyfriend. They had been together for

a few months. Most days she regarded him with pure adoration but there were some moments when her stomach would thrash and turn until her entire

body would be in tumult, and all she felt was a sickening revulsion towards him. They would be in bed, him absent-mindedly stroking her hair, and she

would have to fight the urge to fling herself at him and scratch at his eyes. She started losing sleep sitting entirely still as not to wake it within her, paralysed

in fear of it, while he slumbered on peacefully beside her. She had tried describing the hollow cavity inside her chest to him, searching for some sort of

understanding, but he instantly shied away.

“Sounds like a period kind of thing, babe, I wouldn’t know,” he said, gingerly patting her on the knee before getting up to go to the bathroom. She had to

bite her tongue to stop it from launching up from her chest and out of her throat.

She went to a doctor about it, once. She had begun to tell him of her symptoms. The sleepless nights, the strange lines, almost like scars, that slashed across

her belly. The doctor interrupted her, holding up two latex gloved fingers, and asked,

“Is there any chance you could be pregnant?”

She hesitated and he raised an eyebrow. It began to claw at her insides. No, she told him, no, there is no chance of that. He lowered his voice to a whisper

as if talking to a child or a dog.

“You can tell me. You’re safe here.”

She eyed the tray of syringes and scalpels and other medical equipment behind him. The clawing became more fevered.

“It is important that you are completely honest with me. In my,” he leaned forward further, “professional opinion, your symptoms all point to a potential

pregnancy.”

She answered more decisively, she was not pregnant. He sighed, stood up and reviewed the notes on his clipboard. He continued without looking at her.

“When was the last time you had penetrative intercourse?”

***

She had become isolated in her own self. The scars now stretched the entire length of her chest, from above her right breast down to her left hip. She refused

to show anyone, partially out of a fear of judgement, but also because it seemed to settle more in its isolated state – it was only her and it. She would spend

long evenings sprawled on her couch in her one-bedroom apartment, stroking the length of her chest and belly. She could almost feel it calm under her

touch. She now defined her actions by what settled it. She cut her hair shorter and shorter until one day she bought a razor and shaved it right down to her

scalp. She had long forgone makeup and dressed only in shapeless clothing. Her way of life existed around its happiness and in return she began to feel...

freer. She found comfort and peace in reliving her childhood, remembering the days spent exploring the fields between her grandparents’ house and her

own, where her mother kept a watchful eye on her out of the kitchen window. The field, now a plot of land for sale, had grown wild and unkempt, and

she spent her time foraging in the scrub, short haired and barefooted. Back then she collected sticks - some oddly shaped, some that were weathered and

smooth, and others that had bright spots of lichen that bloomed from the dark wood. At the end of each day she gathered her treasures in her skirt and

took them back to her room where they were carefully placed along her windowsill.

They continued to co-exist, her and it, until she awoke one morning in fits of pain. It had writhed inside her, and pushed against her hands as she desperately

gripped her belly. It beat against her lungs, and grew broader until she heard her ribs begin to crack. She cried out in shock as her chest opened. A small

cavity in the centre of her sternum folded inwards. Wider and wider it grew. Beating and flapping its wings, a large crow emerged. It perched for a moment

on her broken chest. Head cocked, its eyes peered directly into hers. Her hands still crossed over her heart, she gazed calmly back at it, breathing steadily.

They both sat, until the crow squawked once and took off, its large wings beating against the air as it flew out of the open balcony door into the morning.

32


Art by Carla J. Romana33


self-love

gallery

34

Art by Kat Pei


35

Art by Kajal K


Art by Linda Chen

36


Art by Linda Chen

37

38 Art by Anneke Tykocinski



The Fall of the Fourth Estate

Words by Xenia Sanut

The Irish statesman Edmund Burke said that “there were Three Estates in

Parliament; but, in the Reporters’ Gallery yonder, there sat a Fourth Estate

more important far than they all”. The role of the press as the Fourth Estate is

to hold accountable the other Three Estates – the clergy, the aristocracy and the

common people – and to voice their concerns. They are one of the pillars that

protect people’s freedoms; by keeping institutions accountable and uncovering

corruption, they ensure we participate in fair elections, are protected from

people and institutions that misuse their power and have our basic human

rights met. The investigation and coverage into the Watergate scandal, the

#MeToo movement and the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal demonstrate

how journalism keeps those with power and influence in check. As the Media,

Entertainment & Arts Alliance puts it, “respect for truth and the public’s right

to information are fundamental principles of journalism”.

But when News Corp shuts down over 100 newspapers and cuts at least 500

staff from its local news outlets, and the Government doubles the annual cost

of communication degrees and slashes $85 million from the ABC resulting in

the loss of 250 jobs, one questions whether journalism can support itself in the

current media landscape. If journalism – the democracy-protecting journalism

– is valued in our society, then why is it becoming harder to see?

The digital landscape has evolved and changed radically in the last couple of

decades and the journalism industry has been facing increasing pressure to

adapt. However, their current business model is not allowing them to. The news

industry traditionally earned a profit from government support, which is the

case for public service broadcasters like the ABC, but due to the recent cuts, it

has been difficult for ABC to continue its programs and pay their journalists

without that financial support. News organisations also gained revenue from

advertising, but since news organisations failed to gain the same attention as

popular online platforms, advertisers decided to move away from the news

classifieds and onto Facebook and Google.

The development of these virtual platforms has also altered the way we

distribute news. News organisations used to be responsible for not only

producing the news but also supplying it to the public, but now social media

and search engines have taken on that role. A study by the Reuters Institute

released this year found that 76 per cent of those surveyed use online sources,

including social media, to get their news. This digital development has also

allowed citizens to become the producers and distributors of their own content

by creating videos, writing blogs, and recording newsworthy events on their

phones to post on social media. News organisations no longer control the

media landscape as they once did; citizens can now partake, starting trends,

and posting and sharing millions of digital content. It concentrates the media

landscape so when we open up Instagram or Facebook, there is an endless flood

of information such that we do not know how to stop scrolling or who to turn

to for accurate information.

Due to this information overload and how easy it is to rise to become a content

producer, many young children are now aspiring to become online gamers or

celebrities in an online environment that competes for people’s attention. In

order to stay relevant in this entertainment-driven age, many news organisations

are now making their content more emotive, shareable and available to these

platforms. This includes producing sensational and scandalous stories which

focus on celebrity gossip and click-bait, and have to be churned out at a fast rate

to compete with the millions of other digital content. This results in little to no

financial gain for the news organisation and causes issues with the audience’s

trust.

To compensate for the loss in revenue, most publications have shifted to

reader payment options such as subscriptions, memberships, donations and

micropayments. However, readers need to have trust in the media before they

feel comfortable investing in news publications. Trust is a key element here,

because according to a study by the Queensland University of Technology

and the Centre for Behavioural Economics, Society & Technology, the major

criticisms people have about Australian news sources are their tendency to

sensationalise stories, publish inaccurate information, blur fact and opinion,

and lack transparency in their reporting. The study participants believed that

to rebuild that trust, news organisations need to look beyond expanding

their reach on social media, and instead reform their journalism cultures to

achieve greater accountability and transparency. This is not something that

can be solved by simply re-hiring journalists or increasing funding; media

organisations need to self-reflect and change the way they present news,

ensuring that they emphasise what traditional news outlets do best – writing

stories with accuracy and keeping those in power accountable. A recent Reuters

study provided further evidence of this, highlighting two instances where there

was a growth of news subscriptions and why. The first occurred when Donald

Trump was elected because many people were looking for publications that

could hold the President to account. The second was at the beginning of the

COVID-19 pandemic, a time when publications emphasised the value of

having trusted and accurate journalism to help navigate through the health

crisis. These examples show that news organisations are still financially viable,

but only if they play to their strengths.

However, paywalls are by no means the preferred method of supporting the

Fourth Estate because it also leaves certain demographics uninformed and

goes against journalism’s function as the people’s informant. Subscriptions can

prevent people from accessing critical public health content and disadvantage

those who cannot afford to pay for accurate information, especially during the

current health crisis. Some news publications, including The New York Times,

have removed their paywalls for the duration of the pandemic to ensure that the

public had easy access to credible information, but not every publication has

the financial capacity to make that choice.

Local newspapers also form an incredibly important role in holding

governments accountable, but the economic impact of COVID-19 has

forced many to close or move online. This disadvantages both the people

who rely on local newspapers and those who lack internet access. Moreover,

it also disadvantages the accurate, transparent and community-oriented

journalism the public is seeking. It was the Sydney Morning Herald that began

investigating former High Court Justice Dyson Heydon and his history of

sexual harassment two years before the High Court announced their findings.

It was Miami Herald reporter Julie K. Brown that helped uncover the truth

about Jeffrey Epstein. For these stories to be uncovered and brought to life, they

not only need financial support by readers and advertisers, but also reforms by

lawmakers to ensure that the honest, public interest journalism that citizens

want is what they receive.

Indeed, for the media to fulfil its role as the Fourth Estate, it will need laws to

protect the people who wish to speak out against corruption, injustices and

human rights violations from those who wish to silence them. The journalists

that published the Afghan Files, a series of stories about Australian soldiers

committing war crimes in Afghanistan, are still under investigation after the

police raided the ABC’s Sydney headquarters last year. Similarly, it was recently

announced that Al Jazeera journalists are under investigation by Malaysian

police after they released a documentary about the treatment of undocumented

workers during the pandemic. It will always be tricky to decide whether the

public has the right to know about a story but press freedom and whistleblower

laws are important if journalism is to provide the stories that make the

profession important in the first place.

Saving journalism has no single solution; it instead requires a collective effort

from all parties involved. Journalists need to value accountability, transparency

and accuracy if they want the public to pay for their reporting. However,

journalists can only do some much; at some point, the public needs to be

willing to pay more out of their own pocket for good journalism. We need to

recognise that the purpose of the Fourth Estate – to identify and illuminate

injustice – is essential for society to become the fair place we want it to be.

We need to invest in it, support it and take our time to listen to the stories

that journalists share, because it is how you ensure power is not placed into the

wrong hands. Ultimately, journalism is only a step to making a just world, for

while the Fourth Estate is powerful, it still needs the support of the other Three

Estates to ensure the rights of citizens are met.

39


I am used to love

like a storm —

conquering, all-consuming —

but yours is

a Sunday morning —

coffee grains spilt

on marble counters,

the smell of garlic

from last night’s pasta.

It is the day wrapped

in satin sheets and kisses;

the window, the closest —

we’ll get to the sun today.

Sunday

Words by Esme James

It is you

holding me tightly

where I say

it hurts the most —

feeling pages

of burnt poetry

and bruises

slowly healing.

Put down your pen —

the chapter has

ended.

I am arriving now

in this sanctuary

made for two.

Feeling you

caress my scars,

filling their crevasses

with red wine

and country music.

Watching the sun

go down —

my body merging

with yours,

knowing I’ll be

held close

as tomorrow wakes —

another Sunday morning

with you.

40


Art by Chiya Belwal

41

42



Monash Uni Student Theatre presents

MUST Olympics

Words by Emma Anvari

Weeks 4-6 in Semester 2

Are you disappointed about the postponement of the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games?

Well, never fear! The Monash Uni Student Theatre (MUST, MSA) has the ultimate

competition and immersive experience for you.

You’ve heard of the Ancient Greeks, from their theatrical tragedies to mighty

warriors. You’ve heard of Pierre de Coubertin, the founder of the modern Olympic

Games. Now, MUST presents to you the perfect collision of both worlds: the

inaugural MUST Olympics.

“A new online competition for all theatre enthusiasts to learn to push the limits of the

stage.”

The MUST Olympics is set to be a bold, innovative, competitive, theatrical Zoom

team-sport extravaganza. It promises to introduce you to the world of the theatre and

everything it takes to create a show, all from the comfort of your bedroom.

The structure of the MUST Olympics will replicate that of the actual Olympic Games

themselves, with a MUST Olympic Committee, opening and closing ceremony,

judges, as well as regular updates on medal tallies and event commentating.

Be warned, for only one team will emerge the most theatrical and victorious…

The project is the proud brainchild of Producer Oscar Balla, and was designed to

create an interactive way of introducing Semester 2 students to the inner workings of

Monash’s student theatre.

Balla has been involved in notable previous MUST performances as an Actor (‘The

Golden Age’), an Assistant Stage Manager (‘Do Not Collect $200’), as well as a Writer

and Director (CabFest: ‘Petrol Love’).

Balla says the MUST community is special and responsible for the positive university

experience of a broad range of Monash students.

“The premise of the MUST Olympics is to expose new students to different theatrical

roles that are required to make a piece of theatre… This is done by having different

Olympic-type events that test the different skills required within these specialised

theatre-making roles,” he said.

“There will be some education provided for each event, and hopefully this

competition will help people find new passions within theatre-making so they will

come back to MUST in the future.”

According to presentation director Gregor Campbell, the Olympics will be unlike

any MUST project ever seen before, with its entirely online platform, open-to-all

philosophy, and transformation of the audience into participants.

“Participants can expect an experience like no other: the experience of being an

Olympic athlete and the experience of being part of the best community on campus,

MUST, all rolled into one,” he said.

“For the first time, an audience composed of theatre kids will be asked to attempt

activities vaguely resembling sports, which I’m sure will be worth a watch at the very

least.

I’m most looking forward to seeing both new and old faces enjoying the experience

the team is developing for them because I can promise it’ll be a unique experience

that will keep people entertained and engaged in this difficult period.”

When asked how he would describe his exciting new undertaking, Oscar said the

Olympics were a combination of theatre sport, immersive theatre and a workshop

rolled into one.

“I find theatre sports to be really focussed on acting and don’t really include things

like sound design,” he said.

“[In the Olympics] the theatre sports will transfer the focus from acting skills,

with the exception of the acting event, to theatre skills such as directing, writing or

marketing.”

The MUST Olympics team have already faced many challenges, namely adapting to

the current circumstances surrounding Victoria’s handling of COVID-19.

The Olympics team said the original plan was to have all of the events completed

over the course of one full day of face-to-face competition, but now the events are

to take place across Wednesday and Saturday nights for three weeks via the online

platform Zoom.

“Overcoming a global pandemic to deliver live experiences and entertainment seems

like a massive hurdle and it’s definitely one for the resume, but with stress, hard work

and a little bit of Zoom magic I’m sure the outcome will still be fantastic,” Campbell

said.

“We’ve had to rethink the content of the events because we’ve been restricted by the

nature of the online platform in what we can do,” Balla added.

“But the intention to focus on teamwork, education and fun has not changed.”

Although an interactive workshop-esque project, participants can still expect to

witness performances by actors throughout the competition.

What are you waiting for?

Check out the Monash Uni Student Theatre Facebook page at https://www.

facebook.com/musttheatre/ to stay in the loop and for details on how to sign up.

You’ll have a blast and you never know, you may find a new and exciting passion

along the way.

May the odds be ever in your favour. See you at the opening ceremony.

Monash Uni Student Theatre presents

THE MUST OLYMPICS by Oscar Balla

Created by Oscar Balla and Lucas Rindt

Wednesday and Saturday Evenings (Weeks 4-6 of Semester 2)

Free Participation via Zoom

Sign up via: msa.monash.edu/must | Enquiries via MUST: 9905 8173

| @musttheatre

43

44



Art by Charlotte Elwell 45


Dating Trends:

Breaking Down the

Frivolous, Problematic and

Non-Committal

Words by Meg-Mel Dean

Dating trends routinely acquire bad reputations and fall victim to less than

subtle contempt. Despite such reputations, a myriad sound rationales exist

behind the fury-inducing actions we inflict upon one another, including

some very valid, very pronounced reasons that the coronavirus has catalysed

(vis-à-vis contemporary exploitation of dating apps). As 2020 accompanies

‘cockblockers’ like social distancing, lockdowns, and face masks that conceal

your signature smirk whilst flirting with some girl whose eyes met yours on

the train, most modes of idling away time involving dating apps have recently

proven wholly acceptable. OkCupid data reveals that as stay-home regulations

intensify worldwide, online connections accelerate tenfold. This prompts us to

question why this might be. One thing is certain: it is naïve and romantic to

claim that all new users derive motivation from a sole desire to find love. After

all, already attached individuals have similarly downloaded dating apps since

the pandemic began. Unless there lies an explicable force compelling people

(irrespective of relationship statuses) to fancy a stranger’s companionship, can

we really ascertain the intentions of those who blithely frequent dating apps, yet

aren’t on quests for love?

In light of this, the nature of modern dating is best assessed via unpacking the

novel dating trends born alongside the advent of online romance. We’ll delve

beyond the frankly passé example of ghosting, exploring seven fresh dating

terms I’m either regrettably complicit in, or absolutely loathe. These swipe

left worthy trends are just about the worst things one could do to a hopeful

single-with-heart-on-sleeve. Nevertheless, they are beneficial for revealing why

millennials, in particular, string each other along.

Stashing (sta • shuhng)

Having a partner hide their friends and family from you. Though there may

be an endless list of reasons why this isn’t the most heinous of transgressions,

stashing involves specific elements of opportunistic secrecy and a sprinkle of

shame. Their Instagram followers have never heard of you. They instinctively

recoil from your touch when bumping into acquaintances in public. Mention

your name to anyone they know and expect a “Who?” in return because, from

an outsider’s perspective, you don’t exist. The role of ‘significant other’ in your

partner’s life remains outwardly vacant, and their intention? Keeping options

open and alerting prospective hotties that if they wanted, one could shoot their

shot anytime since this alleged ‘thing’ between you both is far from official, far

from exclusive. It serves as an excuse to treat you like garbage, for what better

way to argue against a relationship’s legitimacy than playing the infamous “I

haven’t even introduced you to my family” card?

Stashers’ Justification

Fear of commitment and emotional unavailability. A bizarre belief that

singlehood enhances one’s appeal. The allure of remaining a bachelor/ette over

coming across as a simp, and the all-important: they’re just not that into you.

Jekylling (jee • kil • luhng)

Inspired by the 1886 novella The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,

Jekylling occurs when someone’s demeanour does a full 180. Crazy. Not in

an enlightened, life-changing manner but in the way sore losers behave after

being turned down. They first shower you with compliments hoping to garner

attention, and you bathe in the flattering fire emoji galore that your DMs

become. It’s short-lived, however, because one of these two notifications pop

up soon enough: “Can I have your number?” or “Let’s go out sometime!” You

politely decline, and all hell breaks loose. Empty words from before erupt into a

cacophony of insults targeting your looks, personality, career and the littlest of

details, since it’s now evinced that you’re a vicious killer. One who’s annihilated

this melodramatic, insecure character’s fragile spirit, and therefore deserving of

every nasty threat to come.

Jekyllers’ Justification

Crushed egos and deep toxicity. I’ve heard of psychiatrists citing narcissism

Art by Ng Hui Jie

46


as a plausible explanation, but I believe it’s something less complex and more

universal. People tend not to enjoy rejection and surprise, surprise, a-holes are

people too.

White Clawing (wait • klaw • uhng)

Named after the flavourless seltzer camouflaged under an enticing packaging,

this is the dating habit I hate most and interestingly, haven’t done. It’s only

interesting because 42% of singles deem this behaviour commonplace, wherein

individuals stick with a partner who’s ridiculously attractive but lacking much

else to them. An absence of substance fails to repel, and the inability to vibe

on similar wavelengths seems no cause for concern. Just like trophy wives or

the ‘Brainless Beauty’ television trope, only the superficial matters in the art

of White Clawing – made increasingly pervasive via dating apps’ focus on

appearances.

White Clawers’ Justification

Good for the Gram. Pursuits of temporary flings don’t necessarily demand a

cosmic connection, and given society’s inherent preoccupation with image,

being attached to a stunning partner potentially boosts self-esteem. This

objectified arm candy becomes a dramaturgical tool of sorts, signalling to the

world that if one effectively scored such a gorgeous specimen, they must be of

certain high standards themselves.

Eclipsing (uh • klips • uhng)

Adopting the same hobbies as a new partner. Eclipsing goes beyond curiosity

or sharing mutual interests, for a deliberate decision is made to imitate. This

trend is one that boggles the mind, especially taking into account how far I’ve

seen people go to impress, relate or convince their partner that they’re – and I

quote – “as good” as them. For instance, I met a novice guitarist who purchased

a $4000 Fender Stratocaster just two weeks into a relationship with a bona fide

musician. Having made conversation with both parties in the aforementioned

ex-relationship, it’s funny how annoyance and vicarious embarrassment were

the main emotions felt by the copied towards the copier – in other words,

nothing positive at all.

Eclipsers’ Justification

Desire to be loved alongside fear of rejection. Inhibitions that stem from selfdoubt,

caution, nervousness and people-pleasing dispositions. Baring one’s

soul also proves such a turn-off when rivalled against the easier option of

mimicking another, so whilst socialising with strangers, how many would feel

vulnerability-inclined instead of vulnerability-averse?

Typecasting (taip • kast • uhng)

My zodiac sign’s Cancer. Astrologically speaking, I’m probably most

compatible with a Scorpio or Taurus, and firmly believed so until meeting my

Gemini partner – a union far better than any relationship I’ve had with either

sign above. This reformed a staunch typecaster (i.e. somebody who exclusively

dates based on occult affinity defined by love languages, horoscopes and/or the

Myers-Briggs personality test). Typecasters would insist that pairing an ESFJ

with an INTJ equals a definite match made in hell, establishing how they

neglect the necessary communication, effort and maturity to foster healthy

relationships. Myopic preferences imply excessive faith placed on finding a

textbook-perfect match, inevitably overlooking great catches due to sheer

reductionist stereotypes.

Typecasters’ Justification

Every relationship accompanies a certain degree of risk, but avoiding them

might be possible given guidelines or advice. Compatibilities grant precisely

that. If there indeed are plenty of fish in the sea, how should one begin their

search for a partner without first limiting the pool of options through some

structured set of criteria?

Cause-Playing (kuhz • plei • uhng)

When an ex-partner or silent match hits you up for PG-rated, self-serving

favours and nothing more. Think it’s bad being somebody’s booty call? Try

being used as a promotional apparatus where conversations only happen

because you’re the means to an end. I wouldn’t do this now, but previously had

no qualms about pulling this stunt upon releasing music on Spotify. Fledgling

artistes desire credit for their efforts, and my every chat incorporated shameless

publicity to milk every drop from every platform despite lacking ill-intent.

This troubling habit further extends to fishing for followers under a guise of

romantic interest, but regardless of the objective, all cause-players obey one

rule: vanish after securing help.

Cause-Players’ Justification

Efficacy. Unlike sponsored ads, soliciting support in a one-on-one fashion adds

intimacy. Such personalised coercion transforms the favour into an obligation

imposed upon one’s chosen demographic, considering dating apps’ discovery

settings (e.g. gender, location, age).

Obligaswiping (uh • bli • guh • swai • puhng)

Mindlessly swiping without follow through. To obligaswipe is to defeat the

fundamental purpose of dating apps by having no intention to connect nor

meet. It’s analogous with window shopping, and might explain how I once

spent six hours of screen-time on Tinder after sending a grand total of zero

messages. Fuelled by pressures to ‘put oneself out there’, this trend offers a

semblance of doing so when interpreted as attempts to network and correct

singlehood. Results are never reaped, however, are often justified by laziness,

disinterest, hesitance or crushed expectations. But my story’s rather different.

Obligaswiping paved the way to accepting my denied sexuality; an epiphanic

source of clarity and self-acceptance. Upon interrogating personal rationales

for being party to such frivolous, problematic and non-committal deeds, my

closeted self was forced to confront the truths I’ve buried for so long. Feigning

heterosexuality isn’t sustainable.

For context, I come from an immensely conservative country where

homosexuality is still illegal. Societal expectations demand straightness as

necessity, and everyday seemed a losing game against hegemonic stigmas.

Just last night I dealt with anti-LGBTQIA+ taunts spewed by radical church

groups – a sadly accurate representation of the entrenched beliefs prevalent

back home. While Melbourne has provided a safe space for my current samesex

relationship to thrive, it’s difficult to forget where you came from and how

you fled.

Dating apps were then pivotal in constructing my identity because swiping

through a catalogue of men failed to rectify my hunch that I’d never swing

that way. I tried my best, but what more could’ve been done if these stomach

butterflies refused to flutter anytime a fairly charming guy sent a sugary text,

yet burst violently out their chrysalides the second Blake Lively appeared on

screen? In an environment where one suffocates under perpetual invalidation,

any opportunity for empowerment gets embraced with open arms. Even if it

means self-deception and conformity, the fear of being something innately

wrong can drive one to radically recreate themselves – enabled via dating apps’

sanctuary for manufactured personas. Ostensibly I became a quintessential

straight girl online, but only few knew the underlying sentiments of desperate

pretence and heavy self-loathing which make for fun adolescent stories now

that I know better. To quote a wise Lot’s Wife editor: “We have to come out

to ourselves. It can take time to realise our queerness can’t be wished away”.

In hindsight, I suppose I must then thank juvenile dating habits for speeding

things along.

47

Art by Mel

48



Art by Sunny Zhou

49


A Progression

Words by Lydia Strohfeldt

Jigsaw

Sometimes the pieces are prettier

than the picture.

The parts that don’t fit say more

than the pieces

that do.

Am I Not Your Favourite Archetype?

People like him

make you count yourself

in adjectives.

Adding up words in search

of a personality.

Hoping for a hook,

a likeability,

a desirability.

You’ll start to pray:

you’re a character

in a book.

Capable of making someone

feel enough to think

you’re their answer.

All metaphors,

all revelations.

Incompatibility

The mornings were made for mapping

as the ceiling learned our day.

It was then we convinced our differences

to be a balance,

the way the earliest hours of the day

are still dark enough to be mistaken

for the middle of the night.

But by sundown

we had stopped giving out clichés

like they could direct us any way

from the space between us.

Sleep Walking

Insomnia follows me into the shower,

turning the steam into a starry night;

Convincing the water to wash off the dirt

but not the day.

No wonder she’s going to keep me up all night.

Haunted

Some people don’t realise:

They haunt their own words.

They leave unfinished business

in every promise they can’t keep.

They make ghosts out of

I love you,

after leaving it for dead.

The Paper Boats

When me became we,

I took myself down to the river

to send away my poetry.

I folded it into tiny paper boats

and let them set sail.

Now I have no poetry to tell me what to do.

I never noticed

how well-groomedd it kept love;

how often it polished romance.

I didn’t realise

how many ugly words it tossed aside.

I got too confident with a real man,

with real hands

to carry all that heart

I used to hide in my pen.

So I found myself back down at the river,

my paper boats of poetry

gone.

The only shipwreck in sight

myself.

I thought about drowning the new, ugly words

I’d left with my real man.

But words don’t sink, or burn,

or take off with the wind.

Once something has been said,

it can never be unsaid.

Without my poetry,

I guess I’ll have to teach myself new lines

To stay afloat, or put out fires with.

I think I’ll start with:

I’m sorry.

Waking Up

I started to act like the sun,

retreating behind cloud,

just to keep his eyes on me.

Never again will I dull myself

for another.

50


Art by Ben Gonsalvez

51

52 Art by Milly Downing



Why I Don’t Want to Be

‘Wife Material’

Words by Lily Van Berkel

Ever completed a household task, cooked a stellar meal or babysat little kids

and thought ‘wow, I’m basically a domestic goddess, I would make the best

wife?!’ If you have, that’s okay, I have too. But lately I’ve been checking myself.

Whenever this thought pops into my head, I’ve asked myself: why does being

‘Wife Material’ sound so much like a compliment?

For those of us who identify as wom*n, society expects us to walk a fine line

between two dramatically opposing spheres. We must be confident but modest.

We must be sexual beings but also submissive. Smart but not overbearing. The

list of expected yet conflicting conformities is endless.

In psychological terms, these stereotypes stem from Sigmund Freud’s creation

of the Madonna/Whore complex: “where such men love they have no desire

and where they desire they cannot love.” This dichotomy ultimately means that

women are cast into the boxes of ‘pure’ or ‘sexual,’ with men loving the former

and desiring the latter.

While this typecast doesn’t overtly present itself in society, the modern

equivalent of this stereotyping is the labelling of some women as ‘Girlfriend/

Wife Material’ and other wom*n as only being appropriate for sex. Some traits

associated with ‘Wife Material’ include modesty, compassion, maternalistic

tendencies and ‘natural beauty’. On the other hand, undateable, but lustful

traits include those of sexual awareness, confidence and sensuality.

I’ve heard certain phrases thrown around in conversation such as ‘I don’t think

I’d date someone like her,’ or ‘you shouldn’t sleep with him on the first date,’

and the classic ‘I prefer natural beauty.’ I used to agree ignorantly and placidly;

however, the only word which comes to mind about those comments now

is…yuck. These ideals, perpetuated by archaic patriarchal values, create an

impossibly contradictive standard for wom*n to reach. These sexist paradigms

force us to constantly compare and judge other wom*n in order to exist for

the male gaze. This male gaze, which is so heavily ingrained in popular culture,

bombards us with the view that wom*n are sexually positioned as an object of

heterosexual male desire, but paradoxically, expects wom*n to be oblivious of

their sexuality.

While the mere mention of ‘Wife Material’ may seem completely harmless

and a bit of a joke, when unpacked, the values it perpetuates are more sinister.

The notion of ‘Wife Material’ pushes the idea that wom*n are only defined

by characteristics deemed appealing by the patriarchy’s ideal male. This label

creates a perception that all wom*n are meant to be homemakers with a certain

set of successful traits for this role, a stereotype which discourages wom*n from

pursuing their own professional identities and discredits the feminine existence

of certain demographics (wom*n to bear children, trans-folk, etc.).

This patriarchal complex also infers that controllability equates to desirability,

influencing wom*n to become smaller and more malleable to allow space for

their male counterparts. Further, this divide of ‘Madonna and Whore’ manifests

the dangerous ideal that some women are worthy of love and respect, whilst

others are objectified as sexual beings under the male gaze. These Madonna/

Whore/Wife Material values can perpetuate a cycle of rape culture, in which

the ‘Madonna’ and the ‘Wife’ are pure, whilst the ‘Whore’ is undeserving of

respect.

Whilst this complex of being ‘forever material’ can be attributed to all genders

and non-binary folks, it is a set of values which is inherently imbued within

the confinement of the ‘female sphere.’ Basically, what I wish to express is

that ‘Wife Material’ is inherently patriarchal, outdated and sexist. Humans

are innately sensual beings and (shocker) wom*n are humans too. As such,

someone’s humanity should not be valued by their ability to fulfil a patriarchal

set of values, nor should someone’s societal and marital validation be warranted

by their sexual history.

Frankly, wom*n didn’t suffer through centuries of sexist oppression to have

their modern existence subjugated to the superficial label of ‘Girlfriend/Wife

Material.’ Ultimately, 2020 is the year to cancel the ‘Wifey Material’ complex

and in turn, create a society where misogynistic archetypes are rejected and

wom*n are valued for their individuality, not for their ability to be ‘Wife

Material.’

Further, this ‘Madonna/Whore’ dichotomy still manifests itself in society today

through slut-shaming, objectification of female bodies in the media and the

stigmatisation of wom*n’s sexual pleasure. Additionally, the shame associated

with sex workers and the sex industry (regardless of its mass consumption)

further exemplifies the patriarchal standards upon which wom*n are judged on

their sexual history or ‘body count.’

53


Bespoke Patina

Words by Conor Ross

“I feel sick, can we draw the blinds?”

“Mil, we’re in Switzerland. What’s the point of being here if we don’t look at

this view?”

“I know but – alright, I’ll face the other way,” Milly said. She picked up her

book and moved from the salon chair to the bed on the other side of their

honeymoon suite, where she couldn’t see the vertigo-inducing Alps.

“Are you feeling alright, honey?” Stuart asked.

“Yeah, fine.” She reopened the book she bought in Weimar, The Sufferings

of Young Werther, but found she was unable to focus. She would usually

chastise herself for being so scatterbrained. Give me a break, she told herself

on countless occasions. Relax, enjoy yourself, it’s your honeymoon. And now she

was conceding to herself once again in Switzerland, where they had arrived two

nights earlier at the Arrivals terminal.

That terminal: terrible and vast and boring and totally disconnected from the

wintery wonderland honeymoon she had dreamt of as a little girl, re-enacting

it over and over again in her dollhouse. Modern and functional and sapped of

all ambiguity. They arrived at 3AM, sleep deprived. She didn’t have the energy

to wheel her luggage so Stuart helped her with her bags. He always made a big

deal out helping her – even if it was a small thing like helping with the luggage;

he acted like it was a huge responsibility. The lighting was harsh; the massive

hallway was empty with only the cleaner there. And then it somehow got worse.

As they were leaving the terminal she and Stuart bumped into, by apparent

coincidence, his platinum-blonde colleague Stephanie, also on vacation. They

hugged, smiled ear to ear at the sight of each other, and Stuart didn’t even

bother introducing his newly-married wife until prompted by Milly herself.

“What are the chances? So crazy,” Stephanie had said with a glee that

exaggerated her shrill Californian twang. Even after they said their goodbyes

and got into the taxi, that twang kept ringing in Milly’s ears. Stephanie and

her husband seemed so familiar to each other that it was unusual her name had

never come up in conversation, or that Milly had not been introduced to her

at the several staff parties she had attended with Stuart. The usual thoughts

were running through her mind but she kept telling herself, over and over, that

Stuart wouldn’t pull something like that, not again, not on their honeymoon.

He was a good man and he made her happy. And all her supposing and

suspecting could be made about anything. What mattered was the facts. Stuart

said he loved her. So he loved her. But was saying it proof ? No, she told herself,

it was a fact, set in stone. She was happy with him, with their new house in New

Jersey (albeit a little far from her friends and family in New York). And she

was happy with her new job as an interior designer in the adjunct department,

attached to the furniture boutique (an occupation which she had come to

begrudgingly as a compromise after her career as an artist failed to take off, her

husband telling her nicely that the exploration of her own mind and the value

gained from self-expression was “priceless”, whatever that meant to him – an

investment banker). But she had made peace with the fact her attempts to break

into the art world had gone down in flames, this being the verbatim phrase

she gave to her co-workers when she had introduced herself. Milly charmed

them with self-deprecation, exploiting the common disparagement that upstart

good-for-nothing artists inspire, and which she had been on the wrong side for

the majority of her life. Nonetheless, she did find interior design fascinating and

thought of it as playing dollhouse as an adult.

Even now, as she put her novel down on the timber-framed glass table, she

found herself contemplating the design of their suite. The furniture was angled

towards the windows, so Milly could not miss the view of the Alps. They were

vertigo-inducing, seeming to expand both towards and away from her like a

shifting camera lens. It was endless discomfort. Only the bed remained on its

own axis separate from the orbit of the window, its exceptional quality being its

orientation towards the door - a common enough phenomenon that could be

explained in terms of evolutionary psychology or Feng Shui principles, both of

which boiled down to being able to spot bedroom intruders. The general decor

was made of timber or at least had artificial timber cladding; it was the typical

cottage-and-cuckoo-clock theme which Milly had first adored, but was now

sick of after finding it in Germany, then Austria, and now again in Switzerland.

She fiddled with her still unfamiliar wedding band before diverting her

attention again; this time onto her belongings to check everything was there.

She was self-conscious enough to know that there was no practicality in this

(she already knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was all there), but

fortunately being self-aware of this did not sabotage the emotional comfort

she got from it. Clothes and shoes, there and there, toiletries, here, emergency

money, check, passport, passport? It should have been in the cream-coloured

satchel but she couldn’t find it.

“Stuart, did you pick up my passport?”

“Oh is that also my responsibility now?” He said. He had been typing what

appeared to be a long message on his phone.

“No. No, I don’t mean - I just can’t find it. Do you remember seeing it?”

“Yeah, in the safe where you put it ‘just to be careful’ in Vienna.”

“It might still be there.”

“It should be here, Mil. Didn’t you need it to fly here?”

“No, they didn’t ask for it. It’s an EU thing.”

“What?”

She waited for him to say something else but he went back to his phone, very

occupied with whatever it was he had been doing the whole day. Her silence

finally breaking him down, he put down his phone so he could devote his full

attention to her, wearing an exasperated look. She stared at him, her throat taut

as if she were going to scream, to scream right in his stupid fucking squinty face.

But she didn’t. Conceding, she asked, “Do you have the number to the hotel

then?”

The signal was choppy at this altitude and she couldn’t get a call to go through.

Stuart told her that there was a flight back in Vienna in a few hours they could

take.

“I can go by myself,” said Milly.

54


“Mil, I am not mad. Shit happens, don’t worry. We’ll go and then fly onto

London. We’re only missing out on half a day basically.”

“But there’s no point us both going. You can enjoy your last night and have

dinner with Stephanie. I’ll meet you in London.”

“Are you sure it’s fine? I want us to be together.”

“No, it’s fine. Really.” This continued until Milly had convinced him (and

herself ) that it was super, totally fine. After all, she couldn’t force Stuart to

come with her because it would be admitting that something was not fine,

when in fact everything was fine. So she would leave, take a taxi to the airport,

that non-place where she could dissolve into nothing. Milly would leave her

husband in Switzerland (where he more than likely would fuck Stephanie’s

brains out on the bed where she was currently packing her suitcase, engaging

in the kind of wild, high-impact, slapping intercourse that an uptight, repressed

neurotic like Milly had never been able to give herself over to - not even on

their honeymoon).

“Bullshit,” she whispered to herself, trying to keep her mind off that. We’ll

always choose our fantasies over reality, she thought. And as if to outrun the

thought trailing on her tail, she clambered up with her luggage, only to be hit

with a wave of vertigo sending her stumbling and falling apart like her dream:

Barbie and Ken enjoying their perfect honeymoon in their little house up in

the Alps, white confetti snow falling past the tiny windows from the bottom

of her father’s shredder.

“Here Mil, let me,” said Stuart, picking up her suitcase.

How glad he seemed to get her out the door. She walked ahead of him trying

not to cry, trying not to look out the window, convincing her nausea that the

mountains were painted on, that it was an ornament, only to find as she reached

the door that it too was merely an ornament. For she couldn’t turn the handle,

she couldn’t leave, she couldn’t stay. She stood looking at the vase that stood

next to the door, lost in its bespoke patina surface until she recognised herself

in its glossy finish. Her doll eyes looking back at her, her lipstick mouth hanging

open as if she was going to scream.

Art by Helen Tran

55


56

Art by Tess Hoenig


Fashion’s Role In Achieving the

Sustainable Development Goals

Words by Hamah Hosen

When one first sees the word ‘Fashion’ within an international context, we

typically associate it with big brands, luxury pieces, fashion weeks, and models

on catwalks. However, fashion’s international presence goes beyond this —

from environmental impacts to mistreatment of workers in the global supply

chains. As such, the industry has a critical role to play to help achieve the

United Nations (UN)’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The SDGs are a collection of global goals adopted by all UN Member States

as “the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future”. The goals

address challenges such as those related to poverty, inequality, climate change,

environmental degradation, peace, and justice. The fashion industry arguably

impacts the SDG goals of no poverty; gender equality; decent work and

economic growth; sustainable development and consumption climate action;

and partnership goals. The emergence of these goals has led to some companies

in the fashion industry to have a more sustainable and ethical focus. However,

we mustn’t forget that this is a $2.4 trillion-dollar industry that is only expected

to grow at an annual rate of 1.9% over the next five years. Without adequate

consideration for changes to its production processes and consumption

patterns, the social and environmental impacts of the industry hinder efforts

in achieving the SDGs.

Take the example of a classic outfit: jeans and a nice top. We rarely think

about who made these clothes, or take a close look at the label. More often

than not, we think about the price and its ‘fashionable’ aesthetics. However,

if we follow the cycle of production of fast fashion, it usually starts with unfair

working conditions. One key issue that is present in the industry is the wages

or salaries afforded to individuals working at production sites. According to

Oxfam, garment workers can earn as little as 2% of the price of clothing sold

in Australia. So, although the cute outfit may seem like an incredible deal to

our eyes and wallets, it’s often a different story for those on the other end of the

cycle. Brands often assure that workers who make their clothing are paid the

minimum legal wage, yet this may be much lower than a living wage.

The industry employs approximately 60 million people worldwide, with

women making up about 80% of the supply chain. As such, SDG1: no poverty

and SDG5: Gender Equality both present the industry with an opportunity to

improve the supply chain.

The behind-the-scenes element of this casual and trendy outfit choice extends

beyond economics. Other issues present within the industry refer to the

unacceptable health and safety conditions and are related to SDG 3 (Good

Health and Wellbeing) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).

Although the International Labor Organization (ILO) has made the principle

of an 8-hour day, 48-hour week as maximum normal hours a norm, this concept

is often not applied or enforced in “production countries”. On top of this,

employees usually work in unacceptable conditions, which again hinders the

achievement of the SDGs. According to Sustain Your Style, “Employees usually

work with no ventilation, breathing in toxic substances, inhaling fibre dust or

blasted sand in unsafe buildings. Accidents, fires, injuries, and disease are very

frequent occurrences on textile production sites.” These issues were brought to

the world’s attention in the collapse of the Rana Plaza, which led to the deaths

of 1134 garment workers in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

However, the negative impact that the industry is producing amounts to more

than issues surrounding workers. The industry presents itself as one of the

worst contributors to negative environmental impacts. According to the UN

Environment Programme (UNEP), “the fashion industry produces 20 per cent

of global wastewater and 10 per cent of global carbon emissions – more than

all international flights and maritime shipping”. It is hindering SDG13’s calls to

take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.

Take those same pair of jeans and top we discussed earlier. They in fact, also

relate to SDG6 (Clean water and sanitation), and SDG14 (Life below water).

That one pair of jeans takes 7570 litres of water to make. And that one shirt

requires 2700 litres – the amount a person drinks in 2.5 years. But the impacts

within the cycle go beyond this. Dying textiles to a particular colour also

contributes to water pollution. Washing the outfit can also result in microfibers

and microplastics being released into our oceans. And just when you think the

cycle is finally over, your cute dinner outfit will eventually contribute to the

$500 billions of value wasted yearly as a result of clothing underutilisation and

lack of recycling. According to UNEP, every second, the “equivalent of one

garbage truck of textiles is landfilled or burned”. This highlights a need to take

seriously SDG12 (Responsible Consumption & Production). This is just the

simplified story and life-cycle of how one outfit produced within the fashion

industry can hinder progress towards achieving the SDGs. So just imagine the

impacts our whole closets hold.

The aim of this article and the information presented isn’t meant to make you

as readers feel guilty or diminish the current efforts that exist. It is instead here

to bring awareness of how individual actions can either help or hinder the

industry’s role in the SDGs. As much as we can blame companies for the lack

of progress, we must remember that action in this sector requires it from two

entry points: top-down through governments and corporations, and bottomup

– as we as consumers can make informed choices and vote with our wallets

for a sustainable future. It’s precisely what SDG12 (Responsible Consumption

& Production) asks us to do. A change in the production and consumption

patterns in both avenues will undoubtedly have a domino effect and would

benefit all 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).



57


Wordless

Words by Rose Wilted

The sun from the window shone down on my face. The alarm kept ringing. I let

myself lie as still as I could, keeping my eyes closed. As I slowly moved for the

alarm clock, I inhaled deeply her flowery scent on my bed sheets.

It was bad again last night. Her absence filled me up until I could hardly

breathe. I last checked my phone at 2am when Robert texted me. His wife is out

of town. He offered to order the Uber to his apartment but I took a raincheck.

He wouldn’t provide the kind of comfort I needed.

There was no trigger—it just happened. I was brushing my teeth before bed

one moment and heaving over the sink in the next. I was suddenly mute, like

my body was realising that she had died all over again. Like every other time,

I could only wait for it to pass. I knew that when I woke up the next morning,

she’d still be dead. Nothing would be different.

My phone buzzed. With all the strength I could find, I reached for it. Jordan’s

text flashed across the screen.

“Hey G, heading down to the park?”

“Yeah see u at 1.”

I let my phone drop next to me and held my face in my hands, shielding it from

the bright morning sun. With incremental movements, I rose up and slowly

turned so that I sat on the corner of my bed. My feet touched the cool floor. I

could almost feel her kneeling across from me, soothing me with hushed tones.

I held onto the edges of my bed and hung my head, letting my hair fall however

it wanted. I kept my eyes closed and felt them burn again.

“Stop. Please just stop.” I whispered to the empty room.

*

“Hey Dad!” I said cheerily, grabbing an apple at the kitchen island.

“Good morning, G.” He said, looking up briefly with a small smile and then

looking back down at the Sunday Review. He was in slacks and a collared shirt.

Even on weekends, he dressed as though he might run into a business partner

walking down the block.

“So, art show tonight.”

“Is it?” He replied, scanning the contents page.

“Yeah! I left a note with Marzia and we talked about it at lunch on Monday,

remember, Dad?”

“Right, of course, dear. You got an award, didn’t you?” An op-ed title caught his

attention and he started flipping the pages.

“Um, yeah, I placed first for my project.” I said a little slowly, trying to jog

his memory. He inhaled and looked up from what seemed to be an op-ed on

whether democracy was indeed in shambles.

“I can’t tonight, G. Drew and I are closing a major deal.”

I paused.

“You said you’d come when we had lunch. Marzia put it in your calendar, didn’t

she?” The croaks in my throat threatened to break.

“Well, yes, but when important things come up, things need to shift.”

“And I’m not more important than your deals?” My face grew warm.

He looked back down at his op-ed. I felt myself slipping.

“You’re too young to understand. Once you start working in the real world it’ll

make sense.”

I looked down at the half-eaten apple in my hand. My jaw quivered.

“Sometimes I wish it were you on the operating table instead of Mum.”

The words had escaped, and they hung in the space between us. Dad was quiet.

He looked down at the Times. He wasn’t reading.

I left the half-eaten apple on the table and rushed to the front door, grabbing

my skateboard on the way. I paused at the hallway mirror and picked up Mum’s

Chanel bottle from where I returned it last night. The cool, angular bottle fit

neatly in the palm of my hand. She always left it here so she could spritz herself

up before leaving the house.

*

I leaned back on my elbows. The sky was clear and the sun leaked out between

the clouds. I looked across the skate park, absorbing the scene of my friends

doing rounds. Their postures were erect and balanced, yet somehow relaxed as

they glided up and over the domes. Ethan yelled something vague at Kristy. She

quipped back and they laughed.

“So, you gonna tell me what’s up?” Jordan asked, passing me the bud. I took a

long drag. We looked at each other for a moment. He hadn’t changed much, not

since I punched that kid who threw him off the playground when we were four.

I’d always hoped he wouldn’t.

“Was it bad again last night?” Jordan asked quietly. I raised my eyebrows

slightly with a small half smile and passed the bud back to him. He nodded

and took it from me with a tenderness I hadn’t felt before. The rest of the

afternoon continued this way, wordlessly passing the bud between us. The

others beckoned him to join but he always made an excuse to stay with me.

*

Parents clamoured around displays smiling proudly at their children. Invisible

weights dragged at my feet as I begged to disappear. I didn’t know why I

decided to come.

I could barely make out Dad until I got close to my display. The redness of his

eyes matched mine. We both turned to my piece.

The display label read:

Untitled

ARTIST: Georgia Anderson

DEPICTED: Mother with open arms behind her child learning how to

walk.

58


Art by Ruby Comte 59


Are Politically Active

Words by Riya Kiran

Cw. misogyny

For years, women have struggled to assert themselves in politically charged

discussions and environments.

A politically active woman is more often than not negatively branded,

patronised or ultimately ignored and dismissed.

But why?

Are they doing something wrong?

Is it possible that women in politics make the patriarchy uncomfortable?

At 22, Emilia Lisa Sterjova became the youngest woman ever in Australian

history to be elected as Mayor as she assumed the position in the City of

Whittlesea.

Now, she speaks out about her horrible experiences as a woman in the political

sphere.

In March this year, the Victorian government dismissed the entire City of

Whittlesea Council upon recommendation by appointed municipal monitor

Mr Yehudi Blacher. The three-month investigation uncovered an intractable

toxic culture within its governance and operations.

“A wide gamut of behaviours and actions; threatening, aggressive, stonewalling,

shaming, insulting and manipulative,” reccounted Mr Blacher.

One member, in particular, reported that the new Mayor, Ms Sterjova had been

the victim of malicious and spiteful councillors.

“From the moment of her election as Mayor, there has been an orchestrated and

vile attack on Ms Sterejova’s character and leadership by an ‘old guard’ faction

within the Council.”

She dealt with a group of men who felt threatened and as a result became

incredibly nasty and sour towards not only her, but other female members of

the council. She was a target of vindictive personal attacks by male councillors

that “could not accept a young woman deserving of her role.”

“Our community isn’t made up of old white men, but unfortunately we have

old white men forming the majority,” Ms Sterjova said.

Ms Sterjova wished not to speak further on the bullying experienced due to the

sensitivity of the situation, noting it as ‘painful’.

Fifty-one percent of Victoria’s population are women, yet they remain underrepresented

in local councils. In 2016, only one third of 600 council members

were women across the state. Despite being an increase from previous years, it

signifies the insufficient representation of our community.

“In theory [women in politics] sounds like a tremendous thing, but in practice

women don’t get treated equally.” said Ms Sterjova.

“After what I have endured, God help any woman who aspires to enter into

politics.”

Blacher’s report and Ms Sterjova’s comments regarding the council’s behaviour

shed light on a greater issue surrounding politics: the persistent discrimination

against women.

Gender deafness and disparity is prominent throughout all levels of the

Australian government. However, the barrier has never been gender. The strong

system of power cemented through years of oppressing a woman’s voice has

ensured that we still remain relatively unheard.

That system of power, that barrier, is the patriarchy.

Former Senate candidate, Apsara Sabaratnam highlighted the importance of

understanding that we live in a patriarchal society, and that the ‘boys’ club’ of

politics deliberately “disempowers women and anyone who doesn’t fit into the

connotation of a real man.”

“The perception that it’s a man’s job is ingrained into our society, and has been

for a long time.”

Ms Sabaratnam accredited this to the idea that the patriarchy doesn’t want

anyone “sticking their nose into the current order.”

“For them it works, they don’t want anyone to ruin it.”

Women are compelled to submit to the patriarchy and refrain from challenging

it.

Capable women are consciously and explicitly degraded. Their value is defined

by their physical appearance, and they are presented as unintelligent and

simple-minded.

Julia Gillard’s iconic words, “I will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny

by this man,” ring true and remain relevant eight years later.

“I will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by this man, not now

not ever.”

In 2010, when Julia Gillard, the first ever female Prime Minister of Australia

was sworn into office, it felt like the glass ceiling had at last been shattered.

However, she spent her term enduring an unforgiving attack of sexist and

misogynist comments from members of the parliament and the media.

60


Women a Threat?

For three years, Ms Gillard faced accusations of disloyalty, playing the ‘gender

card’, repulsive comments on her physical appearance - ‘small breasts, huge

thighs and a big red box’ - and withstood comments calling her a ‘man’s b***h’

and more. Opposition leader Tony Abbott also smugly endorsed sexist signs

with remarks such as ‘ditch the witch’. The infamous Alan Jones also claimed

Gillard was “off her tree”, and that she should be “shoved in a chaff bag and

taken far out to sea”.

More recently, in 2018, Senator Sarah Hanson-Young was told by Mr David

Leyonhelm that she “should stop shagging men”. When she confronted

Leyonhelm he quite easily told her to “f**k off ”.

The Australian Government avows to be striving for 50/50 gender equality in

Government board positions overall, but how are we expected to achieve that if

this is how our women are treated?

“It’s naive to think that it doesn’t happen,” said Ms Sabaratnam, reflecting on

her own experience in the environment.

“A small group of people, born with the right sex, colour and race find

themselves in a circa of power that endows them with political ranks,” said Ms

Sabaratnam.

An inclusive and broader government is critical to driving significant changes at

all levels and improving the state of our diverse country.

Many members of parliament refuse to accept that this is an existing affair that

requires attention. Discrimination and disparity against women cannot be

addressed in politics due to this.

As a country, we need to reduce the barriers impeding competent women in

politics and heighten the barrier for incompetent men who are against this. We

deserve quality leaders who call for change.

However, solving this issue goes beyond achieving a percentage. Having a

certain number of women in parliament does not automatically equate to

representation and equality.

We require an ideological shift.

Generally, women have ‘no seat’ at the table in the first place, so when a woman

of colour, or non-English speaking background tries to take a seat, the attacks

are heightened. Sexist comments are combined with racial overtones to shut

her down.

“They are held to a much higher standard” said Ms Sabaratnam. “They attack

the individual rather than the idea.”

This requires a change in attitudes relevant to women on a grand scale, within

not only our government but also our people.

It requires understanding that there are still many impediments against women

in our country, such as pay equity and reproductive health.

It requires a change in our culture, language and practices to strengthen the

power of women both inside and outside the political sphere.

“It’s the notion of letting them know their place, culturally and as a woman.”

In 2018, Plan International Australia, a leading girl’s rights charity, conducted a

survey across 314 Australians of all genders. It found that 62% of young women

believe that it is harder for women to become politicians than it is for men.

Only 45% of young men agreed. The report also showed that 56% of young

women aged between 18-25 thought female politicians were treated unfairly

by male politicians, whilst just half of men in the same age group thought alike.

By not calling it out, we permit this bigotry to fester and grow, eventually

accumulating to something much worse.

“We live in a world created by a certain select few white men. When any woman

raises her voice, she is questioning the structural impediments currently in

place,” said Ms Sabaratnam.

“She’s shaking the patriarchy, that’s what men fear.”

The government’s struggle to be inclusive stems from ideas and practices that

have been filtered through organisations and mainstream media. Australia

broadcasts a largely white male perspective through exclusion of others. Farright

political figures have also allowed for misogynist and racist ideologies to

be normalised, encouraging others to inherit similar values.

61

62



Art by Alicia Sach 63


We Just Are

Words by Oliver Cocks

“We just are.”

“But why?”

“Couldn’t tell you.”

I’m in my florist. It’s the first time I’ve been out today, and I need to buy some flowers. The florist is in his mid-thirties. His

hair is combed and he’s wearing a slightly faded suit. I’m the only customer as usual. Behind the florist, Trump is giving

a press conference on an old TV.

“But why?” I repeat. A car drives past outside; it sounds louder than normal. He sighs.

“Already told you. We just are.”

“But- but…”

“There’s nothing more I can say about it.” Another pause, deep as poetry.

“What’s so hard to understand?”

“I just… It’s…”

“Shops close all the time,” he continues. “Does there have to be a reason? Does there have to be a reason for anything?”

I don’t respond. He smiles. “Don’t take it so hard. They did everything they could. We all did our bit. But maybe it’s for

the best.”

I stare. Where will I buy flowers for Sara? She would have loved them. My phone pings. Normally I’d rush to look at it

but this time I don’t.

“So you’re telling me… there’s nothing you can do? Nothing at all? Sell one of your relatives, something like that!” I say.

I try to wink, perhaps too firmly.

“Sorry, bud, that’s it. End of the line.”

Silence. I glance around the shop. Bouquets upon bouquets: a sea of colours. My florist smiles at me for a few moments.

Eventually, I clear my throat, but then remain silent. The wind picks up pace outside.

“You- you sure?” I say after a few more seconds.

“Completely sure.”

“It seems a little strange to me.”

“Evidently it does.”

“You’ve tried everything?”

“I assure you we did. Everything.”

“So you’re closing for good.”

“For good.”

“No ifs or buts.”

“No ifs or buts.”

“You just are?”

“We just are.”

“Look, I wish I could help you, I really do. But that’s just life. If it’s really affecting you this badly, I suggest reaching out to

someone. Like me! Let’s grab a beer sometime soon!”

I don’t respond. Instead, I stand there for a few more seconds, then start slowly walking out of the shop. I shuffle out

the door as the florist stares at me. I shuffle down the street, bumping into hurried pedestrians and ignoring their heated

reproaches. My phone starts ringing. I don’t look at it. I walk slowly down the street. In the distance a dog starts barking.

64


65

Art by Ruby Comte


66

Art by Ruth Ong


How Swerving From Non-Fiction to Fiction Books

Changed My Life

Words by Julian Keller

I used to believe that if I did not learn tangible facts about the world after

reading a book, then that book had absolutely wasted my time. This is where

non-fiction books provided me with solace. They were structured. They all

made logical sense. They recounted experiences that had happened and methods

on how to live a life that worked.

In the domain of non-fiction, nothing used to resonate more with me than the

concepts I learned from personal development books. I was enthralled by the

glitz and glamour of the personal development world. I was enchanted with the

prospect of learning ‘tried and tested’ steps that were simple and would allow

me to live my best life. With great ease, I could build ‘millionaire’ habits, ‘crush’

my goals and become overwhelmingly irresistible to every girl I met for the

rest of my life.

My journey started in 2016 when I was 18 years old. My mum had purchased

me a copy of Mark Manson’s best-seller The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F**k.

Without a doubt, this book changed everything. I became exposed to extremely

empowering theories — namely, that I held the potential to ‘re-program’ my

mind and body to become a dominant force, one that could become the best at

everything I set out to accomplish.

I began to develop the belief that I could literally become the most impressive

person in the world.

This belief catalysed a period of 18 months, during which I believed that only

good things would happen as long as I continued to intensely learn as many

theories as I could from as many personal development books as possible. In my

head, it was a simple progression: if I read more personal development books

than anyone else, I would have the greatest emotional intelligence. I would thus

know how to become the happiest person in the world.

I assumed I could maintain this momentum then and forever. However, unbeknown

to me, I had not really faced any notable adversity or unexpected change

in that period that could have tested my resolve.

Everything came to a boiling point while I was on university exchange during

the first half of 2018. I had relocated to the endearingly old-fashioned and

quaint town of Lund, in the south of Sweden. For the first time in my life, I did

not have to commit extensive time towards studying, as I realised early on that

I could pass all of my subjects with ease. I also did not need to work, as I had

saved up over the past year with the intent of ensuring financial freedom while

I was overseas. I was living a super fun, relaxed and slow life.

Of course, I still maintained the motivations that had energised me throughout

the previous few years. Those that I mentioned earlier, of ‘crushing’ goals and

doing everything to ensure that I was the best at everything. However, it came

to the point where holding these values began to create too intense a mindset

for me. I was living under the belief that if I stopped trying to maintain complete

emotional awareness every second of every day, I would lose control of

everything. Essentially, I had little wiggle room to stop, relax, and enjoy what I

had in the present moment. A few months into my overseas adventure, I started

to become overwhelmed, full of anxious thoughts, and permanently unsettled.

It was at this moment that I knew I needed to change. I had to re-evaluate what

truly made me happy. It dawned on me that I was in my most blissful and tranquil

state when I was letting my imagination run wild, with no expectations. I

knew that I need to realign myself so that this became my priority.

Contemplating this led me to question: what resources could I obtain to further

feed my imagination? It became clear almost immediately: fiction books

were the answer!

I decided to completely swerve away from non-fiction books and immerse myself

in fiction. I had not read fiction for leisure since I was a kid, other than

compulsory school texts. I had always chosen to shelve these types of books,

but not anymore.

The first novel I picked up was The Note by Zoë Folbigg, a contemporary romance

story. It was your classic chick-lit – a tale of a girl who admired a guy

that took the same train as her every day, until a chance meeting blossomed

into romance and eventually, marriage. I could not have picked a more clichéd

romance novel if I tried.

I would not call it a literary masterpiece, nor would I recommend it. However,

I was grateful for putting myself into a world free of the expectation to learn

anything in particular. I could just enjoy the art of creative thought.

Upon reading this first fiction book, I immediately saw change in my life.

I would literally walk through the streets of my town with the sense that

every day was a glorious narrative.

I saw every little thing that happened to me as epic, whether it was the sensation

of a bitter coffee hitting my tongue, or noticing a kid frolicking with

their friends in the snow. Regardless of whether the moment was good, bad, or

neutral, I was amazed to be able to witness it first-hand.

Inspired and motivated, I began to inhale fiction books.

I became certain that my life, and all our lives for that matter, were as creative

and wild as that of fiction books. On the simple basis that you are a

human being, you are entitled to feel this awe for the world

The more I read, the more expansive my view of the world became. My excitement

for life multiplied ten-fold, and this momentum continues to the present

day.

Let me give you a concrete example. You could walk through a hallway in a café

and not even think twice about that activity. Or, you could think to yourself

“I am walking through a narrow hallway. There is dim lighting from the small

circular lightbulbs on the roof that provide a subtle calming ambience, like an

underground candlelit bar one would find upon developing the spontaneous

urge to walk down an illuminated side-street in the city.” A supposedly ordinary

experience, which can quickly become a moment of fascination.

This conversation has become even more important in the age of coronavirus.

Amidst a global pandemic, there has been an additional focus on staying informed,

alert and educated about the dangers that define our unprecedented

times. In no way is this a bad habit; in fact, it is one that is potentially life-saving.

But does it need to come at the cost of neglecting some of the beauty in our

world? Do we have to go to bed every night, seeing the world as shittier than

the day before?

Many people are good at being grateful for the world they inhabit. However,

there is a trend for people to almost ‘ration’ their gratitude. That is, to only reflect

with gratitude on the absolute highlights of one’s life, such as their friends

and family, their health, or their home. There is no need whatsoever to halt this

practice. However, it can easily be expanded – to everything. To the perfectly

grey overcast sky, to the refreshing feeling of a cool breeze, to the sweet smell

of fresh oranges at a fruit shop, fiction books provide the catalyst for one to

engage in this type of creative thinking, cementing it as a habitual part of one’s

daily experience.

The next time you expose yourself to some reading material, think about how

you would like it to influence your world view. For me, fiction has expanded my

world. Maybe it will expand yours too.

67


Face Race

Words by Patrick Lobo

With countries increasingly utilising technology well past what would have

previously been imagined, it is crucial to understand how this area has expanded

and the real concerns that emerge particularly around the area of privacy.

Australia is investing in a facial recognition system called “The Capability” and

China recently unveiled a system called “Skynet” (which interestingly has the

same name as the antagonist artificial intelligence system in the Terminator

franchise). With countries further investing in such technology for law

enforcement purposes, it becomes crucial to understand the potential for

overreach that this technology is already beginning to reveal.

The use of this technology has not only brought about a host of privacy and

civil liberty issues but is also being viewed as an attempt by governments to

introduce mass surveillance. This is becoming evident as facial recognition

is woven into law enforcement and commonly used as an investigative

tool in many parts of the world. However, the key issue is that these facial

recognition searches are increasingly being used by various law enforcement

officials globally without consent.

An example of this is America’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) who,

since 2011, have logged more than 390,000 facial recognition searches using

federal and state databases mainly made up of driver’s licence photos. These

searches are conducted with no consent from any licence holders and with

minimal transparency.

This also occurs in the United Kingdom, where the Metropolitan Police use

facial recognition CCTV to scan thousands of shoppers entering and exiting

popular malls, searching for people of interest. Although signs were present

saying “Live Facial Recognition”, they were positioned next to the cameras so

those recorded only knew they were being scanned after it took place, thus not

getting an opportunity to choose. This takes away a person’s right to a private

life as they do not have a choice in the matter.

In addition, facial recognition technology also has some very practical issues

as well, and despite the technology being widely used, it is still very much a

work in progress.

A US Federal study found Asian and African people are up to 100 times more

likely to be misidentified by different facial recognition algorithms when

compared to Caucasians. The study also found Native Americans had the

highest rate of false positives and that children and the elderly were significantly

more likely to be misidentified than those of other age groups. These findings

illustrate algorithm bias and how this technology could potentially adversely

impact minority groups and individuals by creating baseless police encounters

and interrogations due to false matches.

This occurred with Amara Majeed who was wrongly accused by Sri Lankan

authorities of being involved in last year’s Easter terror attacks. Investigators

mistakenly found Majeed’s photo through use of facial recognition technology.

She was repeatedly harassed by law enforcement and had her photo wrongly

distributed in the media. This demonstrates how facial recognition software is

still imperfect and can lead to misidentification specifically in minority groups.

Currently there is major concern that US law enforcement may use facial

recognition on those protesting the killing of George Floyd.

In early June, a leaked memo, obtained by Buzzfeed News, showed the U.S.

Justice Department had authorised the Drug Enforcement Administration

to conduct covert surveillance and other investigations of those protesting

the police killing of George Floyd. More recently, it was also reported that the

Department of Homeland Security deployed helicopters, airplanes and drones

over 15 cities where demonstrators gathered logging at least 270 hours of

surveillance, according to Customs and Border Protection data.

This is particularly concerning as police in the past have used surveillance and

facial recognition to target demonstrators for arrest. In 2015, facial-recognition

technology was used to track and arrest Baltimore protesters reacting to the

police murder of Freddie Gray, a young Black man who died in police custody

from spinal injuries for which no one was held responsible. Protestors with

outstanding warrants were identified using facial recognition and arrested.

In response, major tech companies have called for change.

Microsoft has stated it will wait for federal regulation before selling facial

recognition to US Police Departments in an effort to curtail efforts. Amazon

has put a one-year halt on police using its facial recognition software called

“Rekognition”. IBM has said that it will no longer offer facial recognition

software and that technology should not promote racial injustice.

Most major tech companies have also been exercising a high degree of caution

when developing facial recognition software. However, these efforts to slow

down creation may not be effective with the rise of new emerging companies

challenging the status quo and potentially putting an end to privacy.

Such a company is Clearview AI, which is a three-year-old company offering an

incredibly novel facial recognition software different from any other. Clearview

is estimated to have a database of more than three billion images of faces, the

biggest database by far of any facial recognition software. These images were

gathered by scraping all publicly available images from social media giants like

Facebook, Instagram and YouTube, as well as many other websites without clear

consent. Although Clearview received cease-and-desist letters from Google,

Facebook and Twitter, its CEO defended the data scraping, claiming it is his

First Amendment right to collect public photos.

Currently, Clearview has a range of paid and unpaid clients such as law

enforcement in 26 countries including the US, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Spain,

Sweden and the United Kingdom. Clients also include many private companies

like Walmart and Macy’s (a paying customer that has completed over 6000

searches) and a sovereign wealth fund in the United Arab Emirates (a country

with notable human rights abuses).

While facial recognition is not new, Clearview has profited off allowing users to

search a huge database despite not receiving any consent from the people whose

images it stores. These could potentially include yours or mine and this is why

we need to think about regulation now.

Facial recognition has many benefits such as identifying persons of interest,

preventing crimes, and enhancing security using biometric data. However, as

we start to further integrate this technology into our lives, we must consider

the price we are willing to pay. Using facial recognition to target protesters of

Freddy Gray’s murder and potentially protestors of George Floyd’s murder is

unacceptable and undermines our right to demonstrate. Without regulation

around how facial recognition can be used as well as how databases are created,

we may very well give up our personal privacy altogether. This regulation also

needs to happen now as this technology is developing at a rapid rate and before

long it may be too late.



68


Art by Kajal K

69

Frau Tru


Words by Michael Walton

1.

I disobeyed my mother and walked into the wood

Wandered half-a-mile then I lost the path for good

I turned, turned, and turned again seeking for the path

And beheld the distant glow of fire from a hearth

The hearth was Frau Trude burning in the night

I approached it with a heavy heart, longing for the light

The witch welcomed me into her home

And she told me not to walk alone.

“Now that you’re here, my dear, let us make a pact

From here the path is easy, there is no turning back.

Bring to me a tale that I have never heard

And I’ll release you from the form of a feathered bird.”

I opened my mouth to speak

But found instead I had a beak

I spread my arms and found them wings

My skin, feathers, my voice – it sings!

70 Art by Kathy Lee


de

2.

3.

Promethean within me woke

‘Round the world, thrice, I flew

I sang the song of lonely stars

And the unknown story spoke

From river runs to vanished view

Of Jupiter, Venus and Mars

To the witch my wings were bent

From craggy alpine walls

Of loves lost and battles won

Beating with bare intent

To woods and waterfalls

Of the dancing moon and shining sun

On her window, down I fell

I spoke to the wind and rain

I sang to her of everything

With my new song, I swelled

I spoke to the light and flame

Making to her my offering

And cast the story from me out

I spoke to the moon and sun

When at last my voice grew tired

And heard it ring with a shout

I spoke to them all, to everyone

To her chair the witch retired

“I disobeyed my mother and walked into the wood

At last I alighted on the southern shore

“Is that all you have my bird?

I wandered for half-a-mile and I lost the path for good”

Having encircled the world once more

Of all these songs I have heard.”

Then I, witch-ward bent

With that she cast me from her home

The witch grinned at my song

Swiftly winged across the continent

To fly my way through the world alone

And took me in her hand, strong

She promised to make me turn

Flying through the windowpane

I flew into the middle height

Then put me in the fire to burn.

I landed by the witch’s flame

Between the day and night

Without ceremony I began

When, in the mirror sky

Air and fire, my lesser form

To sing the song of other lands

I saw my reflection in my eye

Fall from me – I am reborn

Like the rising of the moon

Like a sleeper from the tomb

I arise and become the dawn

71


Reckonings During a

Pandemic

Words by Zayan Ismail

Much has changed around the world. A virus has transformed the way we

conduct our daily lives and our perceptions about the future. It has galvanised

actions that, for better or worse, have created the irony of calm during the thick

of an upheaval. Lockdowns have created a stillness in our societies. The streets

are empty but the hospital wards are a vision of chaos. We are all forced to stay

home and do our part to curb the spread of the virus. The disease it brings with

it, COVID-19, has now encroached upon millions around the globe, causing

not only life-threatening symptoms but also socio-economic disruption.

A virus has led to many re-evaluations and queries. What have the people in

power, detailed with the tasks of upholding the rights of their citizens, done to

effectively adapt to our current circumstances? What are they doing to mitigate

such a pandemic for the future? Was it their negligence and mismanagement

that created it in the first place? Are we, as individuals and as a societal-whole,

doing our own part by adhering to new best practices and following regulations,

however strict they may be? Regardless of all these questions circling in my

brain, I do know what remains to be true. The actual viruses are our corrupted

minds. They do not perceive the detriment of selfishly furthering ourselves

rather than the community as a whole.

It is such corrupt minds that have led some governments to delay effective

action and jeopardise the lives of many. It is indeed such corruption that leads

some to run to the grocery store and hoard vital supplies from the marginalised

and vulnerable. The corrupted actions of us humans, not the virus, are

destroying economies and the social fabric that protects us. It is the disease of

apathy and neglect that is harming our environments, ostracising those at risk,

and forcing us to take difficult and drastic decisions. Research now indicates the

ignorance that comes with not wearing a mask may lead to higher community

transmission of the virus. Additionally, the virus itself has also been identified

as zoonotic, meaning it has seeped into the human population in part due to

deforestation and the destruction of wildlife habitats: the cutting down of trees,

the dredging of lagoons and the mining of the Earth. These actions have also

enhanced Earth’s warming, shifted the climate and risen the sea levels. It is a

vicious cycle that needs to stop. This pandemic is the reckoning, the biggest

reckoning of our lifetimes. So, where do we go from here?

Similarly, not everybody can self-isolate in a protective setting owing to

abuse and dysfunction in their homes. Studies conducted by the United

Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) have concluded that the pandemic has

disproportionately affected girls and women around the world. This is owing to

the rise in domestic abuse and sexual harassment cases. Importantly, this is more

evident in developing states and those that have grappled with incompetent

leadership. In Trump’s America, the ineffective response to the virus, without

proper guidelines and lack of healthcare for all, has obstructed women from

seeking help from abuse and trauma. All these revelations are in part due to a

simple virus.

Indeed, a minuscule organism has exposed the realities of our current times.

The inequality that wreaks havoc in the societies that we live in. The truth that

only unity and acting for the betterment of the community will save us, rather

than seeking individual gain.

In times like this, we must be cognizant of our own well-being and look after

ourselves. We should take extra care and focus on the positive aspects of

everyday life. Try to engage in your favourite activities, whether it be reading a

new book, listening to music, exercising indoors, painting, gardening, cooking

and binge-watching everything possible on Netflix and Disney+.

Attend your classes and conduct your work from home. These actions will be

more difficult for those affected by the recession; in spite of the uncertainties

for those who have lost their jobs and homes, we must try to keep a structure

and a sense of normalcy.

While welfare systems such as JobKeeper and JobSeeker have reduced the

impact of the recession, the virus has nonetheless exposed the need for a firmer

and more sustainable approach to prevent people from losing their sources

of income in the first place. As individuals we must start giving back to the

community, whether it be through donations to charity or adopting volunteer

work. After all, when the world is going awry, we only have control over our

own actions.

By staying home and practising self-hygiene we create a ripple effect that

minimises the spread of the virus. It is a difficult social adjustment to isolate

ourselves from our loved ones. The uncanny reality is, our corrupted minds have

made the lockdown necessary, but our technological ingenuity has made the

lockdown manageable; the so-called ‘social-distancing’ is made easy with the

help of a few Zoom sessions, tweets and a status update.

Nonetheless, times like this highlight the inequality that persists in our

communities, and we must remind ourselves of those who do not have access

to the same privileges. Not everyone has access to Facebook and Instagram,

a luxury of a bygone era that is now viewed as an essential utility. Not every

student can attend Zoom tutorials, with many stuck in their home countries

with weak connections whilst trying to log on in a completely different

time zone. For those who have lost their jobs and sources of crucial income,

they simply cannot afford access to the internet, nor can they afford the

exponentially high fees to attain a quality education. Not everybody has the

capacity to even guarantee a roof over their heads. Furthermore, we must not

forget that modern systems of health care marginalise the poor in times of crisis

and beyond. Universal health care and the proper allocation of facilities to

provide those services are an absolute necessity.

Finally, we must be appreciative and applaud all the front-line workers who

are risking their lives day in and day out. The nurses, doctors and healthcare

workers have become our most valuable assets. It is not just these heroes who we

should be thankful for. We should be proud of our journalists and even our MPs

who are tirelessly working under hectic conditions. Our MPs are undertaking

the tedious task of delivering new legislation, whilst our journalists are keeping

our governments in check and providing us with the truth: something that is

becoming scarcer each passing day.

If we do not learn and instead conduct business as usual, perhaps we may never

recover. We are in dire need of restructuring and balance. Reach out to your

loved ones. Love and respect thy neighbour. Be optimistic and do not lose

grasp of hope. Have faith, for the times we live in do not call for isolation from

positivity.

72


Art by Milly Downing

73


74

Art by Helen Tran


Special thanks to all

our contributors!

Writers

Agnes Benjamin

Austin Bond

Britt Munro

Chiya Belwal

Claire Peter-Budge

Cody B Strange

Conor Ross

Emilio Lanera

Emma Anvari

Esme James

Gursewak Singh

Hamah Hosen

Hannah Cohen

Jeanne Cheong

Julian Keller

Kai-Chin Le

Kelly Phan

Lily Van Berkel

Lydia Strohfeldt

Meg-Mel Dean

Michael Walton

N.Thierry

Oliver Cocks

Patrick Lobo

Riya Kiran

Riya Rajesh

Rose Wilted

Sophie O’Donovan

Julian Keller

Xenia Sanut

Yanchao Huang

Zayan Ismail

Artists

Alicia Sach

Anneke Tykocinski

Ben Gonsalvez

Carla J. Romana

Charlotte Elwell

Chiya Belwal

Felix Leunig

Helen Tran

Joseph Lew

Kajal K

Kat Pei

Kathy Lee

Linda Chen

Maria Chamakala

Mel

Milly Downing

Ng Hui Jie

Ruby Comte

Ruth Ong

Siobhan Stephen

Sunny Zhou

Tatiana Cruz

Tess Hoenig

Subeditors

Alexis Bird

Anagha Raviprasad

Angie Rossis

Anna McShane-Potts

Anvita Nair

Dinithi Perera

Jasmine Tran

Joseph Lew

Kathy Lee

Louise Blair-West

Mish Kumar

Sarah Hult

Xenia Sanut

Yanchao Huang

To contribute to Edition Five, submit your work to the relevant

Google form.

Written submissions: bit.ly/lwed5wri

Visual submissions: bit.ly/lwed5vis

75


...until next time

76

Lot's Wife Edition 4

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?