Lot's Wife Edition 8 2013

LOT’S
WIFE
EDITION 8 2013

CONTENTS
5. Letters
6. Editorials
8. National Affairs
18. International Affairs
20. Student Affairs
32. Science
36. Music
42. Film & TV
46. Performing Arts
52. Creative Space
56. Culture
Thanks
To all of those who have contributed to the creation of Lot’s Wife 2013,
writers, sub-editors, photographers, artists - your work is the life-blood
of this magazine. To our printers - Streamline - in particular Catherine
and Jim (sorry for all the late night phone calls). To our friends and
families for putting up with us dissappearing into the nebulous of ‘layout
week’ once a month. To our friends in the MSA (you know who you
are) for keeping sane in this chaos and to you, our readers, for giving the
magazine a purpose.
No Thanks
To Christopher Pyne, for wanting to bring back VSU.
To trail mix, for being so boring, but so addictive (the cranberries are good
though).
Apologies
In the last edition of Lot’s Wife, an untitled poem was incorrectly attributed to
Marcus Littlewood. The author was Aiden Parisi.
Cover Art
Jasmine Roney
Section Editors
National Affairs: Thomas Clelland and Elizabeth Boag
International Affairs: Carlie O’Connell
Student Affairs: Hannah Barker and Ioan Nascu
Science: Caitlyn Burchell, Shalaka Parekh and Nicola McCaskill
Music: Dina Amin, Augustus Hebblewhite, Leah Phillips and
Steven M. Voser
Film & TV: Ghian Tjandaputra and Patricia Tobin
Performing Arts: Christine Lambrianidis and Thomas Alomes
Creative Writing: Allison Chan, Michelle Li and Thomas Wilson
Culture: Hannah Gordon and Christopher Pase
Online News: Julia Greenhalf
Web Design: Choon Yin-Yeap and Jake Spicer
As you read this paper you are on Aboriginal land. We at Lot’s Wife recognise the Wurundjeri and Boon Wurrung peoples of the Kulin Nations as the
historical and rightful owners and custodians of the lands and waters on which this newspaper is produced. The land was stolen and sovereignty was never
ceded.
Lot’s Wife Student Newspaper est. 1964. Monash University Clayton, VIC.
Lot’s Wife does not condone the publishing of racist, sexist, militaristic or queerphobic material. The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors or
the MSA. Submitted articles may be altered. All writing and artwork remains the property of the producers and may not be reproduced without their written consent.
T: 03 9905 8174
W: lotswife.com.au
@lotswifemag
www.facebook/lotswifemagazine
lotswife2013@gmail.com
© 2013 Monash Student Association. All Rights Reserved.
don’t look back.
4 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

LETTERS
To the weary Lot’s editors,
I thank you for your excellent editorship of Lot’s Wife this year—as
well as everyone else who has contributed. The space occupied by Lot’s may
have shrunk along with the cutting of funding, interest in print media and
infiltration of Host Scheme, but Lot’s Wife still punches above its weight,
particularly at the likes of Tony Abbott.
This year has seen Lot’s initiating a special edition that challenged
University management’s iron fist as well as building action against cuts to
Higher Education. With close to 10,000 views, Lot’s ‘Monash is my store?’
video now forever floats as an independent ship, rocking against a sea of
bullshit corporate Monash PR videos on YouTube.
With threats to student union funding on the horizon and an already
limiting reliance on procuring advertising, it’ll be up to students to hopefully
come out in force—as they have previously—and defend an independent
newspaper that they like lots.
- Anonymous.
Dear Lot’s,
Having been a regular fixture of the Monash student media landscape
for quite some time, people often approach me with a wide variety of
opinions on the state of student media affairs. Sadly, by far the most voiced
opinion I receive is an expression of disdain over the content of Lot’s Wife.
Some of the comments I’ve heard include “too much politics”, “boring and
trivial”, “lefty rag”, and remarkably, even “dangerous”.With this in mind,
and as a former editor of Lot’s Wife, I feel that there is a rather blunt and
obvious point that I feel is my duty to make. The articles you want to read
can only be published if they are written and submitted.
You’ll notice that this letter is addressed, “Dear Lot’s”, but I am not
writing this to the magazine and its editors. I am writing it to you, the
reader, because you are the ultimate author of Lot’s Wife.
Student media is a remarkably unique opportunity to push boundaries,
whether they be personal, political, professional or, in the case of an
overworked and under appreciated editor, physical. It is a blank canvas
for creatives, and an opportunity for any student to opine and wax lyrical
about current affairs. It can be fun. It can be serious. It is a forum for truly
free speech, and a platform for those of us who are only just beginning to
find our voice.
Monash University has a proud history as a forward-thinking institution,
and the student body is well recognised as a vanguard of progressive
student politics in Australia. And despite being derived back in 1964, the
Lot’s Wife’s motto, Don’t Look Back, is an ongoing testament to that legacy.
Honi Soit, the student publication at the University of Sydney, drew
massive public interest and controversy when it recently published a collage
of vulvas on its front cover. In doing so, they raised significant questions
about the status of female genitalia in society and censorship. Why
is the labia somehow more taboo than its male counterpart? What constitutes
supposed ‘good taste’ in a modern society? And why on earth do
talkback radio hosts seem to care so much?
Last year, a student reported on their experiences as an intern at the
Herald Sun in Farrago, the student publication at the University of Melbourne.
What was initially intended to be an anonymous reflection on
a journalism intern’s experience, and how it clashed with their ideology
and ideas of respect, became an astounding demonstration of media industry
culture. Media outlets poured derision and vitriol over the student,
which aside from bringing the intern’s opinion to a far greater audience,
essentially illustrated the student’s core concern about respect through the
very published responses and comments that formed their horrific public
immolation.
Whether you personally agree with the politics and motivations behind
these articles and actions is irrelevant to the argument behind this
letter. What, however, does remains true in all these scenarios is that they
have raised issues that were vitally important to discuss. They have, in
their own way, pushed the boundaries of journalism not only hard enough
to pierce the fabric of the industry status quo, but also the sphere of public
consciousness.
“Progressive” isn’t simply a synonym for left-wing. It is not simply a
political term. It is a word that by its definition demands momentum, yet
it does not specify which direction or in which capacity that momentum
is required to take. Experimentation with the journalistic form holds just
as much merit as the strict and formulaic writing that is often taught in
lecture theatres and tutorials.
Push the boundaries, whatever you perceive them to be. Challenge
the status quo. Challenge yourself. And don’t look back.
- Bren Carruthers, Lot’s Wife Editor, 2012.

EDITORIAL
MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Every so often I sit down and flip through
old editions of Lot’s Wife – from 1964
when it was founded, to last year when my
involvement began with the publication of
some shitty poetry that I found on my blog
from year 10. It was past deadline – which
I thought was pretty serious business – and
I still hadn’t submitted anything to one of
the previous editors, Mell, after promising
I would. Give me a break. And if I find out
you’ve been rummaging through editions
of Lot’s Wife 2012 in some craven attempt
at bringing my name into disrepute by
showing the poems to all your mates,
there’ll be hell to pay.
But perhaps creepier than finding old poems that I wrote is reading
through editions from the past decade or further back and realising
that many of the issues we’ve encountered this year as editors appear to
be on a constant feedback loop. Florence and I may have been the first
Lot’s Wife editors to produce a video as part of a campaign against federal
government attacks on education, but we certainly weren’t the first to
encounter the problem. Similarly, diatribes against student political bodies
and the importance of tearing this magazine away from it all featured
heavily in final editorials over the years. What can we write that hasn’t
been written before? Sometimes there’s no greater existential crisis than
reading through history and realising you’re not special.
The point is I’m filling space. Happy New Year everyone! Now give
me my last pay check.
But seriously, what’s next? What do I do with all this horrendous
free space left in my editorial? Write about Abbott? The protests in Bahrain?
Miley? The human organ harvesting industry in Eastern Europe?
Against my better judgement, I think I’m going to weigh in on this
student government stuff. Unfortunately, if general student sentiment is
anything to go by, by doing so I’m part of the problem, not the solution.
At least that’s what the voter turnout statistics seem to suggest, with only
about 2,500 students on a campus of around 28,000 choosing to vote during
MSA election week.
For a number of reasons, not least because they had the most campaigners
around the traps during election week, the majority incumbent
party of the MSA, Go!, pretty much managed a clean sweep of the
elections this year. As of 2014, Go! will have had control of the MSA for
nine years, but that barely captures the full extent of their influence over
the union throughout the years.
While the ticket has no doubt overseen important changes for students,
their rule hasn’t been without controversy. Some of this has been
written about this year (some would say ad
nauseum), and to illustrate exactly what I
mean when I allude to the historic recurrence
that transpires in student politics
when it comes to shadiness and the abuse
of power, let’s take a look back to Lot’s
Wife in 2007.
In an article published in their fifth
edition, the editors at the time accused
(with a stat dec as proof) MSA Executive
of bribery and corruption in the previous
years’ elections. The then-MSA Executive
saw fit to censor the piece, citing a clause
in the MSA constitution which states
that the executive can refuse to print Lot’s Wife if material is considered
‘potentially defamatory’. The article was not considered defamatory in the
legal sense (as confirmed by independent legal advice) but as it criticised
members of the administration, the editors were forced to “water [the
article] down” before the edition went to print. They were subsequently
told the Executive would be vetting all further editions for the year.
In more recent memory, members of Go! have registered deceptive
‘feeder’ ticket names (2010 and 2012) in elections in an effort to eliminate
competition, and hired a factional associate to oversee the 2010 poll.
I’m not bringing this up to be petty. It would be unfair of me not to
acknowledge that the other major tickets, Switch and Left Hook, don’t
have significant flaws. But this isn’t federal politics. There is no Opposition
to challenge the behaviour of the ruling group. It stands to reason
that the administration, in the context of a student union, will stand up
to more criticism.
A friend of mine made an interesting point with regard to how this
ticket has been able to twist the politics in its favour and weather the ensuing
shit storms relatively unscathed. Students, she said, are in an out of
their degrees in a matter of three or four years, and in that time (roughly
90% of them, if we’re going by this year’s election results) pay no attention
to what goes on in the union. Hardly anyone’s left to give a shit.
In the context of student politics, how people perceive you is paramount,
and I think that negative perception of the union and its major
players contributes to student disengagement. Negative perception can
render a cause or institution a dried up husk of what it could be, no matter
how noble its ideology.
The 1996 Lot’s Wife article that we republished that addresses
student apathy (pages 24-25) is a grim reminder that we all have a role to
play in engaging students – not just Lot’s Wife editors and contributors,
but student politicians and other hangers-on alike.
6 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

EDITORIAL
FLORENCE RONEY
Another month, another edition; only this month’s Lot’s Wife is a little
bit special, being our last for the year. I can’t really describe the feeling,
knowing this is the last editorial, the last stint on InDesign, the last trip
to the printers and then we will hand over the reins.
I could write a thesis on the trials and tribulations of my year in the
Lot’s Wife office, but I won’t. As Matthew so wonderfully articulated in
his first editorial, the office has proven to be “alternately, an asylum; a
home-away-from-home; a precipice and a constant source – in sporadic
yet equal amounts – of joy, rage and wonder”. Eight months later and I
couldn’t sum the year up more eloquently.
With the looming threat of further attacks on education, the
possibility of the privatisation of HECs, the capping of places, and the
life-blood of the MSA – the Student Services and Amenities Fee – facing
the razor blade, we need a strong fighting student union. But just as
importantly, we need strong, independent student media that is open to
criticising the government, the university administration and even the
student union when needed.
Worryingly, the process for becoming editor of Lot’s Wife is also
highly political. Encouragingly, Matt and I were elected on an independent
Student Media ticket, meaning we came into the job without having
been elected on one of the main political tickets. This was only achievable
as we were endorsed by them all – essentially elected unopposed.
Having been recommended by the previous year’s editors, both having
written for Lot’s that year, we came into the job with experience and importantly,
not as a member of any political ticket. Had we run independently
but against candidates running on tickets, we wouldn’t have stood
a chance – the party machine too powerful.
While I have been criticised for being politicised over the course
of this year, which eventually culminated in aligning with a ticket and
running in this year’s elections, I think it is a disservice to the magazine
to say that we have been ‘biased’. If you look back over past editions you
will see work from those of varying political persuasions, representing
almost every group who contested the elections. You must also keep in
mind that as editors we can only publish what has been submitted.
Unfortunately our attempts at maintaining the independent Student
Media ticket, this year, failed.
While I am not suggesting that electing editors on a ticket ensures
a magazine that shies away from the important issues and refuses to think
critically – you need only look to last year’s editors who were elected on
a ticket but produced a magazine of the highest quality – I do think we
should work towards a system which does not make editorial independence
such a pipe dream.
So what do I suggest? To be honest, I just don’t know. Every possibility
I have thought about has some drawback. In my research for this
editorial I asked student media types from around the country how it
works at their publications. The results were incredibly varied.
At the University of New England in Armidale NSW, for example,
editorial candidates are appointed by a panel made up of the current
year’s editors and others involved in student media. According to current
editor, Sarita Perston, this is “so as to appoint the most capable applicants
not the most popular, and also to avoid politicisation”.
In stark contrast to this, at the University of Newcastle, the Media
Officer (and editor-in-chief of Opus) is a voting member of the Student
Representative Council. They are elected in general elections and thus
position is highly politicised, the editor’s vote on council becoming hotly
contested between the different factions.
While the concept of an interview based application process is
appealing on face-value, in the sense that selection would be based on
merit, I worry that the process could too easily fall into a pattern of
cronyism and jobs for mates. And having a vote on council? Well that’s
essentially being the government and media at the same time. Not a
good combo.
If we look to ANU, the editors of Woroni are elected in an election
separate to that of their student union. In fact, student media at ANU is
an entirely independent, incorporated entity, having separated from the
ANU students association in 2010. The problem with this, though, is
that without the support of the union, Woroni becomes dependent on the
university for funding – perhaps even more problematic, especially when
issues of censorship come into the game.
A middle ground must be found, whereby student media is still a
part of the student union, but with separate elections. Or maybe editors
could be restricted from running on political tickets, with a separate
ballot paper.
Next year will be the magazine’s 50th birthday, an achievement,
considering the number of student publications that folded when VSU
was introduced. It seems a fitting anniversary to look at these issues, and
perhaps make some changes.
This year has been one helluva ride, and it wouldn’t have been the
same or possible without a few people who I have to mention. Thank
you to Mell and Bren, for never leaving, keeping us company in the
office and helping out when times got tough. Thank you to our team of
trusty sub-editors, in particular Chris and Hannah, for their dedication
and excellent editing skills over the entire year. To Mum, for picking me
up from uni at 2 in the morning and making us amazing food packages
to tide us through layout week. But most importantly, to Matthew, I
couldn’t imagine this job without him and despite all the ups and downs,
he continues to make me chuckle more than anyone else I know.
I wish the new editors well. It’s a crazy job, but incredibly fulfilling.
And I farewell you, readers, thank you for reading.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
7

NATIONAL AFFAIRS
TRADE DEAL TO HAND
POWER TO FOREIGN
CORPORATIONS
“The TPP has been widely criticised for its secretive negotiations,
restrictive intellectual property provisions and, of perhaps the greatest
concern, investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS).”
James Brooks
The Abbott government is poised to finalise a
highly secretive international trade agreement
with serious implications for Australian
democracy.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is
a proposed free trade agreement between 12
countries, including Australia, Canada and
the United States. Formal negotiations for the
agreement commenced in March 2010 and
independent news sources are reporting that
it could be signed by the Abbott government
before the end of October.
The TPP has been widely criticised for its
secretive negotiations, restrictive intellectual
property provisions and, of perhaps the greatest
concern, investor-state dispute settlement
(ISDS).
ISDS refers to a provision in an
international trade agreement allowing foreign
investors to sue the national governments of
member countries whose policies harm their
investments. Historically, only other national
governments were able to enforce such
agreements under international law.
While it appears that ISDS leads to greater
government accountability, there are a host of
serious problems with ISDS. According to a
2013 United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development report,
“Concerns with the current ISDS
system relate, among other things, to
a perceived deficit of legitimacy and
transparency; contradictions between
arbitral awards; difficulties in correcting
erroneous arbitral decisions; questions
about the independence and impartiality
of arbitrators, and concerns relating to
the costs and time of arbitral procedures.”
Unpacking this statement, ISDS lacks legitimacy
because it exists outside the formal court structure
and its safeguards. It lacks transparency because
arbitral decisions frequently remain hidden from
the public; sometimes even the dispute itself is
kept secret.
There are contradictions between ISDS
decisions because arbitrators are not required to
follow past decisions and because the procedural
rules used to resolve disputes can differ from one
dispute to the next. Erroneous decisions cannot
be corrected because there is no appeal process.
The independence and impartiality of
arbitrators has been questioned because the
parties choose them; they are not independent
like judges. Defending an ISDS claim made by a
foreign investor can cost governments millions
of dollars, often after a lengthy and expensive
battle through the ordinary court system.
But despite the litany of problems,
ISDS decisions can have profound effects on
government policy and societal wellbeing. In a
submission to the Department of Foreign Affairs
and Trade in 2010, Dr. Kyla Tienhaara from
the Australian National University wrote that
there has been an “explosive increase” in ISDS
in recent years, impacting “sensitive issues such
as access to drinking water, mining development
on sacred indigenous sites, health warnings on
cigarette packaging and restrictions on the use of
dangerous chemicals”.
To illustrate the power wielded by foreign
corporations over national governments through
ISDS, take a recent example. The Northern
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is a
free trade agreement between the United States,
Canada and Mexico that contains an ISDS
clause.
In 1996, the Canadian government passed
a law prohibiting the importation of MMT, a
fuel additive associated with various health and
environmental side effects. Two months before
the law came into effect, Ethyl Corporation, a
US company whose subsidiary imported MMT
into Canada, filed a Notice of Arbitration on the
Canadian government under NAFTA.
Ethyl Corporation sought over US$251
million in damages, plus costs. The Canadian
government initially fought the case, before
later agreeing to settle. Under the terms of the
settlement, Canada agreed to reverse the MMT
ban, pay Ethyl Corporation’s legal costs and issue
an official statement declaring MMT safe.
Experts believe the Canadian government
settled to avoid the risk of huge damages if it
was unsuccessful. The back down did not come
8
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

NATIONAL AFFAIRS
without a cost though: MMT continues to
be added to fuel in Canada. There have been
dozens of cases like this under NAFTA and other
free trade agreements throughout the world.
The potential for huge damages to be awarded
without any avenues of appeal or judicial
safeguards forces governments to surrender
to foreign corporations with no democratic
legitimacy.
Australia is not immune from corporate
bullying through ISDS either. Since December
of last year, plain tobacco packaging laws have
been in force throughout Australia. Before the
legislation even entered Federal Parliament,
Philip Morris Asia Limited, a Hong Kong based
company, commenced the first ever ISDS claim
against the Australian government. The claim
was made under the ISDS clause of a 1993
investment treaty between Australia and Hong
Kong.
The precise details of Philip Morris’ claim
are unknown as the case is being conducted in
secret; however, experts believe Philip Morris
alleges the Australian government’s legislation
amounts to an expropriation or unauthorised
taking of Philip Morris’ intellectual property,
namely the trade marks it used to display on its
packaging.
What’s significant about this case is that
it arose even after the High Court of Australia
upheld the legality of the legislation, in a case
brought by several tobacco companies last year.
Time will tell whether Philip Morris succeeds
in its latest attempt to undo one of the most
significant pieces of public health legislation in
Australia in recent times.
ISDS was a hot topic in Australia in
2004 as the Howard government completed
negotiations with the United States over the
Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement
(AUSFTA). The US government had sought an
ISDS clause but public opposition in Australia
led to its removal from the final version.
Subsequently, the trade policies of the
Rudd and Gillard governments explicitly ruled
out ISDS clauses in future international trade
agreements. On the eve of the 2013 federal
election though, the Liberal Party released its
trade policy, declaring that it “remain[ed] open”
to ISDS clauses in future.
Trade and Investment Minister Andrew
Robb has been cagey about whether the TPP
will include an ISDS clause. Many experts are
concerned about the softening of Australian
trade policy under Abbott though; particularly
given how close Australia is to signing off on the
TPP.
The ongoing Philip Morris case is proof
that ISDS can threaten important public health
and environmental legislation benefiting all
Australians. It’s not just the experts who should
be worried about Australia’s current trade policy.
Former Prime Minister Julia Gillard attends the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) meeting at the ASEAN Summit at Peace Palace in Phnom Penh on 20 November 2012.
Tony Abbott is set to finalise the controversial free trade agreement soon.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
9

NATIONAL AFFAIRS
CONSEQUENCES IN
ZONE 2
Linking east and west, dividing inner and outer Melbourne
Anthony Taylor
The proposal for a freeway from Clifton Hill to Parkville (and then to
the Western Ring Road) may not seem immediately relevant to transport
in Clayton. However, the size of the project means it has significance
for all of Melbourne, even all of Australia. This
is because approximately $8 billion would be tied
to the project. The sheer amount of Victorian
Government funding needed will preclude the
implementation of other policies and infrastructure
projects across the state.
The commentary and developments regarding
the East West Link proposal affirm, amongst many
other things, a key lesson about transport policy in
Victoria. The lesson is that there is an inner suburbouter
suburb divide in Melbourne, which extends
to community response to transport policy; and
complementing this, there is a public transportprivate
(ie. motor) transport divide. There is certainly a complex and
fascinating relationship between these two binaries which is played out in
the media and is also evidenced by actors: politicians, transport bureaucrats,
the road lobby, inner-city activists and so on.
“Where inner Melbourne
expanded with the provision
of good public transport, and
then cars augmented this
later, in Zone 2 it has only
ever been cars. In Zone 2,
then, a new freeway further
entrenches how necessary a
car is to get around.”
It is difficult to intelligently explain why there is such a divide in
community response (or lack thereof) to transport projects. The answer
which is often parroted would be that it is simply “hipsters” or “inner city
lefties” who protest road projects; meanwhile, the
“battlers” in the outer suburbs don’t have time for
such bullshit. They have long hours and bills to pay,
and cars are the only practical way of getting around.
Sadly, the next move of the Hun-style argument is
to convince people in outer suburbs that, since it is
only the privileged city dweller who protests roads,
the best they can and should expect is a new road.
However, the overwhelming investment in private
motor transport, and concomitant urban sprawl over
the past 50 years can also do some work to explain
the differing responses to road projects in inner and
outer Melbourne.
Every time a new freeway is built in this city, it sharpens the divide
between the way transport works in Zone 1 and Zone 2. The impact of a
new freeway, regardless of where it is built (leaving aside local impacts), is
not so dramatic for those living in Zone 1. There remains a choice between
10 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

NATIONAL AFFAIRS
the full range of public and private transport options, and a new road will
simply augment or adjust this in a small way. Where inner Melbourne
expanded with the provision of good public transport, and then cars
augmented this later, in Zone 2 it has only ever been cars. In Zone 2, then,
a new freeway further entrenches how necessary a car is to get around.
Much of post-1950’s suburban Melbourne, in contrast to much of Zone
1, has been built with the provision of minimal “charity” public transport
services. The layout of more recent suburbs actively discourages walking or
cycling as modes of transport even for short journeys.
People are forced into these circumstances to invest in private
transport. In outer suburbs there is endemic car-dependency: 4-car
households, higher percentages of income spent on transport, social
isolation for non-drivers and no alternatives to avoid traffic congestion.
This leaves outer suburban communities in a bind, as the best short
term policy they could expect from the government is an ease on traffic
congestion.
A better long term transport policy for all of Melbourne does not
receive support in outer suburbs because people in outer suburbs are
economically bound to the current policy direction in a way those in the
inner city are not; there is no “choice” if you live in the outer suburbs.
The smooth functioning of people’s day-to-day lives is reliant on private
transport. To that extent, the Herald Sun prognosis is correct. One only
has to look at local community responses to recent major road projects
in outer suburban Melbourne including East Link (running parallel to
Stud Road) and Peninsula Link (running from Frankston to Mornington
Peninsula) in comparison to the ongoing local community response to
East West Link to see this inner suburb-outer suburb dynamic at play.
While East Link saw a few small scale protests on environmental grounds,
recently protesters in North Carlton attempted to stop preparatory
drilling work for the East West link. There have also been reasonably
large petitions, public meetings, rallies and strong stances from local
government against the project. The reasons for this response have
included that is likely to aggravate traffic congestion, preclude funding
of other (public) transport projects, impact on local residents and on
parkland, and that the business case has not been officially released.
This dynamic can partly explain the impressive shadiness of the
unreleased East West Link business case. Infrastructure business cases
always have a political dimension; in this case, the Liberal government is
clearly staking its political fortunes on the appeal of this road in suburban
Melbourne. As such, the business case reportedly includes long-term
or peripheral factors which are not usually used to judge the economic
benefit of a road project. The lack of a robust and politically neutral
business case for this project must raise serious doubts independent of
one’s view on other arguments made in this article.
The construction of the East West Link is crucial for suburbs like
Clayton: East West Link is about the entrenchment of car-dependency
in Zone 2, much more than it is about the loss of inner city parkland
or noise pollution. If the East West Link goes ahead, the consequences
will certainly not include money for a train to Clayton campus for at
least another generation, and (probably) not even for some modest bus
network improvements.
Keep an eye out on https://www.facebook.com/ptua.vic for updates.
Image: Chris Star, Yarra Campaign for Action on Transport (YCAT)
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
11

NATIONAL AFFAIRS
ANTI-CHOICE
BIGOTS CRACKED
Much like the egg splattered on Bernie Finn’s face
Lauren Goldsmith & Shannen Bethune
On October 12 a counter rally took place in opposition to the annual
anti-choice ‘March for the Babies’. This was attended by hundreds
of people from a vast range of groups: feminists, socialists, first time
protesters, unaligned progressives and other concerned people who would
prefer Abbott keep his hands off their bodily autonomy.
A new bill (dubbed ‘Zoe’s law’) which aims to define a foetus of 20
weeks gestation or more as a “living person” is currently being debated in
NSW Parliament, so the demonstration couldn’t have come at a better
time.
Unsurprisingly, right-wing media coverage of the protest has
misrepresented pro-choice activists as ‘barbarians’ (I’m pointing at you,
Andrew Bolt!), committing all manner of unspeakable ‘savagery’ such as
wearing ‘profane’ T-shirts and ‘destroying balloons’. The horror! Channel
9 falsely reported that Liberal MP and March for the Babies organizer
Bernie Finn was ‘assaulted’, when in reality he was simply on the
receiving end of a harmless, wayward egg.
Quite frankly, Chief Fucktrumpet Bernie Finn deserved to get egg in
his hair.
Anti-choice marchers were certainly not protesting ‘peacefully’.
In fact, the very premise of ‘March for the Babies’ is not a peaceful
one; it entails an attack on our right to make our own choices about
what we does with our bodies, it shames those who make the innately
personal choice to end a pregnancy, and it harks back to the disgusting
and archaic idea that a woman’s sole purpose is to produce and nurture
children in a life of domesticity. This was by no means a peaceful espousal
of a ‘different point of view’; this was blatantly a parade of anti-woman
bigotry, complete with rosaries and rubber fetuses.
Pro-choice activists were both verbally and physically abused
by the anti-choice side. Pro-choice activists were labelled as ‘whores’
and ‘harpies’, and told that we were murderous ‘baby killers’ and that
we are ‘going to hell’. We were told that our bodies were not our own,
and strange rubber embryos were shoved in our faces in what we can
only assume was a pathetic attempt to shame us for believing that
we can decide our own fate. Several people involved in the rally and
confrontation were physically hit by anti-choice marchers, including
one of the writers of this article being punched in the face by a man in
a cowboy hat. This demonstrated that not only do these people want
to prioritise a bunch of cells over living people with free will, they
were actively engaging in violence against women, as a number of us
experienced at the rally.
The pro-choice side was led by a diverse range of people standing up
for the rights of uterus-bearers, but it was fantastic to see women’s voices
take centre-stage.
Comparatively, the anti-choice demographic was composed
overwhelmingly of white, middle-aged, middle-class men.
This largely privileged bunch should have no authority over what
reproductive choices we make, especially with regards to an issue that
effects working class individuals the most, and people from rural and
remote areas with lessened access to abortion both financially and
geographically. Anti-choice bigots have no respect for agency and the
ability for us to determine if, when and under what circumstances we
shall raise children.
Shame on Andrew Bolt and the Herald Scum. Shame on Channel
9 and their predictable, biased media coverage. Most of all, shame on
anti-choice bigots calling themselves ‘pro-life’ when they are clearly only
concerned with birth, not quality of life, or human rights and bodily
autonomy.
Anti-choice troglodytes have recently been emboldened by the
election of the most outwardly anti-choice Prime Minister in living
memory. Over the next few months and years, those of us who support
women’s rights must continue to come together and fight to protect the
rights that our feminist forerunners won for us decades ago. We must
continue to fight against legislation like ‘Zoe’s law’.
12 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

HUMAN TIDES
Bren Carruthers
It’s a scenario that is far too familiar to the Australian public. On October
3, a small, barely seaworthy vessel sunk off the coast of a remote island,
with at least 360 people dying in their quest for refuge and asylum. On
October 11, another shipwreck occurred, this time claiming 34 lives. Yet
these scenes occurred half a world away. That remote island is the Italian
island of Lampedusa, around 110 kilometres from the Tunisian coast.
From Eritreans, Somalis, Ghanaians and Syrians, to Iranians,
Vietnamese, Sri Lankans and Afghans – it’s a sound reminder to Australians
that our country is not the only one facing an influx of desperate,
displaced peoples. The two theatres of exodus are remarkably similar,
with Italy having already seen around 30,100 migrants arrive from across
the Mediterranean this year, up from 10,380 in 2012, whilst Australian
saw 25,541 arrivals in the 2012-13 period, up from 8,311 in the previous
year. Yet one can’t help but note that, just like Lampedusa, the European
response to this tragedy is also half a world away.
Upon the news of the Lampedusa disaster, Italian Prime Minister
Enrico Letta tweeted that it was ‘an immense tragedy’, and announced a
national day of mourning. Pope Francis called for the use of abandoned
Catholic monasteries and convents to house the influx of refugees. And
the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, António Guterres,
was quick to commend the Italian Coast Guard for their swift response
to the disaster. The greater European response as a whole has also been
quite positive, with the European Union, an organisation on the financial
brink, immediately submitting €30 million in financial aid for the refugees.
Earlier this year, Sweden remarkably offered sanctuary to millions of
displaced Syrians.
Comparatively, in August, whilst the public was pre-occupied
with the Federal Election race, the UN’s Human Rights Committee
found Australia guilty of almost 150 violations of international law. The
Australian Government’s latest program, Operation Sovereign Borders,
is laughably named, as it pours hundreds of millions of dollars worth of
funding and infrastructure into Papua New Guinea and Nauru: spoils
which are virtually impossible for the leaders of those financially strapped
nations to reject. The Australian Government is now the largest employer
in Nauru. It’s a strange new mutation of neo-colonialism: supposedly
buying Australian sovereignty by getting other nations to sell theirs.
“We won’t be discussing operational matters”, Immigration and
Border Protection Minister Scott Morrison says ad nauseum, in one of his
weekly Operation Sovereign Borders briefings – the only avenue through
which information about the crisis can now be sourced. ‘Operational matters’
appear to include the nationalities of asylum seekers, living conditions
in facilities, incidences of self-harm and the health and wellbeing
of those held in camps. In the most recent briefing, Morrison was forced
to concede – but only with considerable prompting – that medical staff at
Manus Island needed to be removed for their own safety on October 18.
He refused to make any further comment, other than to pass the buck and
suggest it was an issue for the PNG Government to deal with.
The incident at Manus Island is, at the time of print, a national
secret.
The sad truth is that the asylum seeker issue in Australia is little
more than a political weapon. “Stopping the boats” was a pivotal platform
for the Coalition in this year’s Federal election, but there is no doubt that
this is a bipartisan issue. Immediately upon the formulation of the Papua
New Guinea agreement, the former Rudd Government spent millions in
advertising the new regime. “If you come here by boat without a visa, you
won’t be settled in Australia”, was scrawled across all major newspapers
for weeks, in what can only be described as a demonstration of action
to the Australian people, as the sales of Australian newspapers in such
exotic departure points such as Malaysia and Indonesia is somewhat low,
to say the least.
The most terrifying aspect of this myopic pursuit for short-term
political gain is the precedence it sets for the pacific region well into the
future. With effective global action on climate change unlikely, a massive
crisis looms on Australia’s doorstep. Many pacific island nations are at significant
risk of either being severely depredated or completely decimated
by rising sea levels, erosion, and changing environmental conditions, and
Australia may well be facing a massive influx of environmental refugees
in the decades to come. As the main safe haven in the region, it will be
an issue that Australia will be required to address – and there will be no
option for return.
The manipulation of the asylum seeker affair is the marque of cowardice
rather than leadership. The true measure of a leader is to do what is
logical and right in the face of opposition. Former deputy Prime Minister
Tim Fischer virtually destroyed his political career when he ensured the
Australian Government passed gun control legislation in 1996, placing
human lives over his popularity. Sadly, it is impossible to think right now
that anyone with any real power in the two major parties would be willing
to make a similar stand.
The refugee and asylum seeker issue will not simply go away through
mistreatment and secrecy. It breeds contempt, and dehumanises us as a
society. With the lack of support of an organisation like the European
Union in our region, this situation requires Australian leadership, not
populism. Both Australia and the people seeking our assistance deserve it.
Image: UNHCR
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
13

HOMELESSNESS IN
AUSTRALIA
Phillip Liberatore
HOMELESS AND ACCESS TO SOCIAL
SECURITY
The homeless can face impediments in accessing entitlements under
the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) and therefore some of those facing the
greater financial struggles are denied help that could have been afforded
to them.
To make a claim from Centrelink, a person must establish their
identity using “100 points” worth of evidentiary material. These include
birth certificates, driver’s licences and passports. Individuals who are
suffering from primary homelessness, that is they have no conventional
place of residence and rather take shelter in public places such as parks
and streets, most often cannot meet these criteria or struggle to do so and
the process delays their ability to receive assistance as quickly as possible.
A former identification system used to allow a person to rely on three
documents, one of which could be a letter from a youth or social worker.
The reintroduction of this system would make it easier for homeless
persons to establish their identity because they do not have access to the
range of documents that others have.
The Newstart Allowance is a Centrelink payment for the
unemployed. In 2012 there was a Senate Committee into the adequacy
of the allowance payment system for jobseekers and others, the
appropriateness of the allowance payment system as a support into
work and the impact of the changing nature of the labour market.
The Australian Council of Social Service has called on the Federal
Government to increase the new start payment by $50 in line with the
findings of the Senate Committee. A Salvation Army report found that
7% of single parents seeking emergency relief from the Newstart system
were homeless and yet single parents have lost around $60 - $100 per
week under recent budget cuts.
The Social Security Act does not mandate a minimum wage and
those who cannot earn a livelihood are not guaranteed payment; the
Special Benefit for individuals in this situation being at the discretion of
Centrelink. Furthermore, activity requirements are normally imposed on
the Newstart Allowance. These requirements are normally conditions of
job-seeking and they must be fulfilled before payments will be made. For
an individual struggling to find accommodation, these conditions may
not be imposed at the right time and may hinder rather than help the
individual.
The lack of a fixed address can also make it difficult for
correspondence about benefits and conditions to be communicated
to individuals. A lack of literacy and numeracy skills in the homeless
population means that some may struggle to understand correspondence
when they can receive it. It has been recommended by Philip Lynch and
14 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

NATIONAL AFFAIRS
the Australian Human Rights Commission that Australia Post develop a
system where homeless individuals can elect to have their correspondence
directed to a post office of their choice and that post office workers can
be trained to go through the letters with individuals to ensure they are
receiving all their entitlements and correspondence.
Once identity requirements and activity requirements are made less
restrictive and correspondence mechanisms are made more accessible
then homeless people should be better able to claim their entitlements
and build a foundation for a stronger economic future.
THE RIGHT TO VOTE AND HOMELESSNESS
The Homeless Persons’ Legal Clinic has said that the homeless are among
the most disenfranchised demographics in Australia. Voting in Federal
elections is a legal obligation under the Commonwealth of Australia
Constitution Act 1900 and the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth).
It is estimated that around 70,000 homeless people were eligible
to vote in 2007 but were not enrolled. In other words about 64% of the
homeless population was of voting age. It is not compulsory for a person
with no fixed address to vote in Federal elections but they do have a
right to vote. Voters without a fixed address are called itinerant voters.
Itinerant voters can enrol in a division:
a) where they were last eligible to be enrolled, i.e. the last place they lived
for at least one month
b) where one of their next of kin resides, if they have not been previously
eligible to enrol as per above
c) where they were born, if the neither of the former options applies to
them
d) where they have the strongest connection, if none of the former
options apply.
An itinerant voter is defined by Section 96 of the Commonwealth
Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) as someone who is in Australia and has had no
real place of living (which is a broader concept than permanent address)
in a subdivision for at least one month. An application must be made
to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) to enrol as an itinerant
voter.
A significant number of homeless persons access crisis
accommodation, much of which is funded by state governments and
various charities, when they are in serious need of immediate shelter. Data
suggests that homeless persons who lived in crisis accommodation stay
on average for 56 days; well over the maximum amount to be eligible to
enrol as an itinerant voter. However they also cannot enrol as an ordinary
voter because they have no permanent or fixed address. This is an
anomaly in the law that needs to change. Such an anomaly does not exist
in the voting provisions for Victoria. Section 3A of the Electoral Act 2002
(Vic) allows persons living in crisis accommodation to enrol as itinerant
voters no matter how long they have stayed there. The Homeless Person’s
Legal Clinic has recommended that the one month restriction be
extended to six months to allow for homeless persons who do move into
crisis accommodation to be able to enrol as itinerant electors.
For some homeless persons fear of being fined for failure to vote
may deter them from enrolling. Itinerant voters will not be fined if they
fail to vote and this fact, along with the enrol options listed above must
continue to be communicated to them. If an itinerant voter fails to
exercise their right to vote then they may be taken off the electoral roll.
This practice should cease because it increases the risk a homeless person
will be disenfranchised when they do attempt to vote in the future.
In addition to location requirements, a voter must meet the proof of
identity requirements under section 98AA of the Commonwealth Electoral
Act. First priority is given to providing a driver’s licence number. Failing
that, the person can have a prescribed enrolled elector cite a prescribed
document and sign on the enrolment that form that they have done so. A
prescribed document includes, but is not limited to, a passport or a birth
certificate. These criteria are restrictive for homeless people, particularly
as those facing primary homelessness and secondary homelessness
(moving between various, temporary forms of shelter such as living in
crisis accommodation or coach-surfing with friends or relatives), and do
not have access to such identifications.
The identification criteria are also problematic because prescribed
electors are people of the professional classes, including lawyers, police
and nurses and some homeless individuals do not have connections with
these individuals and cannot afford to see them. Some may also not feel
comfortable approaching these individuals. The Commonwealth Electoral
Act does not allow Centrelink cards to be used, and yet this is one source
of identification that most homeless individuals have access to.
During the 2013 Federal parliamentary election, the AEC ran
a trial program to encourage more homeless people to participate in
democracy. Mobile polling booths were set up in community centres in
three electoral divisions in Western Australia in the week leading up the
general polling day, allowing individuals living in homeless shelters to
enrol without a fixed address. This trial is expected to lead to nationwide
changes in coming elections. Whilst these changes look likely to increase
the number of homeless persons enrolling to vote, the changes argued for
in this article must also be undertaken in order to reach those homeless
persons who do not live in homeless shelters or community centres. The
Victorian Electoral Commission has initiated a community engagement
program to better educate homeless persons’ about their rights and the
AEC should follow suit.
Article 21 of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of
Human Rights 1948 states that everyone has the right to take part
in the governance of his country directly or through freely chosen
representatives authorised by universal and equal suffrage. The homeless
must not be forgotten when democratic opportunities come along in
Australia.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
15

GOODBYE,
MR. CHOPS
Bren Carruthers
On October 9, Mark Brandon ‘Chopper’ Read finally submitted to his long
battle with liver issues, and passed away. He was, to many, an archetypal
villain. A prolific stand-over man, he once claimed to have killed nineteen
men in his life, but was never sentenced for murder, instead spending a
good portion of his adult life behind bars for kidnapping, assault, arson,
and armed robbery.
Chopper was a man of significant, almost theatrical charisma. With
the crafted swagger of a larrikin “bloke’s bloke” persona, he became an
Australian icon, and a hero for the underclass. Australia, and Melbourne in
particular, has always had a curious fascination with criminal figures, quite
likely stemming from our convict past and to Australia’s most-loved folk
hero, Ned Kelly. Chopper was only too happy to exploit that fascination.
As a personality, he was so unique that Eric Bana’s remarkably accurate
portrayal in 2000’s film Chopper catapulted both Bana and Read to international
fame, and launched Bana’s Hollywood career. An impersonation also
helped secure Heath Franklin a comedy career.
Yet, one of Chopper’s most defining traits was his ability to inspire
fear in the hearts of the public, even in death. As I mentioned in passing
to friends that I would be writing this article on the life of Chopper Read,
reactions were largely of apprehension and concern.
I once, very briefly, crossed paths with Chopper on cold night in 2008
at the Leinster Arms Hotel, hidden away in the back streets of Collingwood.
At that time, news of his illness had just become public knowledge. Pausing
for just a moment to subtly analyse the hunched figure, I saw Chopper as a
sickly, jaundiced figure, so far removed from the caricature of him that exists
in the minds of the public. Here was just a man… where was this myth?
According to his own accounts, Mark Read was once a fat kid living
in the suburbs of Melbourne, where he was routinely bullied by his peers
and beaten by his father. He became a ward of the state at the age of 14, and
spent his teens in and out of psychiatric care. His teens were spent swinging
between the dual pains of street fighting and electro-shock therapy. His
brutal upbringing was the catalyst for his life of crime.
In a twisted offshoot of vigilantism, he established his own moral
code, and began to target fellow criminals, recognising that it was far
more profitable, but also more importantly that his victims were far more
deserving of his wrath than the general public. He was particularly noted
for torturing drug dealers with blowtorches, and using bolt-cutters to avail
members of the criminal underworld of their toes, in a less-than-subtle
attempt to inspire them to pay their debts. It was these actions as a ‘headhunter’
that he became feared, first in the world of organised crime, then in
the public realm at large.
Years of incarceration followed. Between the ages of 20 and 38, Read
spent only 13 months outside prison walls. Whilst inside, he waged a relentless
and savage prison war, famously asking a fellow inmate to slice off his
ears so that he could be transferred to the mental health wing of the prison,
so that he could retreat to relative safety. Yet, despite his violent past, Chopper
walked out of prison for the final time in 1998 as both a more mellow,
mature man, and an accomplished best-selling author. On the birth of his
son Charlie, not long after his release, he wrote, “Fatherhood changed me. I
reckon I became a human being at 45, when I saw my first boy born… that’s
the moment I joined the human race.”
Now feeling truly human, he once again capitalised on the public’s
penchant for celebrity criminals, this time parlaying his fame into new
ventures: a comedy career, an endless stream of writing gigs, a terrible rap
album – even a children’s book, Hooky The Cripple. Grappling with more
serious issues, he also appeared in advertisements speaking out against
drink driving and domestic violence, and along with his film royalties,
the proceeds from those appearances were donated to charity in full. And
throughout his illness, from the initial diagnosis of Hepatitis C, until the
liver cancer and cirrhosis that cost him his life, he continuously rejected the
offer of a liver transplant, saying that he was undeserving, and didn’t want
one when it could be used to save another life. When once he boasted that
he had killed 19 men, in his final days he conceded that he had lied, and
had only killed “about four or seven, depending on how you look at it”, as
he allowed his hard man persona to fade.
Even in the criminal world, nothing is black and white, good and
evil. Chopper Read was a violent criminal and an admitted killer, and
no-one could ever condone or absolve him of his actions. But he was also a
victim of circumstance – a hurting child, a mentally ill teen, and a complex,
troubled soul. We can only hope that he, like his claimed victims, can
finally rest in peace.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
17

THE HUMAN VOICE OF ASYLUM
Arielle Milecki
“The journey took two months… When I first
decided to come I knew how it would be. I’ve
seen a lot of terrible things in my life… For me
it was very normal. I was looking forward to a
future for my family, a future where I can go
to school. Without fear of shots, stabbing and
bomb blasts. I was very excited. It was short
lived.”
Sultan’s* story is unique and horrifying.
It is a story that must be told in the wake
of new government policy that threatens to
disrespect Australia’s obligation to engage in
international human rights treaties.
Sultan was born a Hazara Muslim in
Kabul, Afghanistan in April 1994.
Before Sultan was born, his parents lived
on the west side of Kabul.
“My family was inside their home when the
Taliban came.”
Sultan’s father was badly injured and after
a quick stint in hospital, they escaped to Afshar.
Then the Taliban came again.
On the 11th of Febuary 1993, government
forces entered Afshar and for 24 hours they
killed, raped, set fire to homes and took young
children as captives. 700 people were estimated
to have been killed or to have disappeared.
Sultan’s parents escaped the day before.
“From Afshar my parents went to our native
place in the Parwan Province. They were there
for a year and after that they went to Kabul and
I was born there in 1994.”
Sultan’s family moved many times during
those years, fleeing from the incessant threat of
the Taliban.
“I remember the bombs hitting a car in front of
us on the way to a village three hours away from
Kabul. It was full of people. There were lots of
bodies along the road. There was a little girl;
she was about my age at that time, alone sitting
next to her dead mum. She was crying.”
Even after the American’s came, violence
continued.
“My parents were worried about my future.”
“After that, my father spoke with a people
smuggler and he brought me to Australia.
“I was 15.”
From Malaysia to Indonesia, Sultan lay in
foetal position with no room to move.
“There was a piece of wood sticking into my
back for 21 hours.
After arriving in Indonesia, the people
smuggler arranged air tickets from Medan to
Jakarta.
“I don’t know how they did it without a passport.
In the airport the police came because
they knew we were illegal. They asked ‘do you
want to go to jail?’”
The policeman asked for a $2500 bribe for
their freedom.
“He said this in front of everyone in the airport.
I had only $100 with me. He took my mobile
phone, my money and he took some money
from everyone and then he left us and we went
to Jakarta.”
From Jakarta, Sultanboarded his final
boat, destined for Australia.
On the last day, the weather turned and
the conditions worsened. Food and water was
long gone and the boat’s condition was deteriorating
quickly.
“Everyone was tired of crying. Everyone was
ready to sink.”
Eventually, after 14 days at sea, a plane
spotted the boat and called for the Australian
Navy.
“Then they took us to Christmas Island.”
“It was a very nice feeling when I first got
there... I had my own room. I had three meals a
day… They transferred me to Melbourne after
90 days. I didn’t know what I was going to do. I
didn’t know anything. I was thinking if I go to
the mainland I’ll be free. I’ll go to school. I’ll do
whatever I want.”
They transferred Sultan to the Melbourne
Immigration Transit Accommodation (MITA)
for 11 months.
“It was like a fancy prison.”
“When we were going to eat we had to line up
in a queue. Every day was the same. There was
18
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

NATIONAL AFFAIRS
nothing to do every day. For 11 months, every
day I was seeing the same people the same thing
was happening. I was really bored.
“Some people were hitting themselves, hitting
their heads on the walls, cutting themselves. I
didn’t do that but my body was very weak and I
was shaking. It was very warm at that time but I
was feeling very cold.
“I saved one of my friends’ lives. He tried to
hang himself. I called the security.”
After five months, Sultan’s application
was rejected. They told him it was safe to go
back to Afghanistan.
“If they really read my case, if they were really
honest, they would never reject me.”
So Sultan applied again.
“I asked my case manager once what was happening
as I always did. She said they had made
a decision and we were waiting to receive it.
It took 3 months to get to me. I don’t know if
they were walking the decision from Sydney to
Melbourne.”
“Then I was rejected a second time.”
In seven days, Sultan would return to
Afghanistan.
“I heard later that no one with that particular
case manager had ever been accepted.”
“Pamela Curr came to see me from the Asylum
Seeker Resource Centre (ASRC). She got
some extra time for me from Immigration and
got a lawyer to work on my case. The lawyer
appealed for us to the courts.”
Finally there was some positive news.
“They said Immigration had made a mistake…
Finally, I came out of detention.”
During his time in detention, Sultan’s
father was murdered by the Taliban. This forced
him to support his family by working excessively,
seven days a week.
Sultan was reunited with his mother, two
brothers and sister one month ago.
Sultan now works for the Salvation Army
on Manus Island where he is the bridge between
clients in detention and the Australian people.
This kind of help is welcomed as government
policy tightens and those in detention
further lose hope.
To put this in context, when Labor were
elected in 2007, Kevin Rudd altered or abolished
many of the asylum seeker policies put in
place by the Howard Government. Mandatory
detention was one of them. The new policy introduced
by Rudd dictated that people would be
detained as a ‘last resort’, rather than as standard
practice. In August, a milestone of 50,000
‘illegal’ people had arrived in Australia since
Labor had been in office. It was only in July that
Kevin Rudd re-introduced off shore processing
as boat arrivals had sky-rocketed.
But since the Liberal party came into
power, Tony Abbott has said that no permanent
visas will be issued to those who come here ‘illegally’.
Rather, temporary Protection Visas will
be issued to people classified as refugees in an
effort to deter people smugglers.
This policy was first proposed by Pauline
Hanson’s One Nation in 1998.
Andrew Robb, the Minister for Trade and
Investment has weighed into the debate, stating
that turning back the boats (by removing the
incentive for people smuggling) is important to
prevent deaths at sea.
The new Immigration Minister, Scott
Morrison, insists that “people need to know not
only will they not be resettled in Australia, they
won’t be settling in Australia after arriving as
they have been under the previous government
for months.”
Thus, the Abbott government’s plan is for
disruption and deterrence, detection and interception,
off shore detention and then rapid return
to their country of origin or resettlement in
a third country other than Australia wherever
possible. However Sultan’s story demonstrates
that, with violence continuing worldwide and
a lack of better options for refugees, prevalent
corruption in neighbouring countries, and
regular oversights by Immigration case managers,
Abbott’s proposed procedures are proven
inadequate to deal with the issue at hand.
The temporary status of asylum seekers’
residency creates a deep uncertainty and anxiety
for their future.
Alison Halliday has fostered an Afghani
Hazara and has seen first hand the long term
emotional affects government policy has had on
asylum seekers.
Her foster son Jan Ali spent two months
on Christmas Island, two months in a Port
August detention centre and then one year in
MITA. He was just 15 years old.
In Port Augusta Jan’s mental and physical
health deteriorated.
“He, and the others, had no idea that it is a bit
of an Immigration Game.
“Very few asylum seekers are accepted with
their first application even if they can explain
all the suffering they have experienced, and it is
obvious that they tick the UNHCR criteria for
refugee status.”
Like Sultan, Jan was told Afghanistan was
safe and that he would be returned.
“This started the roller coaster that I see in
them all. Increasing anxiety, inability to sleep,
and inability to eat.
“My boy Jan still suffers sleep problems and
anxiety and depression, and he has a permanent
visa. He is extremely anxious about the safety of
his surviving family members.”
Jan’s case was reviewed by a Tribunal and
only then was he accepted.
This is the Tribunal that the Liberal Government
have said they will get rid of.
Halliday thinks the government needs
to be spending greater amounts of money getting
people processed by UNHCR in transit
countries, and then sent to the countries that
will take them, including Australia.
“The other thing Australia should do is dramatically
increase the refugee intake. We can’t
stop the world’s wars and the displacement of
peoples, but we can help by taking more of
these people.”
This seems unlikely with the rigid approach
the government has already taken since
the election.
Sultan has mixed feelings about the country
he now resides in.
“Australia is a good country. But if my country
didn’t have problems I would never come to
Australia. I love my country. I love my people.”
The future is hopeful for Sultan.
“I would like to travel. I am planning to go to
Brazil for the World Cup.”
For many, the future is much grimmer.
*Name changed at the request of the interviewee
Image: UNHCR
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
19

SUBHEADING
EGYPT: THREE YEARS ON
Carlie O’Connell
Almost three years have passed since Egypt’s Arab Spring began, but with
over 50 fatalities from protest clashes this month alone, it is clear that the
country is a far cry from the one protesters envisioned when they took to
Tahrir Square all those months ago.
In January 2011, Egyptians flocked to Tahrir Square in Cairo
to protest against then President Hosni Mubarak and the oppressive
government the country had been living under for decades.
With mobile phones in hand, the protests and their military backlash
were streamed live on social media around the world. Protests in Lebanon,
Oman, Yemen, Syria and Morocco began to ignite and with unrest already
bubbling over in Tunisia, it became a period of revolution for the region,
popularly coined the ‘Arab Spring’.
By the time I travelled to Egypt the following September, President
Mubarak had resigned months before. Beyond the bustling markets of
Cairo, the majesty of The Pyramids and the quiet villages the Nile curled
around, there remained the scars of a revolution. The charred skeleton of
a building stood next to the National Museum as a reminder of what had
passed. Tourists had all but depleted. Hour long lines of tourists eager to
enter The Pyramids no longer existed, with the few remaining visitors able
to walk straight in.
While the physical scars the city nursed were telling of what had
been, it was the people who were telling of what was to come.
Even if the protests weren’t being discussed specifically, everything
was referred to as ‘before the revolution’, or ‘after the revolution’. Even
from brief interactions, it was clear what a momentous split it was in their
timeline as a country. The struggle for democratic freedom was far from
over, but there was always hope that shone through; a sense of optimism
for the future that seemed to override the trepidation of how exactly they
would get there.
Fast forward to 2013 and for many Egyptians those rays of hope have
all but diminished.
President Hosni Mubarak had ruled over Egypt for 30 years, and after
his resignation the country entered a period of military rule. This military
rule concluded in June 2012 when member of the Freedom and Justice
Party (FJP – a party set up by the Muslim Brotherhood), Mohamed Morsi,
became the first democratically elected President. However the popularity
and legitimacy of the FJP and its leader quickly began to unravel.
Senior Lecturer at the Monash University School of Political and
Social Inquiry, Dr Benjamin MacQueen, explains that the declining
support for Morsi’s presidency cannot be pinpointed on any one fault.
“He broke four or five really important relationships that just
isolated him and his supporters. It was him, the party, and the ideological
supporters that were left in a bad economic situation, with the military
always wanting to get back at him because they saw him as an enemy from
decades back. So he fully isolated himself from that, and created this sort
of fervour,” Dr MacQueen says.
Coupled with this was Morsi assigning himself powers of legal
immunity from any presidential decision he made. All of these factors
culminated in the huge protests against President Morsi that were held on
June 30, 2013, the one-year anniversary of his presidency, resulting in him
being removed from power by the military the next month.
Since then, the country has reverted back to a military-run state, just
as it was in 2011 after the initial revolution. The difference is that this
time there is no decisive course of action.
Between August 14 and 18 this year, raids of sit-ins that supported
ex-President Morsi left over 800 civilians and security personnel dead. On
October 6, Morsi supporters clashed with police, leaving at least 53 dead.
“In terms of popular support, there’s no precise gauge as to where
sentiment lies. The protests against Morsi were massive, but there was a
negative motivation to wanting him gone, and not really a positive vision
of ‘we want this instead’,” explains Dr MacQueen.
“When you look at it, it’s no longer even about findings solutions, it’s
more about how can things be managed that mitigate the worst possible
outcomes. As bleak as that sounds, that’s really where the situation’s at,
at the moment.”
Until a suitable candidate to run for presidency can be found, the
military will continue to run the country. Considering Egypt is a nation of
90 million, 50% of which are on or below the poverty line, experiencing
a wavering economy and bloodshed on the streets, it will be no easy feat.
Ultimately, when the crowds filled Tahrir Square in 2011, they had
a list of demands that were well within reason. Stability. An accountable
and transparent government. A stable economy. A sense of certainty that
their children will be educated and employed.
Of course, these have always been hopes among the Egyptian people
for their country, but until the Arab Spring, they didn’t seem attainable.
Whether it is more crushing to come so close and miss an opportunity
that at the time seemed so ready to unfold, or whether it should be viewed
as a step in the right direction that has allowed for a more participatory
civilian front, remains to be seen.
20 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

SUBHEADING
THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT AND
AFRICAN STATES:
A Troubled Relationship
Tamara Preuss
The birth of the International Criminal Court (ICC) was hailed around
the world as a victory for international justice. It was hoped that its
creation would spell the end of impunity for individuals guilty of the
worst crimes known to the international community.
The ICC was created by an international treaty known as the
Rome Statute in 1998. The Court is historically unique as it is the first
permanent international criminal court. The court exercises jurisdiction
over three crimes; namely, war crimes, crimes against humanity and
genocide. Currently, 122 states are party to the Rome Statute with the
notable exceptions of the United States, China, Russia and Israel.
In spite of the admirable aspirations that lead to the foundation
of the Court it has been plagued with problems concerning state
cooperation, funding and legitimacy. The Court’s relationship with the
African Union (AU) and the 34 African states that are party to the
Rome Statute has been particularly problematic.
At an extraordinary summit of the AU, which took place on
the 11-12th of October, AU states considered the future direction of
their relationship with the ICC. The state parties declared that no
sitting government officials should be brought before the ICC, a direct
contradiction to the Rome Statute. They also requested that the ICC
defer the case against the Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta.
The long-term success of the Court depends on whether it can
resolve its issues with the AU and African states and regain legitimacy as
an arbiter of international justice.
One charge that has been consistently leveled at the Court is that
it is unfairly biased against Africans. All of the cases currently before
the Court involve individuals of an African nationality. The AU argues
that the ICC targets Africans and ignores atrocities committed in other
regions.
The AU’s argument ignores the fact that the Court may only
consider a case where the national court of the accused is unable or
unwilling to do so. This implies a situation in which a state’s judicial
system has either collapsed or sided with the accused. Arguably, this
occurs disproportionately in African states hence the overrepresentation
of African individuals at the Court. Indeed, four of the eight situations
currently being considered by the Court were referred by the state itself.
Nevertheless, the ICC should take the AU’s concerns seriously.
The declaration that no sitting head of state should appear before the
ICC severely limits its capacity to deliver justice.
In particular, two cases have incited disagreement between the AU
and the ICC. These are the indictments of Sudanese President Omar
al-Bashir and the Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta.
Al-Bashir was indicted in 2009 for his alleged role in atrocities
committed in Darfur following a referral of the situation to the ICC by
the United Nations Security Council. AU member states agreed to not
enforce al-Bashir’s arrest warrant if he were to visit their country and
they unsuccessfully petitioned the Court to defer the case. They argued
that the need to resolve the conflict in Darfur should take precedence
over justice.
The concerns of the AU bring to the fore the issue that sometimes
peace and justice are irreconcilable. From the AU’s perspective, the
indictment provides an incentive for al-Bashir to cling to power, as
amnesty is no longer a possibility. Should the international community
place more importance on the punishment of a few individuals than a
peace agreement that could resolve a long and bitter civil conflict? The
ICC has firmly decided in favour of this proposition; however perhaps
they should reconsider their position. In some situations, the ICC should
allow a society embroiled in civil conflict the chance to establish peace
before indicting those responsible for international crimes.
The ICC indicted the current President of Kenya, Uhuru
Kenyatta, in 2011 for his alleged role in the violence that followed the
2007 Kenyan presidential election. In response, the Kenyan National
Assembly passed a motion to withdraw Kenya from the Rome Statute
and petitioned the United Nations Security Council to defer the
case. Kenyatta has thus far cooperated with proceedings but there is
speculation that he will not appear at The Hague when his trial starts on
12 November 2013. The fact that Kenyatta was democratically elected
whilst facing trial by the ICC shows that a majority of Kenyans do not
support the trial.
The ICC must improve its relationship with Africa if it is to retain
legitimacy as an international arbiter of justice. Just how this may be
achieved is difficult to determine. The ICC’s past attempts to establish
an African liaison office have been rejected by the AU but they must
persist. The Court must actively engage with African governments
to build relationships based on trust and understanding. In addition,
the Court must recognise that in some situations peace must is more
important than justice.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
21

HOW TO MARKET
‘MARKETING’
In conversation with Colin Jevons
Samuel Blashki
In 1989, the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) introduced the now
iconic slogan “If you drink, then drive, you’re a bloody idiot.” It’s a clever line
with a serious message and since it’s introduction, the Victorian road toll has
almost halved. TAC slogans have now been visible on billboards, newspapers
and TV commercials for more than 20 years, battling to keep road safety at
the forefront of public consciousness. Appearing amongst the never ending
stream of adverts for Coca-Cola, McDonalds and other big brands, the TAC’s
relentless campaign is a prime example of advertising and marketing being
used to positively impact society.
The marketing industry is not often associated with campaigns that
benefit the public, like those produced by the TAC. Rather, the word ‘marketing’
tends to conjure images of shady men in suits finding ways to sell
consumers things they don’t really want or need. This criticism was well articulated
by American Professor of Economics Colston Warne, who in 1961
described the industry as being focused on “the manipulation of human personality
into profitable molds.” There is an element of truth to this perspective,
but is it really fair to dismiss the whole marketing industry as a cesspool
of trickery and greed?
Colin Jevons, Associate Professor in the Monash University Department
of Marketing and course director of the Bachelor of Business, doesn’t
subscribe to the view that marketing is evil. “Marketing is misunderstood,
it has done a bad job of marketing itself,” he says, speaking from his corner
office overlooking the city. Jevons comes across as quirky, affable and a little
idealistic. He has years of experience in the market research industry and, as
a respected academic, has developed strong opinions about the potential for
marketing to be an agent of positivity in society.
Jevons is on a mission to eradicate “the assumption by good people
that they don’t want to do marketing because it’s what bad people do.” In
his opinion, if more good people put more energy into marketing things
ethically and in the public interest, then society would be the better for it.
He believes that if intelligent and passionate young people had skills in
marketing, they would be better equipped to have a significant impact on
the world.
In Jevons’ opinion, the process of marketing is amoral rather than
immoral; a skill set that can be used equally to do good or bad. “Marketing
isn’t the problem,” he says, “it is an effective means of encouraging
22
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

STUDENT AFFAIRS
voluntary behaviour change.” The basic psychology of marketing involves
discovering the underlying desire of a consumer. Once a marketer knows a
consumer’s desire, they can then create the perception that their product
fulfills that desire. Smirnoff doesn’t sell vodka, it sells a wild party lifestyle.
Tiffany & Co doesn’t sell diamonds, it sells elegance and class. The TAC
doesn’t sell cautious driving, it sells avoidance of the danger and embarrassment
of an accident. Jevons argues that there’s nothing inherently wrong
with this process of persuasion. Rather, he believes that putting marketing
skills in the hands of more ethically minded people could significantly
improve society.
If more people knew how to ‘sell’ a charitable cause or social movement
they are passionate about then they could, in Jevons’ opinion, significantly
increase their chances of instigating social change. It’s true that the
most successful Australian charities and social movements have strong brand
identities; Oxfam, World Vision and Red Cross are all instantly recognisable
across Australia. In 2010, environmental organisation Greenpeace used
ingenious marketing strategies to pressure global food giant Nestlé into no
longer using palm oil as an ingredient in Kit Kat chocolate bars. The production
of palm oil leads to rainforest destruction and the death of orangutans,
so Greenpeace created a parody advertisement in which a Kit Kat package
contained dismembered orangutan fingers in place of chocolate. With the
right marketing approach, Greenpeace managed to attract significant public
attention and successfully pressure Nestlé into making major changes to their
supply chain.
While the premise of socially responsible marketing is positive and
inspiring, the issue remains that the vast majority of marketing money is
spent by private industry in pursuit of profit, without giving thought to ethical
considerations. Nestlé not only owns the brand Kit Kat, but also weight
loss company Jenny Craig. It’s disturbing to realise that the company has a
massive vested interest in consumers yo-yoing between unhealthy eating and
dieting. An even more worrying example of morally questionable marketing
is that of the tobacco industry. In 2012, an investigation by British newspaper
The Independent found that “tobacco firms have taken advantage of lax
marketing rules in developing countries by aggressively promoting cigarettes
to new, young consumers, while using lawyers, lobby groups and carefully
selected statistics to bully governments that attempt to quash the industry
in the West.” These are just two examples of corporate behemoths at their
worst, using marketing might to drown out the voices of common sense and
basic morality.
Jevons accepts that marketing is often used as an agent of greed, but
he doesn’t believe that this negates it’s positive potential. “Most is done
by corporations for profit” he concedes, “but it can be used for the public
benefit as well.” Whether marketing is being used to reduce drink driving,
encourage donations to charity or save orangutans, Jevons makes the case
that the art of persuasion is essential to getting good things done on a large
scale. The world is full of people with good ideas waiting to be heard, but
succeeding requires the tools to get people to listen.

STUDENT AFFAIRS
FRAGMENTED NOTES FROM A
DEPRAVED WEEK IN THE MSA
Thomas Clelland
‘The kids are turned off from politics, they say. Most of ‘em don’t even want to hear about it. All they want to do
these days is lie around on waterbeds and smoke that goddamn marrywanna... yeah, and just between you and
me Fred that’s probably all for the best’. – Hunter S Thompson
I begin my trudge across the Menzies lawn
toward the campus centre and rain immediately
soaks through my Chinese-fabricated canvas
jacket. The air sits heavy and surprisingly still
in the Clayton wind tunnel; the humidity
would otherwise be a portent of a storm to
come, but the rain is already here with trenches
dug. The rhythmic squelch of my leather boots
and disjointed wonderings about which class I
am actually here to attend occupy my already
limited attention span. As I enter the warmed
confines of the Campus Centre I am suddenly
accosted by a young, sweaty man whose
enthusiasm is jarringly at odds with the maudlin
weather outside.
‘Hi mate! Just wanted to grab a minute of
your time to talk about the reasons to vote for
Go! in this year’s MSA elections!’
His sudden appearance, which was
probably not all that sudden, has me off guard
and reeling, frantically combing my mind for a
response that will avoid the impending tirade.
I meet his eye and manage to garble
something to the effect that I am a senior
24
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

STUDENT AFFAIRS
biology professor and therefore cannot vote.
His hands frantically wring his t-shirt back and
forth and his mind feverishly tries to reconcile
the image in his head of a stately old biology
professor and the dishevelled and wet youth
standing before him. I take advantage of the
ensuing pause and make my escape across the
hallowed white masking tape on the worn
carpet. Apparently it is election week.
My usual tact in election week involves
blending in with the wallpaper and avoiding
the manically enthusiastic advances of comers
from all sides as if they were infectious. The
Clayton gods had different plans for me this
year, though, and I immediately came face to
face with one of the head honchos of Clayton’s
own resident career antagonists, running this
year on a ticket heavy-handedly dubbed “Left
Hook”. He frantically began to inform me of
the fascist undertones of the bigoted policies
of the other ratfuckers running in the election,
and though I don’t really align politically, it’s
hard to ignore someone so honest in their
fervour that they will walk around in red all day
yelling at passers-by. Our discussion progressed
and eventually it was time for consummation
via how-to-vote card, which was forcefully
thrust into my hand without my consent. At
this point I noticed something odd, though.
There were candidates for Left Hook, the most
ardently anti-establishment party on campus,
running on the ticket of Go!.
‘It’s because it’s strategic, it’s nothing
ideological. It’s fine. Don’t worry about it,’ he
assured, his eyes glinting in a way that made me
think that he probably realised it was a little
fucked up, too.
That was enough to pique even my
interest. What does that say about these parties,
leagues apart on the political spectrum, willing
to compromise their principles and dive into
the mud together for just a sniff of political
gravy?
Throughout the week, almost
unintentionally, I began to find out other
things about this year’s election that made that
first fetid whiff seem like just a precursor to
something more.
The MSA elections have, in recent years,
revolved around the incumbent juggernaut,
Go!. Holding the high majority of office bearing
positions in the Monash Student Association,
they are well equipped, influential, and
numerous. The campus crawls with an army of
feverish blue shirts, and among their ranks are
without doubt a few future career politicians.
By sheer numbers alone they overwhelm
competing tickets and feed on their carcasses.
Maybe jumping into their sleeping bag isn’t so
incomprehensible after all.
‘They’re everywhere. It’s like an empire.
My advice is just not to fuck with them,’
remarks another friend of mine whose political
libido, like my own, is satisfied by observation.
He has a flair for the dramatic, but the tone
of the conversation still implored me to learn
more. We sat undercover as it rained, shooting
the shit, and he eventually mentioned the
extension of the Go! tentacle into my very own
Lot’s Wife.
“What does that say about these
parties, leagues apart on the
political spectrum, willing to
compromise their principles and
dive into the mud together for just
a sniff of political gravy?”
Some of the most powerful laws in
society aren’t law at all, but convention.
They’re not written in black letter, but they
still carry weight in the mass respect they
inspire. An example is that, in our democracy,
the government shouldn’t really meddle in
the affairs of the media. This idea is already a
little bit hobbled at Monash, as Lot’s Wife must
submit requests for money to the MSA, like a
griping child to a parent. In fact, Lot’s has to ask
for permission to spend the money generated by
the magazine itself via advertising. Journalistic
independence isn’t dead, per se, but it’s taken
a hell of a beating. Add to that the fact that
Go! also decided to install their own choice of
editors, rather than following convention and
accepting the endorsements of the previous
editors for the position, and journalistic
independence at Monash is lying in a gutter
outside the Nott in a pool of blood and shards
of glass, spitting out teeth and trying to work
out which way to crawl home.
Admittedly, my own affection for the
publication and the ideals of a democracy might
be colouring my language. Maybe I should have
slept more before writing this. Maybe having
state run media at Monash will result in a fair
and balanced approach to reporting. That’s
actually not a bad mantra: fair and balanced.
They should use that.
Maybe I should just vote for Free Beer.
They sound like they have solid policy.
‘Yeah you would vote for Free Beer,
wouldn’t ya.’ my friend continues. I think I’m
being lambasted.
‘That’s part of the empire, they get idiots
like you to vote for that stupid stuff on the
Feeder Tickets and it just consolidates the
empire.’
I am out of my depth, but I’ll have a
go at this. The “Feeder Tickets”, like “Free
Beer” and “Free Parking” are like your friendly
neighbourhood white supremacy party in the
following ways: they’re on the periphery, and
only crackpots and people who don’t care
will swing them a vote. However, behind
closed doors they have a creepy preference
deal that moves these votes gained in apathy
and boredom to a mainstream political party,
like the ALP. Or like Go!. As far as I can tell,
another layer was just added to the continually
thickening plot and I am really out of my depth.
I spent the rest of my Tuesday alternately
seething and forgetting. By the end of the week,
it’s clear that Go! has prevailed, with some of
the Left Hook candidates dragged in on their
shirt tails.
Don’t look to me for a pronouncement of
what it all means or what happens from here.
The fog cleared and for an instant I saw the real
layout of the city. All that I really know is that
a lot more goes on behind closed doors in our
windy abode than I previously thought.
‘Ah, don’t worry about it bro. We’re
gonna be out of here soon and then it’s not our
problem.’
Maybe my doomsday ramblings aren’t
really necessary.
Maybe that decaying odour is actually just
from that dodgy sushi place.
Thomas Clelland is not a member of any political
party on campus.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
25

STUDENT AFFAIRS
THE APATHY
MYTH
Nicole Rodger
This piece and image originally appeared on page 10 of Lot’s Wife
Edition 6, 1996.
I know it’s a cliché, but if I had a dollar for every time someone made a
despairing remark to me about student apathy, I’d be a rich woman. And
to continue in the vein of my high-brow introduction, I will quote those
masters of satire and cynicism, TISM; “I’m interested in apathy.”
Apathy is regarded as the bane of student activists and student politicians
everywhere. It is defined as insensibility, indifference and mental
indolence. Its tangible manifestations include lower voter turnout during
student elections, small rallies, ignorance about education/social issues,
and inquorate Student General Meetings. Apathy also laid the perfect
foundations for the introduction of Voluntary Student Unionism. Governments
and University Administrations rely on student apathy to push
through regressive and undemocratic changes to higher education policy.
During the recent media frenzy attracted by the closure of Lot’s Wife,
many journalists noted the lack of passion and activism amongst students
of the 1990s. If we rewound the clock by thirty years, the loss of a student
newspaper would have generated mass outrage and probably militant action
by the student population – a far cry from the comparatively muted
protests of our generation.
Apathy is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. When people say
that students don’t care, don’t understand, don’t want to know, they are,
by implications, saying that we should not bother with them, that to
expend any energy on a particular issue would be a waste of time. But if
students are written off as apathetic, they are never given the opportunity
to prove themselves otherwise, and so the cycle continues.
Often saying that students are apathetic is just a way of avoiding the
hard work needed to get a campaign off the ground. Some people say that
the issues are too complicated, that students won’t understand, or that
you can’t expect students to get their head around them. I believe this
is selling students short, and it says more about the people who articulate
those theories than it does about students themselves. Such people
have no faith in student organisations. After the first Student General
Meeting for the year at which an overwhelming (but inquorate) majority
voted that the Monash Student Association withdraw from the funding
agreement binding it to compliance with Voluntary Student Unionism,
it was said by many office-bearers that students didn’t know what they
were voting for, or understand its implications. Partly, this reasoning was
a justification for ignoring the SGM motion and largely avoiding the
difficult issues it raised. It was also a thinly veiled attack on the group
of activists who worked very hard to make the SGM happen, and to
ensure that students did understand what was going on. Ironically, these
office-bearers have internalised the notion of apathy, a thing which they
constantly complain about, and then use as a weapon against students,
to either undermine something they have done or decided, or to deprive
them of the information they need. Such reactions from our student
association facilitates a deeper, more hardened kind of apathy amongst
students – cynicism.
In many instances, the people who complain about
student apathy are the ones in a position to do
something about it. Stu-
dents need
to be inspired, informed
and
treated like intelligent
adults rather than sheep to
be herded into polling booths
during election week.
Any person who is
involved with
the student
association
has
a responsibility
to
work actively
for, and more
importantly,
with students.
Yes it can be an
uphill battle,
and it is often a
thankless job, but
if the MSA lacks
the support and the
interest of students, it
is a grave dug not only
by Kennett’s antistudent
unionism
26

STUDENT AFFAIRS
legislations, but by a litany of office-bearers who failed to use their positions
in a constructive and inclusive way.
Another theory penned in 1969 by C. Davidson, is that “apathy is
the unconscious recognition students make of the fact they are powerless”.
There is probably some truth to this; many students of the nineties
seem to have internalised this notion of powerlessness on a more conscious
level. They merely throw up their hands in despair when something
goes wrong, as if that is justification for why they failed to show any
interest in the issue or the thing in the first place. However, all is not lost.
Power is relative. We may not be able to kick Jeff Kennett out of Spring
Street (and you thought we was going to decriminalise marijuana – suckers),
but we do have the power to storm the rotunda when he makes his
annual visit to Monash. Students have won concessions on reforms in the
past, through lobbying and through direct action on the streets and in
universities. The most important thing we have is the power to question,
to criticise, to challenge and to learn. We don’t just have to be passive
pawns in a game played by student political hacks or politicians of the
State and Federal variety.
So are we Monasharians really irretrievably apathetic? We rarely
get more than one bus load (usually only half a bus) of students going to
rallies in the city. But on the other hand, Monash has a proud tradition of
highly attended Student General Meetings with usually at least 300 and
a few times in the past few years over 1000 students participating. This
SGM culture is the envy of office-bearers and activists at other campuses
who can only marvel at it, as for example at Melbourne Uni and RMIT
they’re lucky to get 200 people to an SGM.
Many Monash students walk around this campus as if blindfolded,
they don’t look at posters, they don’t get involved in extra-curricular activities.
And they don’t read this newspaper. That’s their loss. But I know
from experience that if you approach any given group of people or any
individual with something concrete to say, or for them to do, the majority
do take some form of interest. So those of you subscribing to the apathy
theory, get out there and give others a reason to take notice. To those
who would put themselves in the apathetic basket, pop the bubble that
your life is and you never know what you may learn or who you will meet.
We may not be about to have a revolution, and Monash has certainly
changed a lot since its radical hey-days in the late 60s and early 70s, but I
like to think there is hope for us yet.
In 2013?
Florence Roney
It might seem strange that we would choose to re-publish an article that
was written nearly 20 years ago. But if you have had much to do with student
politics in 2013, the resemblance outlined in Nicole Rodger’s piece
to our current situation at Monash is striking; it feels like it could have
been written last week.
As the 2013 Lot’s Wife Editors, Matt and I have worked on several
political campaigns over the year. It is easy to get disillusioned and
frustrated when the students around you don’t seem as passionate, or as
pumped as you are for a cause. I remember working towards the National
Student Strike on May 14th, and feeling utterly perplexed: why wouldn’t
every student see what is happening and feel the dismay? More attacks
on education! (In the form of the $2.3 billion cuts to Tertiary education
by the Federal Government). Didn’t they want to fight for themselves? Is
‘student apathy’ the reason?
The ideas that Rodger touched on, all those years ago, still seem so
pertinent. On a campus of 28,000 students, the fact that MSA membership
is less than a third is saddening, but really, not all that surprising.
As she argues, by dubbing students ‘apathetic’ - the catch-cry of student
politicians (myself included), we are essentially giving up, not providing
the opportunity, nor the tools for students to become involved in activism
or politics on campus.
So what should we make of the situation in 1996? How do we
compare? Unfortunately, the strong Student General Meeting (SGM)
culture that Rodger describes has all but disappeared. In the last eight years,
the MSA has held only two SGMs (meetings open to all Clayton students
to vote and direct how the MSA should function) both of which were held
this year after immense pressure from student activists. I was a part of the
organising group for the first SGM, and it was heartening to see around 400
students turn up, despite the lack of recent precedence. But again, in the
context of 28,000 students it is not all that impressive.
MSA elections, typically with a voter turnout of around 10 per cent
of the student population, are another example of this ‘apathy’. But having
campaigned during election week, speaking to hundreds of students, I
would argue that it is not so much that students are apathetic, disinterested
or lazy, more that they are simply not informed. While I got my fair share of
unconvincing “already voted” rebuffs, I found that if you took the time to
talk to students, discussed ideas and issues with them that are important to
you and your campaign in an adult and clear way, most would be interested,
and willing to talk.
I think this is the crux of the issue. How we (as student activists/
politicians/journalists) interact with the broader student body needs to
reflect that students are not stupid, or apathetic, or ‘right-wing bigots’.
Positive campaigning, that does not involve tricking students into thinking
their classes have been cancelled, or sitting in offices waiting for students
to come to you, is important. But really, information is the key. From
Rodger’s piece, it is clear that the cycle has been around for a long time, but
if students are informed, engaged and treated as capable of making critical
decisions, rather than as an apathetic mob, we may just be able to turn this
cycle around.
Florence Roney is current Lot’s Wife editor. She ran with the political ticket
Switch at the 2013 MSA elections, unsuccessfully.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
27

STUDENT AFFAIRS
IN CONVERSATION WITH
MSA PRESIDENT ELECT :
BEN KNIGHT
Louise Mapleston
To the untrained (non-ticketed) eye, the Monash Student Association
(MSA) represents a maternity ward that fosters and prepares for the birth
of student politicians; outgoing presidents, office bearers and loose supporters
fall into simultaneous Labor (get it!?) around week 9 of semestertwo
each year, and without fail, a fresh-faced new president pops right
on out. Through the sea of primary coloured t-shirts that persuaded,
argued and battled with you to cast a vote - a new president, Ben Knight,
was elected.
It is difficult to fathom at first glance that Knight is in fact old
enough to be in University, let alone president of one of Australia’s largest
Student Unions. Go!, primarily a Labor Left ticket, has held power in the
MSA for the past 8 years and Knight, 21, has quickly climbed the ranks
from Education (Academic Affairs) Officer to President within a year.
First impressions of Knight are soon diminished as we settle into beanbags
and drink coffee at Wholefoods. His tone of voice is much more
calm and controlled than mine and I joke about my joining the MSA
paying his salary, he is quick to correct me in between sips of his latte, “as
President I will work about 50 hours a week and receive a very modest stipend,
for the enormous amount of work I will be doing,” he says. Despite
Knight’s baby-faced mien his professionalism and credible intellect shines
through within the first five minutes of the interview.
As the incoming MSA president at a time where the tertiary education
sector is facing the largest cuts to funding and casualisation of staff
in over a decade, Knight is all too aware he has his work cut out for him.
The MSA’s relationship with University management and outgoing Pro
Vice-Chancellor Ed Byrne has been testy at best and Knight seems vague,
if not slightly weary to confirm his strategy to strengthen relationships
with management and the new Pro Vice-Chancellor for 2014.
“We have to make sure that we retain our integrity, our collaborations
and conversations with the University, while making sure it doesn’t
override the fact that we do represent students. I have told the university
in discussions that we are looking to work with them in a manner that
brings benefits to students. And that means there may be protests on
campus and we will be speaking out not in their favour a lot of the time,”
he says.
Go! and its office bearers have been criticised in the past, particularly
after the NTEU picket at the beginning of semester two, for a lack
of solidarity and unity endorsing a ‘whole-union’ approach to stop the
cuts and supporting university staff with industrial action outside of their
education portfolios. Ben, a member of the Monash Education Action
Group was quick to retort such assumptions and assured me, “I’ve already
sat down with incoming OB’s. It’s something you have to prioritise over
politics; we have to critise the ALP, criticise the LNP and all independents
attacking unions and education because if we don’t, we can’t build
for a movement we’re expecting from a very regressive government.
Working together collaboratively is key,” he says.
Knight stresses collaboration and maintaining integrity are
paramount in Go!’s direction for 2014, “we come through with ethical
values,” he says as I prod him for answers about Go!’s pragmatic stance
on running non-Go! members for the Environmental and Social Justice
(ESJ) portfolio.
The ESJ office-bearers oversee and raise awareness for environmental
and social justice issues within and outside Monash University.
Preference deals were made for the ESJ position between Go! and Left
Hook, a ticket comprised mostly of Socialist Alternative members. Left
Hook members have taken a hard-headed, grass-roots approach to the
cuts campaign and many others, in contrast to Go!’s more bureaucratic,
lobby-style techniques.
If history between the two tickets is anything to go by, the marriage
could be somewhat dysfunctional. Under the direction of Knight, Go!
must ensure that they are working together in placing priority on the cuts
campaign and various others next year. He shakes off my suggestion of
dysfunction with a smile as we rearrange ourselves on the floor.
Knight’s approach to interview questions is remarkably measured
and sincere. He tells me he is from a financially disadvantaged background
in Tasmania and unionism has run in his family for generations
28
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

STUDENT AFFAIRS
– compelling him to run as President for 2014. One of the running platforms
of his election was the introduction of ‘Household Goods Services’
to provide free rental of lawn mowers, vacuum cleaners and whipper snippers
for students who couldn’t afford to invest in these items long term.
I told Ben that those items were too practical and that he should lobby
for either a massage parlour or monkey helpers to carry our books from
lecture to lecture. Chuckling he replied, “I really would love to implement
monkey helpers within the MSA but I’m afraid it’s not very ethical
and could create an internal coup and could compromise the values of the
organisation generally.”
Ben’s passion for equity in education and student services is admirable.
The necessity for strong, ethical leadership from an MSA president
has never been so imperative at Monash University, as we enter a term
under a national Liberal Government set to attack higher education and
its resources. Ben Knight is locked in for a hard and hopefully rewarding
term as President. And it wouldn’t be kosher unless I posed the question:
Will Ben and his team transform into ‘Knights’ (*cringe*) in shining
armour quick enough to defend Monash from extreme cuts to our muchvalued
resources and staff?
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
29

STUDENT AFFAIRS
MSA OFFICE BEARER REPORTS
President: Freya Logan
Hi all, After two years we’ve come to my last
Lot’s Wife report ever! As your MSA President
this year and your MSA Secretary last year
I have had both great times and not so great
times representing you all. It’s been a great
learning experience, and I encourage anyone
who has thought about getting involved with
the MSA to absolutely do it.
At the moment we are launching the
MSA Host Year program which will help bring
the MSA to the wider student body by aiming
to create 1000 student hosts. As a Host Year
volunteer you can help students with faculty
concerns, direct them to the MSA and listen
to any concerns that you may have. I am very
proud to have helped lead this project and I
am excited to see it in action next year!
The past year has been so wonderful and
I have a lot of people to thank, Ben Zocco and
Sam Towler for being a great executive team,
and Ben Knight who has been an outstanding
Education (Academic Affairs) officer and will
be a brilliant President. Everyone else will
know who they are and know how much their
support and putting up with me meant.
Good luck with all your exams and have
a great summer break!
Treasurer: Samantha Towler
I’m sure I wouldn’t be alone in feeling like
we’ve hit the hectic point of the year. Budget
Process is in full swing and between reviewing
submissions, consulting with departments and
pouring over bottom lines it can feel like there
just aren’t enough hours in the day. The MSA
“Stress Less” Petting Zoo was a huge success,
and hopefully gave everyone to chance to take
a break and play with some adorable animals!
While Budget, projects and the continual
day-to-day are keeping me more than busy, a
big part of this time is beginning the handover
process with next year’s Treasurer Sinead and
the 2014 team who I know will do an amazing
job, and who I am delighted to work with over
the next few weeks.
Secretary: Ben Zocco
I can barely believe that this is my last report
to Lot’s Wife – a lot has happened since my
first report more than nine months ago! I have
spent much of the last few weeks working on
finalising the projects I have undertaken this
year, including the policy review and strategic
planning, which will continue right until
the end of the year. It’s great to see that the
students of Monash, in their enduring wisdom,
have once again elected a fantastic group
of office-bearers to lead the MSA next year.
Congratulations to everybody who was elected,
including my successor, Sarah Christie, who
I now have the pleasure of training up over
the course of the next few months – I have no
doubt that she will do a fantastic job as MSA
Secretary for 2014. I would also like to thank
the current office-bearing team for being such
a vibrant and hard-working group. In particular,
to my fellow Executive members Freya
Logan and Samantha Towler – it has been
humbling to work alongside two dedicated and
passionate student representatives. I wish everyone
good luck with the upcoming examination
period, and, as always, if you wish to know
more, please feel free to contact me!
Education (Academic Affairs): Ben Knight
For the final time this year, hey everyone! Myoh-my
this year has flown by.
If you read the last Lot’s edition you
would have seen that the MSA was successful
in gaining a trial for after hours library access
during SWOTVAC and exams – a massive
win! The Matheson will be staying open until
2am to trial the demand for study spaces after
12am. If you wanted later library hours, make
sure you utilise the extended service to show
the University how much students need this
service.
One of the last few academic projects
that I’ve be working on for the year relates
to fair assessment procedure – enforcing and
amending. Currently we’re collaborating with
the University to create a better and more
effective exam-feedback process. Make sure
you know what your assessment rights are, and
if you have any questions, email me at ben.
knight@monash.edu.
Also, congratulations to Nicholas
Kimberley who is the Education (Academic
Affairs) Officer-elect for 2014. Best of luck!
Adios!
Education (Public Affairs):
Sarah Christie & John Jordan
So here it is, the final report! What a year it
has been! For us here in the Ed (Pub) office
it’s hard to believe that it’s almost over. 2013
has been a massive year for education on
campus. We have run campaigns around the
cost of parking, 24 hour libraries, the state of
women in higher education, international and
postgraduate concession cards, the spiralling
cost of higher education, produced a guide
to university life, run the campaign against
the cuts to Higher Education alongside the
Monash Education Action Group, and much
more. It has been a fantastic year - we have
met so many fantastic activists, we have
spoken to so many inspirational students
making the most of university, and of course
we have cooked many sausages. We have
had such a great year, and we hope you have
30 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

STUDENT AFFAIRS
too. Lastly, a huge congratulations to Thomas
Green and Declan Murphy who were recently
elected as your Education (Public Affairs)
Officers for 2014 - we know they will do a
brilliant job and we can’t wait to see them get
started! Sarah and John xx
Environment & Social Justice:
Rory Knight & Tamara Vekich
Seeing as this is the last report from us, we
want to thank all those who were involved
with ESJ this year and to encourage you all to
continue pursuing your passions for environmental
and social justice issues. Every little
bit of individual effort will ensure progress
continues, whether it’s signing a petition,
volunteering for a cause, or organising a movement
yourself! We are looking at wrapping
up this semester by perhaps organising a trip
to the Tarkine rainforest in Tasmania, which
is threatened by logging exploitation. If you
are interested, give us a shout! In other news
we have finished our cooking nights and will
be hopefully continuing at Wholefoods next
year too. If you are looking for causes to get
involved in or inspired by for the summer or
next year, drop us a line! Good luck for exams
and have a productive summer!
Male Queer: Asher Cameron
Queer Affairs Committee elections were
on last week and I would like to congratulate
the 6 elected committee members for 2014!
Good luck during your term!!
Recently I’ve been continuing work with
Monash Equity and Diversity Centre on the
Ally Network pilot program, attending and
organizing the student panel and assisting with
the training package being offered to staff. For
those who don’t know, the Ally Network is an
education program for (primarily) staff to make
the university a more inclusive and supportive
place for queer students by making academic
and professional staff more knowledgeable
about queer issues and making queer allies more
visible on campus. The project will continue
into next year with the year pilot coming to an
end in September next year. After a (hopefully)
successful evaluation, the program will be
rolled out across more faculties in future years.
I have also been liaising with Monash
Abroad to write a sexuality and gender presentation
for exchange students arriving in Australia
as well as Australian students departing
for overseas study. This will be introduced into
pre-departure programs in the next few weeks
and then rolled out into other sessions over
the next few months. Hopefully this will make
more queer students feel supported by Monash
University.
Thanks for a fantastic year, all the best to
Freddie in 2014!
Female Queer: Cam Peter
The MSA Queer Dept. has had an exciting
year. We’ve organised and run some of the most
well attended Queer Week and Queer Balls in
recent history, we’ve fundraised and sent record
amount of attendees to Queer Collaborations
and are looking forward to hosting Queer Collaborations
next year.
Perhaps the achievement I am most proud
of, and one that is the most significant, is the
way our collective has grown and has come
to reflect the much greater diversity of our
community. We have successfully organised
a TISGD (Trans, Intersex, Sex and Gender
Diverse Caucus), as well as Dyques (a queer
women’s social group). This is in addition to
the forums, workshops, discussion groups and
resources we continue to provide to our collective,
and provide spaces for voices of our most
marginalized groups to be heard.
Next week is Asexuality Awareness
Week and the MSA Queer Dept. is hosting an
‘Asexuality 101 + Mythbusting’ workshop in
the Queer Lounge from 1pm. We hope to see
you there!
Welfare: Alexandra Bryant
Hi all! Sitting down to write my last report for
Lot’s is odd. A while back the department was
a part of R U OK? Day and of course as always
Free Food Mondays has run every week, well
except the week of the power outage that is.
With the final go in Week 12 planned to be a
bit more special than usual. I have to thank all
of the volunteers who have helped me week
to week, from the every week volunteers that
have helped all year to my fellow OBs who
have helped me out of tight spots.
The other semester long project has been
the NUS Student Mental Health Survey which
is aiming to get current data about the state of
students minds. It talks a couple of minutes to
fill out but every entry is more valuable knowledge,
you can fill it out online at: https://docs.
google.com/forms/d/1Qufi0vCWcxYH2Pbm_
yuknt5P3uixX1CxZXXv0N37EuE/viewform
I think the only thing I have left to say
is that if you need anything during the more
stressful period of exams, the door to the welfare
Office is always open.
That was a lie the last thing I have to say
is good luck to next year’s Welfare officers Paul
and Sarah who have amazing plans for next
year and who I know will do an amazing job.
Women’s Department: Edith Shephard &
Sally-Anne Jovic
The Women’s Department is slowing down
as we get towards the end of the semester,
and starting to prepare for next year. We’re
currently finishing off our Trigger Warnings
campaign, working with next year’s Women’s
Officers Edie and Zoe, and doing some housekeeping
activities to make the Department and
the Women’s Room all the better for next year.
As we’re currently in the planning stages of
next year’s activities, so we are looking for ideas
and suggestions for events, campaigns, and
activities, as well as volunteers! If you have any
ideas or want to get involved, please email us at
msa-womens@monash.edu.
Activities: Amy Clyne & Eliza Gale
For our final Activities report of 2013, we’d like
to reflect on how our department has grown,
and had much fun along the way! From Surfin’
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
31

STUDENT AFFAIRS
MSA to Oktoberfest, from free yoga to AXP,
the department has had many great new legacies
added to it, which we’re sure will continue
on through the ages. More recently, we had an
excellent Oktoberfest, and sold out AXP II in
record time, with 1750 tickets gone less than
48 hours after they first went on sale. As 2014
looms, we’d like to thank every single person
who’s attended one of our events, our extraordinary
committee for their dedication and hard
work, and Amy for her tireless passion in making
Activities the best it can be this year. Let’s
hope 2014 will be just as great, and wish Eliza
and Sam luck for the year ahead.
see lots of MAPSers there!!!
We’d like to take this opportunity to
thank everyone for supporting our division this
year, using our fantastic facilities and making
MAPS such as wonderful place. Good luck
with your exams, enjoy the summer break and
we look forward to seeing you all again next
year.
Mature Age and Part Time (MAPS): Rebecca
Doyle-Walker
As we wind up another successful year in
MAPS it’s a good time to reflect on what we’ve
done this year. We held two charity morning
teas and raised almost $200. We continued
with our popular morning teas almost every
week which were organised by our social
secretary Ange brilliantly. We also held several
lunches each semester which were always well
attended. There was also a Trivia night held
which was poorly attended but those that did
had a great time!! We were also able to send
three committee members to the MASNA
conference in September.
The annual election was recently
conducted and the 2013/14 MAPS Executive
Committee members are:
President: Rebecca Doyle-Walker
Vice President: Monique Bell
Treasurer: John Pollard
Social Secretary: Angela Schuster
Publicity Officer: John Storey
Committee Member: Paul Hague
Committee Member: Katherine Wozniak
The new committee is full of energy and
enthusiasm and looking forward to a fantastic
2014. A big thank you goes out to our outgoing
committee members Sascha Rouillon and Kade
Moore for their contribution to MAPS this
year.
But before then we are having our end of
year function on Thursday 24 October – the
details are in the MAPS lounge so we hope to
32
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

STUDENT AFFAIRS
AN OPEN LETTER TO MONASH
UNIVERSITY SENIOR MANAGEMENT:
Dear Chancellor Alan Finkel & Co.,
We were thrilled to hear that you have recently awarded an honorary Doctorate of Laws to big businessman John Gandel.
Bold moves such as this are an important part of the Monash tradition of bequeathing honorary degrees on notorious and powerful figures such as that
awarded to Victorian State Premier Henry “The Hangman” Bolte back in the 1967.
Cementing Monash Uni’s world-class relationship with the private sector should be a priority in a difficult financial environment and we applaud you
and your Senior Management colleagues for your initiative.
However, while bestowing such a prestigious degree upon Gandel is certainly a step in the right direction, we think it is time for Monash to expand its
business relationships further. We believe that you need to be even bolder.
Now that we have cemented our close ties to Melbourne’s richest person, we think it’s time for Monash to go national and honour Australia’s richest
individual: Gina Rinehart.
Through sheer hard-work and brilliant entrepreneurship, Rinehart has been the key driving force behind the Australian economy for decades.
Her wealth far surpasses Gandel’s meagre billions, and a close relationship with her could provide Monash with a mountain of resources to potentially
fund increased salaries for our hard-working Senior Management team, consultants and lawyers who all do their best to keep Monash profitable in the
difficult circumstances of the 21st century.
It is important to note that Rinehart is not just about digging holes and selling coal. As the biggest shareholder of Fairfax media, she also stands for
diverse big business interests.
Moreover, Rinehart is 100% committed to expanding mining in our State. She owns almost 20% of Lakes Oil, which is planning dangerous but nonetheless
exciting coal seam gas operations in Victoria.
Recently we saw Western Australian Universities put Monash to shame in bonding with Rinehart’s miner friend Andrew Forrest who gave them tens
of millions in donations for research.
In contrast, Monash has only been able to secure $5 million from two mining corporations for its new-fangled Division of Mining this year.
A relationship with Rinehart would complement Monash’s already existing partnership with the Coal Industry, which includes having former coal
mining boss Ian Nethercote on our University Council.
Potential degrees for Rinehart might include: Business, Economics, Politics or even Journalism.
In summary, Monash must expedite its relationship with Australia’s greatest mining hero, or risk falling behind other Universities. We implore you to
go more boldly.
Yours in brilliance,
Monash students everywhere

SCIENCE
The World Food Prize, Monsanto and
Agricultural Biotechnology
Laura Aston
On October 18, three scientists responsible for breakthrough research in
agricultural biotechnology will be presented with the 2013 World Food
Prize, the most prestigious award in food security. The scientists are
pioneers of genetically modified (GM) food production, with links to GM
giants Monsanto and Syngenta. Does this spell the souring of The World
Food Prize, an organisation whose mission is to advance the quality,
quantity and availability of food that is nutritious and sustainable? Or is
there more to Monsanto than a monopoly on mono-strain seeds? This
development will undoubtedly further legitimise Monsanto’s exploits in
the realm of GM crops, a state of affairs that will no doubt exacerbate the
mistrust and hatred of protestors who have been taking to the streets in a
wave of international protests against Monsanto’s empire.
In 1992, biotechnology was defined in such a way that even
traditional processes like wine- and cheese-making, involving
the addition of cultures and bacteria to food, was considered biomanipulation.
While there may be purists out there who see cause for
concern in these mainstream practices, the majority of Monsanto sceptics
would not blink at the ethics of a humble glass of wine. It is the much
narrower, modern definition of biotechnology that the Monsanto-hate
is directed toward. Modern biotechnology involves gene manipulation
via two mechanisms: selective breeding or breeding improvements; and
manipulation of genetic patterns.
Much has been done to demonstrate the immediate advantages
of GM food. Indeed, it is the very promise of contributing to the fight
against hunger that has earned Monsanto’s scientists the prestigious
food award. There is no end to the possibilities for nutrient enrichment,
weather resistance, drought tolerance, yield increases and reduction of
production costs that genetic manipulation could entail. There is even
the advantage of reducing the demand for other evil inputs: fertiliser
and pesticides. Is there scope to see GM as a lesser evil, and the ethical
ambiguity of genetic manipulation a worthy trade-off for reducing world
hunger? Clearly those responsible for the award of the World Food Prize
believe so; or at least their pockets do. But first there are many questions
clouding a coherent discussion on the matter which must be answered
first.
Genetic modification of crops began in 1996. The reception to this
practice has been polarised. The European Union has condemned GM
food, citing environmental risks and ethics as its reasoning. As a result,
China has also refrained from adopting GM crops, relying on entry into
the EU trade market for a significant portion of its agricultural revenue.
In contrast, the United States and other parts of the American continents
have embraced GM technologies. While much praise is directed at
the potential for GM crops to combat food insecurity where the risk is
greatest, it is contradictory at best to note that the majority of GM crops
reside in Canada, the USA and Argentina. Australia has acted cautiously
in comparison to the USA, but seems to be slowly following the path of
the US. A two-hectare GM wheat trial in central Victoria, scheduled
for 2013 to 2015, will be the largest of its kind. A decision looms as to
whether Australia’s farmers will endorse or reject GM crops. It will not be
possible to take a middle way in GM production, since the nature of GM
crops is that they produce higher yields, thereby crowding out traditional
farmers who refuse to adopt the technology.
Major uncertainties reside in the long-term ramifications of
GM crop use. A report by the World Food Organisation cites several
concerning potentialities, including unpredictable demand for water and
nutrients, undesired gene transfers and mutations, transfer and creation of
allergens and ecological break-down as a result of favouring certain food
sources over others. Current GM practices are characterised by a lack of
controls for potential environmental snowball effects, and little academic
research into the safety of GM. Monsanto has conistently blurred the
facts, utilising the data of pseudo-environmental research bodies such as
the Climate Corporation – founded to assist farmers to produce more food
with fewer resources – to keep allegations of unsustainability at bay.
While there are clear advantages of GM food, the sources of
34 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

SCIENCE
public concern continue to be consciously ignored by Monsanto. This
lack of certainty surrounding the existence or nonexistence of longterm
environmental risks, which potentially outweigh the acclaimed
advantaged of yield-enhancing GM technology, makes it difficult for
the public to direct their outrage. Until such a time as Monsanto gives
me reason to believe – despite my antipathy of their ruthless crowding
out of small-holder farms and monopolisation of seeds – that the social
and environmental benefits of genetically modified food outweighed the
disadvantages then I would concede that there was no reason to reject
GM food production on the grounds of sustainability. Of course, this
would not justify its business ethics, but that is a topic warranting its
own discussion. Until then, I shall continue to employ the precautionary
principle with respect to my diet. Strictly local or organic puh-lease.
SCIENCE LESSONS FROM...
GAME OF THRONES
Chris Pase
The fictional world of Westeros where Game of Thrones is set is subject
to unusual seasonal patterns. We’ve been warned: winter is coming, and
it could last generations. Seasons are mostly controlled by a planet’s tilt
towards the Sun, with Uranus’ North Pole pointed towards the Sun for
42 years and then away from it for another 42. Unusually long seasons are
definitely possible, but the seasons on Westeros seem to arrive unpredictably
and vary dramatically in length. Astrophysicist Greg Laughlin of The
University of California says a ‘wobbly’ axis like the one on Mars can vary
season length, but only makes gradual changes over thousands of years,
not the random fluctuations seen on Westeros. Laughlin has suggested
that if Westeros were part of a multi-planet system, with its orbit being
pulled out and affected by the planets around it, wild season change could
occur. Similarly, a group of graduate students from John Hopkins University
in the United States have released a research paper concluding that
Westeros orbits 2 suns; yielding an irregular orbit, meaning it is impossible
to predict the length of seasons.
***
Another weather related phenomenon, the ice wall, seems harder to
explain from a scientific point of view. Over 200m tall and almost 500km
long, the ice wall is an impressive natural defence against the North.
According to Engineer Mary Alibert from the Ice Drilling Program Office
at Dartmouth College, “even at very cold temperatures, large ice masses
deform under their own weight,” let alone “hold its original shape for
thousands of years.” The ice wall is far too big to support its own weight,
with a slope needed to support a structure that high. This means the wall
would be 40 times wider than it is high – still an impressive structure but
slightly easier to scale. Once again gravity spoils all the fun, and with no
evidence to suggest gravity varies greatly between Westeros and Earth this
one has to be put down to the magic that helped create it.
***
The wildfire used in the battle at Blackwater Bay is strikingly similar to
ancient Greek fire, or the modern equivalent, napalm. Greek fire was used
by the Byzantines to sink rival ships, exactly as Tyrion did. Furthermore,
Greek fire was a closely guarded state secret, just as the Alchemist’s Guild
in King’s Landing controlled the creation of wildfire. While the makeup
of Greek fire was lost, it is most commonly believed to be petroleum based
like napalm. All these weapons are activated in two stages; firstly the
delivery of the flammable substances, and secondly a reactant to ignite
the fuel. George R.R. Martin makes his wildfire a little more dramatic,
its haunting green glow turning into an eerie explosive light show. This
colouring wouldn’t be hard to achieve, with compounds such as trimethyl
borate producing emerald flames and copper chloride providing the green
tinge to the liquid.
***
Incest. It appears to be one of Martin’s favourite plot drivers. One of the
sub-characters, Craster, is a wildling who continually reproduces with his
daughters. And their daughters. This means some of his daughters are also
his granddaughters, and sisters with their own mothers. A slightly less
confusing case is Joffrey Baratheon, said to be the love child of his mother
Cersei Lannister and her brother Jaime despite the former being married
to king Robert Baratheon. Robert Baratheon has a host of bastard children
all born to other women, all of which take after his father in having
dark hair. Yet Joffrey has blonde hair (as well as his two siblings) like his
mother and uncle (father?). It is possible that while Robert has dominant
dark hair alleles (groups of genes), these may mask blonde alleles.
However, given none of his bastard children have blonde hair but all of
Cersei’s children do, the odds are stacked against him. That and the scene
where Jamie shows off his swordsmanship to his sister Cersei.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
35

SCIENCE
A SCIENTIFIC
MANIFESTO:
THESE ARE MY
HOPES AND DREAMS
Nicola McCaskill
Science was
my first love.
I was raised by
two scientist
parents in a
household
where fatherdaughter
bonding time
involved
diagrams of
pathogens
and antibodies.
There was never a time that I remember wanting to be anything other
than a scientist, and my favourite childhood fantasy consisted of hanging
out in labs, curing various diseases and winning the Nobel Prize. As I
got older, though, I realised maybe there were areas outside of discovery
and research where science could do with a bit of work. My present day
ultimate fantasy is to be instrumental in a paradigm shift in society’s
perception of science. I don’t want to live in a world where politicians
that do not comprehend the basics of climate science make catastrophic
decisions, where the average citizen lacks the skills to distinguish between
pseudoscience and the real thing, and where young people are scared
or pushed out of studying science or considering it as a career. I’d much
rather these problems weren’t around for me to try and solve, so that I
could get back to more important scientific pursuits, like curing cancer or
tracking down the last unicorn. But since they are, in my last column as
science editor for Lot’s Wife, here are just a few of the problems I hope to
play a part in solving (should I ever manage to graduate from this place):
Education
Science should be the most exciting thing ever for kids. Science contains
the answers to their questions, the constant thrill of learning something
new, the sense of wonder at the world and universe. And while there are
some fantastic extracurricular programs for kids, it’s a testament to anyone
involved in science that they didn’t have all enthusiasm for the subject
smacked out of them early by the school system. Learning science should
be fun and exciting, not dull and rage inducing.
Science education in schools is a massive and complex issue. At the
heart of it, I think it’s vital that we acknowledge the fact that the majority
of school students do not study science in VCE. While it would be great
to change that, there’s little reason for students to take it at year 12 unless
they plan to study a science-based degree afterwards. So, let’s just work
with the assumption that most students will stop studying science for
good at year 10. That gives us up until then to give each student the skills
required to understand scientific issues in society and the media, to be
able to determine scientific fact from fiction, and even to feel comfortable
voting on these issues. I don’t believe the current curriculum can achieve
this.
The immediate reaction to science as a subject is often that it’s
just too hard - that it’s a field consisting only of geniuses and the average
person need not apply. I wish I could tell people who feel this way just
how many morons I’ve come across in my science degree, but I digress.
A teacher who’s scared of teaching science to a classroom of students
who are scared of learning science does not exactly make for a magical
learning experience filled with wonder and joy. The risk of not adequately
educating school leavers is far greater than people just not understanding
how super cool science is. The endgame is where a person who refers to
carbon dioxide as “weightless” is elected as Prime Minister.
The Media
I don’t want to blame the so-called singular entity of ‘the media’ for
perpetuating myths and shitty pseudoscience, since it can only reflect
what’s already around and what people want to see. It’s a vicious cycle
when those reporting science in the media do not generally have a science
background, and those reading it do not generally have the skills
36 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

SCIENCE
to determine what is reliable information and what is bullshit. It bothers
me a little when people (both in science and in the media) are pleasantly
surprised that I am studying science and journalism because I want to be
a science journalist. It’s more standard practice for someone to start out
in one field and slowly merge into the other. With that in mind, I think
we really do need to push harder for quality science journalism, to benefit
both the science community and the general public.
The main issue I have with the mainstream media’s reporting on
scientific issues is that of false balance. In journalism classes, it’s drilled
into us from the beginning that we should always give equal weight to all
sides of a story. For the most part, this is the essence of fair reporting, but
when it comes to science, all sides of the story do not necessarily have
equal veracity. When the overwhelming consensus among climate scientists
is that climate change is driven by human activity, and you find one
crazy loon with a PhD who disagrees, giving both sides equal time is
not balance – it’s misleading. When immunologists agree that
vaccines are beneficial and very rarely harmful, and one mother
believes they cause autism – without any evidence to back her
up – giving that one person a platform from which to give
their baseless opinions is genuinely harmful to the community.
It is part of a journalist’s job to determine
whose opinions are valid and deserve to be heard
by the wider community. It’s their job to
distinguish between truth and fiction,
not to perpetuate absolute lies
under the guise of journalistic
balance and integrity. The
only way to improve this is to
improve the general standard of
scientific literacy, both in the media
and throughout the general public.
Women
This is not an issue I want to dwell on, since anything I have to say about
it has probably been said before. There does seem to be the general idea
floating around that, simply because it’s the year 2013, sexism in science
is no longer a thing. This kind of thinking is a logical fallacy if there ever
were one.
An observation: in first year laboratories, female students tend to
doubt themselves. They ask their supervisors if they’re doing the right
thing at every step. They double, even triple check their measurements. If
something goes wrong, they blame themselves. Male students tend to be
overconfident. They don’t read the entire practical before starting, they
rush their measurements, and if they’re unsure, they just try it anyway. If
something goes wrong, they blame anything – the equipment, the materials,
the practical, the demonstrator – but themselves. I don’t think this
is surprising in the least. Whether you notice it or not, multiple studies
have shown science is a gender biased subject. Teachers and parents tend
to encourage boys in maths and science, believing they have some natural
aptitude in those, whereas girls get more encouragement in English and
the arts. Given the amount of pressures and social cues telling young
women that they are not naturally talented at science, it stands to reason
that even those who have chosen to study it at university have internalised
these ideas – in stark contrast to young men, who have never had
their natural scientific ability questioned.
Growing up, I felt a distinct lack of the presence of a female role
model in science. Any woman whose work I did admire seemed to get
screwed over, anyway – Rosalind Franklin as a prime example. The more
I learn about the history of science, the more I see that there actually
were a number of absolutely brilliant women doing incredible work over
hundreds of years – it’s just that their presence tends to be erased in the
way history is remembered.
Science is not an easy field for women
to enter. It is inherently difficult, for
example, to return to research
after a woman takes any considerable
break to have children.
This is due to the nature of how
science works and not any kind
of insidious action by the
patriarchy, but it’s enough to
put many brilliant women
off. Whether we like it or
not, we also have to realise
there is still a general culture
of sexism within the scientific
community. Sometimes it’s subtle, sometimes less
so, but I do believe nearly every woman in science will
have felt it at some point. Indeed, the next guy to imply I’m
only where I am because I want to find myself a ‘rich husband’
is getting a test tube to the face (as if a research scientist is going to be
raking it in, anyway).
It is absolutely vital to me to do my best to become a visible,
positive female role model for other young women thinking of entering
science. Whilst there are some amazing women doing fantastic work in
science communication, I think it’s high time one of us achieved the
mainstream success and recognition of people like Dr. Karl, Brian Cox
and David Attenborough. I want a future where being female is not any
kind of barrier to becoming involved in science.
Finally, I want to thank any readers that I may have had over the
year, everyone who’s contributed their fabulous stories, and the amazing
team at Lot’s Wife I’ve gotten to know and love during my time as science
editor. It’s been an amazing experience and I’m so, so grateful for having
been able to share my passion with you all.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
37

SUBHEADING
ARTPOP:
Warholian Gaga
Fabrice Wilmann
Lady Gaga has always positioned herself as an eccentric artist following
in the footsteps of David Bowie, Michael Jackson and Madonna. With a
debut album entitled The Fame, it comes as no surprise that Gaga is infatuated
with celebrity culture and pop culture prominence. In the most
recent phase of her musical career, Gaga is attempting to cement her
legacy through the marriage of art and music. Citing the work of artist
Andy Warhol, Gaga, 27, is setting out “to alter the human experience
with social media” and to “bring art culture into pop in a reverse Warholian
expedition” to be henceforth known as ARTPOP.
The movement known as pop art began in Britain during the mid-
1950s before being appropriated by artists such as Roy Lichtenstein and
Andy Warhol. Flourishing in a new setting (the New York
art scene), the movement began to steer the concept of
‘culture’ away from elite groups through its use of imagery
from popular culture, such as advertising, news and ordinary,
everyday objects. The elements of irony and kitsch
utilised in this new art form can be seen in Andy Warhol’s
most famous piece, Campbell’s Soup Cans. This utilisation
of found objects and images is similar to the work of the
European Dada movement in the 1910s. Constantly referring
to Warhol as an inspiration for her outlandish videos and fashion,
Gaga has her own creative production team, the Haus of Gaga, which is
modelled on Andy Warhol’s Factory.
From an early age, Gaga immersed herself in the world of art,
writing a thesis on the work of Damien Hirst and the New York-based
photographer Spencer Tunick. Now Gaga is beginning a new movement
that depicts classic and modern art in popular culture to educate the
masses about the power and history of art. Tunick recently expressed his
approval of the singer’s use of her “phenomenal success.” He declared
that “any time there is a new perception within the mass culture, there is
growth and enlightenment. Whether it’s through museums, mass media
and, in Lady Gaga’s case, music, the inclusion of depth and art into a
viral expressive mass outlet like pop music is invaluable in the expansion
of new ideas.”
Tunick said Gaga’s involvement would “bring a new perception or
an experience of the avant garde to a mass audience… [and] any artistic
intervention into the masses will only move societies in borderline
conservative countries to have more acceptance towards human rights
issues, women’s rights and artistic freedom. Art cannot change the world
within a bubble. It takes artists like Warhol, Koons and Abramovic to
make strong waves of change in conservative societies.” And it is these
very artists that Gaga has worked with to integrate the spheres of art and
music.
“ARTPOP could
very well have
a revolutionary
impact on the
way art is viewed
and shared in the
modern world”
Famed artist Jeff Koons designed the cover for Gaga’s upcoming
album, ARTPOP. The artist created a sculpture of Gaga in the same
ilk as his previous work entitled Michael Jackson and
Bubbles, a 1988 series of three life-size gold-leaf plated
porcelain statues of the sitting singer cuddling Bubbles, his
pet chimpanzee. Depicted as the goddess Venus, Gaga is
seen giving birth to Koons’ The Gazing Ball, which looks
like an ornament coloured globe. This portrayal of Venus
was altered by Koons in a similar manner as Edouard
Manet – the father of modern art – did to Titian’s Venus
in his painting Olympia (1863). Whereas Manet brought
the image up to date by turning Venus into a hooker, Koons has done it
by transforming her into a pop star. The background images of the cover
take inspiration from Botticelli’s The Birth of Venus, which portrayed
the goddess of love emerging from the sea as a fully-grown woman, and
Gian Lorenzo Bernini’s Apollo and Daphne, which portrays the battle
between chastity (Daphne) and sexual desires (Apollo).
Gaga’s foray into the artistic world was announced through her
work with Serbian artist Marina Abramovic. Respected as the ‘grandmother
of performance art’, Abramovic seeks to promote the preservation
of long durational work. Gaga immersed herself in this work
by participating in the Abramovic method, which is designed to train
artists for physical endurance. “She is a hardcore student.” Abramovic
said of Gaga. “I had to blindfold her, and she was in the forest [naked] for
three hours, eaten by mosquitoes and spiders, scratched by the bushes. It
38
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

MUSIC
was quite incredible.”
Gaga’s growing fondness for depicting art in music videos, which
was already apparent in the use of Botticelli’s Venus in ‘Judas’, is even
more pronounced in her latest video ‘Applause.’ Directed by Inez and Vinoodh,
the video includes references to the aforementioned Venus, Warhol’s
depiction of Marilyn Monroe, the black swan, and John Galliano’s
2009 fashion show. Gaga has also injected her music and presence into
the world of films, appearing in Robert Rodriguez’s 2013 film Machete
Kills. A trailer for the film utilises a new Gaga song, ‘Aura’ that infuses
Spanish instruments into EDM production by ‘Clarity’ DJ Zedd.
Slated for an 8 November release, ARTPOP could very well have a
revolutionary impact on the way art is viewed and shared in the modern
world. Through mass appeal, Lady Gaga is uniting fashion (meat dress),
art, music, technology (social media) and performance into one globally
shared experience. The inspiration of Andy Warhol is well noted in the
lyrics “pop culture was in art, now art’s in pop culture in me.” With the
veneration of art as her ultimate goal, ARTPOP looks likely to fortify the
legacy of Lady Gaga as a true artist.
THE MISTIQUE OF THE ARTIST:
Lorde
Fabrice Wilmann
Recently dubbed ‘The New Queen of Alternative’, 16 year-old New
Zealand native Lorde revealed in an interview with Billboard Magazine
her desire to remain an enigma to the world. With the release of her
debut album Pure Heroine, and the mounting success of singles ‘Royals’,
‘Tennis Court’, and now ‘Team’ across the world, Lorde is positioning
herself as the antithesis of the modern archetypal pop star.
In her cover feature with the magazine, she disclosed that “in a
perfect world, I would never do any interviews… and probably there
would be one photo out there of me, and that would be it.” Lorde,
real name Ella Yelich-O’Connor, prefers the impression of mystique,
believing that “mystery is more interesting.” This aspiration has never
been more pronounced than in this day and age, where over-sharing on
Twitter, Instagram and Facebook has left little to the imagination. Lorde
astutely recognises that “people respond to something that intrigues
them instead of something that gives them all the information —
particularly in pop, which is like the genre for knowing way too much
about everyone and everything.”
In this way, Lorde can be seen as the anti-Miley Cyrus. The latter
has established herself as a constant presence in the media spotlight
since her provocative and poorly executed mash-up performance of ‘We
Can’t Stop’ and ‘Blurred Lines’ with Robin Thicke at the 2013 Video
Music Awards. This has been followed expeditiously by a disturbing
music video whereby she rides naked on a wrecking ball and seduces
a sledgehammer, a series of highly sexualised photo shoots with famed
photographer Terry Richardson, an apparent break-up between former
fiancé Liam Hemsworth, a bevy of interviews and music performances
and a recent – completely unprovoked – attack on celebrity victims of
mental illness (Amanda Bynes and Sinead O’Connor) that resulted
in all-out warfare with pop icon O’Connor. Many people see Cyrus’
behaviour as an attempt to annihilate the association with her eternal
good-girl alter ego Hannah Montana, whilst others just view it as a
cry for attention and a marketing ploy to bolster sales. It seems clear
however that all this inflammatory behaviour is simply a way to hide the
fact that Miley Cyrus has no real lasting talent.
In the comparatively small number of interviews that she has
done, Lorde has revealed only morsels of information that provide us
with a snapshot image of who she truly is; an obsession with reading as a
child, how writing short stories since the age of ten has helped with her
song writing, and her love of electronic, pop and hip-hop music. “You
can step into Kanye’s world and it’s like you being there,” Lorde muses,
admitting that she wants to make a “sweet, really cool rap song” in the
future. The singer also proclaimed her love of Nicki Minaj and Miley
Cyrus’ current hit ‘Wrecking Ball.’
Lorde’s live performances also display her rapport with simplicity.
Performing her song ‘Royals’ (a #1 hit on the U.S. Billboard charts) on
Good Morning America, the singer simply stands and delivers her lyrics
with conviction. Dressed in simple, one might say ‘old-lady clothes’,
the only movements are that of her hands, which seem to flow and
bounce eerily to the beat of her music. This performance underlines
Lorde’s immense talent, not only as a singer-songwriter, but also as a
true performer and captivating entertainer. These two attributes are not
always so easily intertwined, something that was made all too obvious
through Lana Del Rey’s largely criticised performance of ‘Video Games’
on Saturday Night Live.
Having shattered the record for longest weeks on the alternatives
song chart (a record previously held by Alanis Morisette’s 1995 classic
‘You Oughta Know’), Lorde has immersed herself in a torrent of
worldwide success and critical acclaim. However, it seems as though the
talented singer has managed to preserve her down-to-earth Kiwi persona
and not fall victim to the hazards of the music industry. Lorde has
remained true to her introverted self, presenting only a glimpse into the
brilliantly complex passages of her mind and of her young life.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
39

SUBHEADING
60 minutes with
Jennifer Kingwell
Dina Amin
Meet Jen Kingwell. Born in Darwin, raised in Canberra and now based
in Melbourne, Kingwell is gearing up for the release of her first single
off her debut solo EP, The Lotus Eaters, due for release early next
year. ‘Kissing in Tutus’ is a bold declaration of resistance and love
in the face of war and chaos and Kingwell is only a few weeks away
from releasing it at the Empress Hotel in Fitzroy. Formerly known as
one-half of the indie-cabaret sensation The Jane Austen Argument,
Kingwell will be joined on the night by her new band, The Garland
Thugs. Sitting inside her cosy flat – complete with Film Noir artworks,
scattered keyboards, an overstuffed bookcase dedicated to Jazz music
and an adorable black pussycat named Maceo – Jen openly discusses
her new tunes, The Jane Austen Argument, her nostalgia for Casio
keyboards, her fascination with Greek mythology and her upcoming
collaboration with Neil Gaiman – yes that Neil Gaiman.
It all started with a Casio keyboard. You know the one – that basic
beginner’s instrument with the “cheesy backing tracks.” Laughing, Jen
recalls her first instrument, the first medium that really kicked off her love
for music. She even wrote her first song on it: a country love ballad. How
old was she? “I was six,” she cackles. How cute. After graduating from the
school of Casio, Jen went on to study classical piano, a study that evolved
into the dream of wanting to play professionally. After high school, Jen
was accepted into the Canberra School of Music. However, halfway
through her degree, she dropped out. Her heart wasn’t in it anymore and
she had lost her perseverance. “I didn’t have the disposition to stay in a
music room by myself for eight hours a day, pumping out classical tunes.”
She then did the polar opposite and began a degree in Electronic Music
and Interactive Multimedia, where she stayed until graduation.
With a degree under her belt, Jen then took her boyfriend and bike
to Central Europe, where she rode the streets, sightseeing. After doing
a few odd jobs here and there, she returned to Australia, moved to
Melbourne in 2006 and went back to school to study a Masters of Communication.
It was at RMIT where she met Tom Dickens, a cabaret aficionado
who was in desperate need of a pianist for his upcoming show. They
formed a duo and started performing under the name ‘Tom and Jen,’ a
temporary title that was officially replaced with ‘The Jane Austen Argument.’
Did the name come to them whilst arguing about Miss. Austen
perhaps? Laughing, Jen replies “I’m a huge Jane Austen fan and Tom can’t
stand reading her. He is under the impression that all her novels are about
doilies and balls. We needed a name and Tom came up with it – I don’t
know if he had been thinking about it for a while or if it just came to him
– but we were at the pub and he was like ‘How about The Jane Austen
Argument?’ and I was like ‘That’s a terrible idea!’ but it somehow caught
on.”
A blend of cabaret and indie folk music, Tom and Jen were taken
under the wing of the infamous Amanda Palmer, a kinship that led to the
duo supporting Amanda on her Amanda Palmer Goes Down Under tour in
2011.
After three years together which saw the release of two EP’s and one
LP, Somewhere Under The Rainbow (recorded in Seatle last year), Tom and
Jen separated with the motivation of beginning solo careers. Will we be
seeing The Jane Austen Argument again? “Absolutely! We haven’t officially
stopped doing stuff.” So it’s like an indefinite hiatus? “Yep, exactly.”
In saying this, Jen emphasises the importance of moving away from
the Jane Austen sound in her solo release. “I wanted to pursue something
that wasn’t necessarily right for The Jane Austen Argument. I want to
explore different sonic possibilities and weave in electronic elements. I
want to push the limits of a three-minute pop song and I want to work
with other musicians that are pushing the limits of their instruments.”
So what can we expect from the single launch with new band The
Garland Thugs? Jen answers with a big smile, “Apart from the audience
thinking ‘That was a fucking killer show!’ they can expect killer songs,
a killer band and a really intense set with real audience connection. It’s
also going to have a really lush, rich orchestral feel. Chad Blaster, my
drummer, brings this real hip-hop element in, so there’s a real hard groove
in there.” The band also features Jess Keeffe on electric cello and Adam
Rudegeair – Jen’s partner – on bass.
The single in question, ‘Kissing in Tutus’ is an ode to radical love in
40
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

MUSIC
the face of revolution. Jen’s poignant lyrics focus on the powerful image of
love as a tool of resistance. The words are supported by a beautiful piano
composition, a string section and light percussion. An anarchist’s anthem,
‘Kissing in Tutus’ celebrates infinite, universal emotion in a chaotic and
uncertain reality. The idea came to Jen when she was recording The Jane
Austen Argument’s debut LP in Seattle. “We lived in Seattle for around
six weeks and it was just when the Occupy Wall Street movement was
kicking off. It was really inspiring to see this totally like, complete grassroots
swelling of resistance. I was really fascinated. The single came to me
because I had the idea of this power of people who come together to resist
something and want to change something rattling around in my head.”
When she was at University, Jen was also a radical cheerleader for the
G20 protests, another image of resistance that inspired the theme of the
single. One particular image of the G20 protests stands out. “A while ago,
I discovered a photo – which I haven’t been able to find since – of me and
my partner at the time kissing in the street in our tutus. I just remember
one of the cheerleaders saying that that was her favourite moment from
the whole thing.” The beauty of ‘Kissing in Tutus’ is further solidified by
this deeply personal recollection.
While ‘Kissing in Tutus’ sees its official launch on Friday October
25, Jen’s debut solo EP, The Lotus Eaters, teases us a little more with its
release date. Expected in March, maybe even early April, The Lotus Eaters
takes its title from a much-loved story which Jen discovered as a child.
The Lotus Eaters, a short retelling of Homer’s original story of the same
name from his classic, The Odyssey, tells the tale of what happens to Odysseus’
men on a small island dominated by lotus plants. These plants are
narcotic and cause the men to become stoned, happily content in their
apathy. By using Odysseus’ men as a metaphor, Jen’s EP is fundamentally
about overcoming obstacles and temptation, avoiding indifference and
lethargy and being enlightened about a specific purpose, “waking up from
a dream that is keeping you down.” Funnily enough, most of the tracks
off the new EP came to her in a dream, hence the essential themes of the
record: Dreaming and awakening.
Before we round up our interview, Jen lets slip of a little teaser that
is only mildly exciting: “One of the tracks on the EP is going to be an instrumental
improvisation to a spoken word piece that I wrote and which
Neil Gaiman will narrate.” Seeing as Mr. Gaiman is married to Jen’s good
mate Amanda Palmer, this collaboration really doesn’t come as a surprise.
Oh man, March/April is too far away, what a tease.
Jennifer Kingwell will be launching her brand new single ‘Kissing in
Tutus’ at the Evelyn Hotel on Friday October 25. Her debut EP The
Lotus Eaters will be released next year.
ANIMAUX
Live @ The Workers Club
Leah Phillips
‘Alaska’ is the latest single from Melbourne’s Animaux (pronounced
an-ee-mo) produced by John Castle and Rosce James Irwin (The Cat
Empire). The band of seven know how to pull a crowd, after countless
packed out residences at The Evelyn over the past year or so. Tonight’s
gig was no exception, with the band comfortably selling out The Workers
Club a week before the show. Come 9pm, bodies’ filled the band room
to its stylishly exposed wooden rafters, and there was a distinct feeling of
relaxed excitement among the masses.
Supporting acts included self-proclaimed ‘progressive cosmic soul’
band Ghost Orkid, and eight-piece folk troupe Velma Grove. There was
a bit of a sad vein through Velma Groves set, as it was the last show for a
few members of the band. Nonetheless, the optimistic bunch played songs
from their debut album, Older, with enthusiasm. The lush vocal harmonies
they produce live are beautiful, led by vocalist and banjo player,
Maxie Roberts, with an Angus Stone-esque tone.
Animaux hit the stage and BAM, a huge force field of happy sounds
filled the room for the solid hour-long set. You couldn’t help but be taken
along for the ride with the boppy, carnival-sounding sax and trumpet interaction
on ska soaked ‘Paradise’ and the popular ‘Lie To Me’ and ‘Wave
Of Change’ had fans singing along. Mid-set they covered American
sisters, Haim with a gutsier version of ‘The Wire’.
Animuax’s infectious tunes had people crowd surfing, jumping on
mates’ shoulders, and dancing uncontrollably. They ended their set with
the new single ‘Alaska’ featuring the best percussion instrument going
round, the cowbell. Before coming back for more in an encore shortly
after, they rounded up the night with a huge rendition of ‘Questions &
Exclamation Marks’. With members of Velma Grove and the audience
jumping up on the tiny stage and playing whatever instruments they
could find, or just dancing along with them.
After the euphoric set, Animaux, Velma Grove and Ghost Orkid
members mingled with punters and friends, while most just headed to the
bar to rehydrate.
Animaux launch their EP Vale Street at The Northcote Social Club on
December 5th with Albert Salt, and are also playing at this years Inca
Roads Music Festival, Nov 29 - Dec 1.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
41

AN INTERVIEW WITH
SUBHEADING
CUT COPY
Linh Nguyen
Cut Copy’s fourth album, Free Your Mind, is a psychedelic dance record,
a radical celebration of youth counter-culture and the forms of cultural
practice which develop in and around the club. I spoke to Dan Whitford
and Mitchell Scott about their upcoming album, recording in Dave
Fridmann’s upstate New York studio, and being ‘bros’ with Alexander
Skarsgard.
Lot’s Wife: I saw your D.J set with World’s End Press at Pony on
Friday – it was great! How does it feel to play in smaller, local venues
back in Melbourne?
Dan: I guess we spend so much time now overseas, touring, that coming
home can be a bit strange sometimes, it feels sort of like coming back
down to earth.
Mitchell: It can be quite funny. It’s just the way it works. It’s pretty cool
to be able to catch a tram to the venue, or to do a show that doesn’t rely
on any sort of grand effects, or big staging and lighting designs – you have
to win over a smaller crowd right from the start.
Dan: And the music that we like are more underground and niche, so
they’re the kind of shows that probably we would have grown up going
to, enjoying electronic dance music live, so I guess it’s cool that we get to
do smaller shows that are a bit more targeted, rather than playing in big
arenas every time. The experience is different.
LW: I feel that Melbourne’s music scene in the last few years has been
particularly dynamic and interesting - how do you think it has changed
since when you were starting out as a band?
Dan: I think it’s changed each time we do a record, or each time we
come back from touring. In that sense we have quite a unique perspective
on how Melbourne’s music scene is constantly evolving. In terms of the
music that we make, when we started there wasn’t really anyone pushing
the boundaries of electronic music – now there’s quite a lot of people doing
interesting dance music, both on a larger, more commercial scale and
a smaller one. The underground scene when we first started was really just
‘indie’, so I feel that the possibilities are a lot more open now.
LW: I find what is interesting about Cut Copy’s sound is that you guys
have this dance, clubhouse, electro-pop vibe, but you infuse your music
– explicitly so on this latest album, although it’s certainly present in
In Ghost Colours and Zonoscope – with a somewhat spiritual sensibility.
Dan: I guess the spiritual aspect is subjective; everyone has their own
thing which resonates with them. Making this new record, for me, one
of the things I found interesting was the power of dance music – and the
sub-cultures surrounding it – to bring and unify people who otherwise
wouldn’t have that much in common together, on a dance floor, or in that
environment with the music when you’re there in that moment. As a
band, we’re trying to get back to the basics of what dance music is about,
what it’s been about since the 60s, 70s; the acid house days.
LW: In your press release, you spoke about counter-culture revolutions
and youth movements as a theme of the album. What is the idea
behind Free Your Mind?
42
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

MUSIC
Dan: I’m not sure when we first became aware that there was this thematic
link between the tracks as we were writing the new record. Part of
our approach to working on this record is trying to channel a time when
music existed more in the real world; the notion of music as a medium to
push youth culture out there to actually do things, and make the world
better, even becoming a catalyst for social change. That’s not necessarily
what we expect that to happen with this record, I don’t think you can
pre-engineer that kind of thing – it’s more just a celebration of that idea,
that ethos. I feel the way people receive and explore music nowadays has
become disengaged; it’s too easy and readily available.
LW: Where did the idea for placing huge billboards displaying the
phrase “Free Your Mind” – in remote areas of the Californian desert,
Chile, Western Australia, Mexico City, Wales and Detroit – come
from? It’s a very inspired concept.
Mitchell: I guess that’s another extension of having things exist in the
real world, in contrast to having things available on cue and on demand
in a virtual space. We had this idea of people making this mini odyssey,
trekking out into the desert or where ever to listen to our new track - it
was putting this challenge out there for people to go out into the wilderness
and actively experience our music. Of course it was an advertising
experiment as well. Tim had always wanted to put a billboard in the
desert when he was an art student, and as a band we wanted to do something
which could cover the corners of the globe. Partly, it came from a
place of thinking that if we could put a billboard in Sydney or Melbourne
– that’s what our record label had the budget for – if we could take that
away, and do the opposite instead, and put our billboards in the most
remote, the worst ‘advertising’ locations. Rather than having a billboard
telling you to do something, or buy something, our billboards essentially
tell you nothing – it doesn’t even tell you what it is about. In essence, we
use the internet to drive people to the billboard, and flip or subvert that
relationship around.
Dan: It’s also a reflection of where we are at in this moment in time. I
think, as a band, we had become a bit bored of the way new tracks were
being premiered – things just came and went in the space of 24 hours.
Our attention span has become so short. As individuals, we are also susceptible
to that, and what’s always stuck for me are things which have an
interesting idea behind it. So this allowed us to have some fun with new
concepts, and hopefully capture our audience’s attention as well.
LW: I know for your last album, Zonoscope, you shut away in an
industrial warehouse for a few months. What was the process behind
creating this new record? How was recording and working with Dave
Fridmann in New York?
Dan: Like last time, we set up our own space – it wasn’t a big, abandoned
warehouse like the last one, it was more suited to-
Mitchell: This one had heating.
Dan: It had heating, it had carpet -
Mitchell: It was still all our own gear, so in that sense it was a similar
concept –a space where we could just record by ourselves.
Dan: We spent a couple of months doing that, and then once we got
things to a certain point we went across to the U.S to work with Dave
Fridmann in his studio in upstate New York. It was this sort of self sufficient
artist commune; a house in the middle of the forest which had a
studio on the ground floor and living space upstairs. I guess the idea is that
any band that goes there, stays there and lives there. It was something we
had never done before, and it was a cool way to finish the record.
Mitchell: It was actually really funny, imagining bands like ‘The Flaming
Lips’ or ‘MGMT’ actually living in the same tiny shared living space. The
whole idea is that it’s supposed to be like a communal, collective camping
experience, so bands who were uncomfortable sharing rooms together, or
wanted to be divas, – well, they’re not the bands Dave wanted to be working
with.
Dan: It’s quite hilarious though, because they were essentially kids
bedrooms. It was great for us – cooking meals together, going grocery
shopping together. It was like a sharehouse.
LW: So I saw the film clip for ‘Free Your Mind’ – I thought it was
absolute genius, simultaneously hilarious and disturbing. What was it
like working with Alexander Skarsgard?
Dan: Yeah, I think there are a lot of people in the same boat, including
us. We met him when we were touring the last record. He came to one of
our shows in Rio, and the promoter was like – ‘you have to meet this guy’,
so this massive Swedish man comes in and tells us how much he loves our
music. It was strange, having this guy who was obviously much more famous
than us, coming in and telling us how much of a fan he was. But we
hung out with him after the show, and we just became bros after that, and
became really good friends. So when we came to be doing another clip,
we contacted him to see if he would be interested, and he was psyched. It
was really just another chance for us to hang out.
LW: You guys are touring at the end of the month – the U.S, and around
Europe, promoting your new album. How does this album differ to your
previous ones?
Dan: For this album, part of my inspiration was getting back to Melbourne,
and re-immersing and reconnecting with my life. I guess I fell
back in love with the idea of underground music, the scenes and subcultures,
and we tried to connect that with our love of old school acid
house, early rave culture, and dance music.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
43

FILM & TV
MOVIES FOR THE MODERN GRADUATE
Patricia Tobin
Alas, for many of us, the time remaining in this semester marks our last
weeks as university students. The final hurdle of major essays and exams
will be a bittersweet experience for some, and perhaps it will venture
towards the usual terrain of the exasperated dread for many. Later on
this year, we are rewarded for passing our exams with a piece of paper
that indicates our past few years of academic achievement. But what
next? Graduating is terrifying, and the “aimless grad” is an aspect we can
all identify with. While that honours option or post-graduate degree is
looking strangely inviting at this time, maybe it would be best to grimly
confront the daunting notion of the “real world” with a little wisdom
from the movies.
Liberal Arts (Josh Radnor, 2012)
How I Met Your Mother’s Josh Radnor writes, directs and stars in this film
as Jesse, a jaded 35-year-old college admissions officer who visits his alma
mater. The almost-romance storyline between Jesse and a bright, young
drama student named Zibby (Elizabeth Olsen) takes the forefront of the
film, but most strikingly and endearingly, Liberal Arts displays the struggles
of romanticising the past. Sure, your university experience was a blast, but
leaving university has made you a different person and the community
you were once part of is no longer there. The addictive pull of nostalgia
also horrifyingly applies to many twenty-somethings of today (I’m looking
at you, Instagram user who tags #nostalgia on #ThrowbackThursday).
Liberal Arts earnestly shows that reminiscing the past is common for all
of us, but perhaps looking towards the future really isn’t that bad either.
Also, from the title alone, Liberal Arts gives reference to great works of
literature from Romantic poets to David Foster Wallace, which is a huge
treat for English majors. However, the film is fairly problematic in its
portrayal of women (it fails the Bechdel test, for one), but as a delightful
take on university, books, love and life, Liberal Arts is still a pretty great
movie for any grad.
Frances Ha (Noah Baumbach, 2013)
In a post-Girls world, the storyline of white, twenty-something girls who
are scrambling to find stability in their life is becoming increasingly stale.
But Frances Ha reassuringly shows that while modern life can be difficult,
it can also be quite lovely and, oddly enough, fun. This black-and-white
flick follows New Yorker Frances (Greta Gerwig), an aspiring dancer,
who has trouble with money and maintaining friends. Frances is a likeable
protagonist, and she is the kind of person that eats cereal for dinner
and thinks it’s fine (we’ve all done that at some point). At one point,
desperate for cash, Frances returns to her former college to help out with
orientation and lives in her old dorm. It is a briefly poignant moment that
questions if there is any real growth or change, for Frances or otherwise,
from undergraduate to “adult”. Frances’s character plainly shows that how
you encounter your problems as an adult is really quite similar to what you
are doing now. Frances remains hopeful throughout, which could come
off as naïve, but it certainly becomes the best way for her to confront her
problems. The film also has a John Hughes moment: an unexpected musical
number where Frances dances down the streets of New York to David
Bowie’s Modern Love. Frances Ha carries a sense of optimism and charm
that Girls struggles to have, and the film is enjoyable for any graduate who
wants a peek into the future; the world of a twenty-something.
The Graduate (Mike Nichols, 1967)
As cliché as it seems, The Graduate is arguably the perfect movie for the
modern graduate. This 60s classic consists of a timid, indecisive graduate
facing the troubles of an ailing society. The themes of the film revolve
around the social anxieties and stark generational differences of a pre-
Vietnam America, but it can easily be applied to contemporary society.
Dustin Hoffman plays Ben, a college graduate returning home in Los Angeles.
He is unsure about the future, feels alienated, and appears to have
no plans for his life. Ben is eventually exploited, manipulated, seduced
(both literally and figuratively) and betrayed by a corrupted older generation,
symbolised by Mrs. Robinson (Anne Bancroft). The generation gap
of the sixties is evidently encapsulated with Ben’s attempt to find a way
to live his life, and his parents’ and Mrs. Robinson’s decadent Californian
lifestyle. The Simon & Garfunkel soundtrack, of course, is remarkable.
The memorable closing scene, featuring ‘The Sound of Silence’, is deeply
haunting, and it precisely expresses the younger generation’s journey
towards an unpredictable, ambiguous future. The Graduate captures the
uncertainty that comes with youth that is undeniably relevant to our
world today, and to every modern graduate too.
Honourable mentions: An Education (Lone Scherfig, 2009), The
Breakfast Club (John Hughes, 1985).
44
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

SUBHEADING
NOW YOU SEE ME
Levi Truong
Do you believe in Magic?
Well, no, of course not, silly fool. The point is not to believe in
the magic, but to be entranced by the trickery behind the illusion. To
deconstruct the process and make visible the deception would benefit no
one past the initial amusement, thus making miserable geezers of us all.
Now You See Me is the latest comeback (or, if you’d like,
redemption) for director Louis Leterrier of Transporter fame and Clash
of the Titans shame. The scene opens with four self-assured, practiced
magicians/tricksters: J. Atlas (Jesse Eisenberg), the illusionist; Merritt
McKinley (Woody Harrelson), a mentalist; Henley Reeves (Isla Fisher),
an escapist and Jack Wilder (James Franco the younger, Dave) as a
sleight-of-hand pickpocket – all being recruited by a brooding, enigmatic
hooded figure to be part of some kind of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
gang. The assemblage is inexplicably titled ‘The Four Horsemen’ (so I
guess they’re more like Adult Magical Ninja Horses).
Things get interesting for the AMNH as - now famous and funded
by insurance mega-millionaire Arthur Tressler (Michael Caine) - they
seemingly rob a bank in Paris and distribute the spoils to their supposedly
underprivileged Las Vegas audience (via bombastic cash storm). Needless
to say, this is all rather suspicious, and before anyone can say ‘alacazam’
the Horsemen are arrested and interrogated by FBI agent Dylan Rhodes
(Mark Ruffalo) and his new partner Alma Dray (Beginners beauty
Melanie Laurent). Predictably, they reveal nothing, because one must
not dishonour the Magician’s Code, so Rhodes enlists the help of a
magic debunker with a mystical yet pretentious name, Thaddeus Bradley
(Morgan Freeman). Spills and thrills and clashes occur, and what was
originally an innocent show becomes more thrilling when it appears their
tricks are no longer working to their advantage
Throughout the film, characters warn us with a heavy heart to avoid
“com[ing] in closer, because the closer you think you are, the less you’ll
actually see.” In order for the film to establish some kind of believability,
the director must navigate between what to portray, and what to leave
to the imagination. Two fundamental questions need to be asked: Can
it balance realism without losing the – for lack of a better word – magic
of film? To spend the entire film explaining how each trick was executed
would be a bore (and perhaps not even a movie), but to then leave
everything unexplained and for the audience to fill in the gaps is lazy
and unrewarding. There is only so much one can expect from suspension
of disbelief; in return for turning your brain off the film must deliver
something worthwhile.
So, does the film achieve this tricky equilibrium?
A quick glance through recent reviews suggests the negatory, with
many finding the logical leap within the mechanics of the heist too much
to handle. Though this is understandable, it is unfortunate that many
have lost the ability to appreciate (or consider themselves too superior
for) popcorn flicks; isn’t magic itself inconsequential and, at the end of
the day, insignificant?
No, I’m not advocating the perpetuation of the mindless, moneychurning
monster that is the current Hollywood movie-making culture.
And yes, just because you want to turn your mind off and escape doesn’t
mean you can. However, this is different to the critics purposeful hyperscrutiny.
It ruins the enjoyment of the film (which is rich coming from
an aspiring film critic) when one refuses to forgive the minor flaws. It’s
okay to hate these films when you really can’t overlook all the gimmicks
(which is why the seasoned critics, already overexposed to many films like
this a year, cannot tolerate so well). But this film, I feel, has more to offer
in return than people realise. You’ll just have to let yourself appreciate the
magic.
Part of the reason it was harder to notice the film’s misgivings and
cheesiness was the acting. The ubiquitous beauty of Freeman’s melodicmoney-making
voice does not require reiteration, and Michael Caine is
Michael Caine. Your arguments are invalid, and so are his adversaries’.
Each word he says, no matter how clichéd or expository in nature, is
a universal truth. You, the audience, are the one who is clichéd and
expository.
And that’s my point entirely. You can definitely notice the longwinded
exposition necessary for the audience’s understanding. And yes
you can criticise its lack of subtlety (though be kind, magic tricks are hard
to explain!). But Freeman’s delivery was so natural and perfectly adapted
to the character that in the end, it doesn’t even matter. You should only
notice the flaws because of poor movie-making, not because you are
anhedonic and hypercritical.
Do you need to believe in magic to like this film? No. But you do
need to give it a break. Go see it, now.
But not too closely.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
45

FILM & TV
CLASSIC FILM REVIEW
MILLION DOLLAR BABY (2004)
Directed by Clint Eastwood
Starring Hillary Swank, Clint Eastwood and Morgan Freeman
Duncan Wallace
I recently saw the new Ron Howard film, Rush, in which a devastating accident
is so well executed that it reminded me of an even more affecting
moment on film that, too, has the brutal antagonism of sport as its central
tragedy. In Million Dollar Baby, Clint Eastwood’s most important film as
director, we see the thirty-something Maggie Fitzgerald (Hillary Swank)
rise from persistent wannabe to boxing champion, only to see her fall in
an aggravated incident which was at once beyond her control and seemingly
inevitable. Both films work incredibly well to show us the flimsiness
of safety in two ridiculously dangerous sports, but they do so in different
ways. Rush positions us to see the shakiness of the Formula 1 driver in
the heat of the moment, battling all the elements — the possibly faulty
mechanics of the car, the torrential weather, the sheer speed on the track
that makes it impossible for us to concentrate on anything — let alone
their competitors. Million Dollar Baby shows us a more direct situation,
where opponents tackle no one and nothing but themselves. The episodes
of these sports are equally electric, but boxing for me is the more terrifying
because there are no intermediary obstacles — nothing to distract the
players from their own violence, from the possibility of their own cruelty.
Eastwood, who plays Maggie’s boxing coach Frankie, is acutely
preoccupied with the idea of withdrawal. He is interested in knowing
when to call it quits, in playing a risky game carefully. But his pupils don’t
quite see it the same way — they’re more likely to see an exit from the
ring for want of safety as a kind of weakness, as surrender. But Frankie’s
regret about his perceived failures — both personal and professional — to
‘throw in the towel’ invariably informs his approach to coaching, and
ultimately makes his role in the film’s final moments all the more chilling.
In the early scenes, his most persistent reminder of the sport’s lasting toll
is former trainee and now-employee Eddie ‘Scrap-Iron’ Dupris, played by
Morgan Freeman (who also lends his magnificent voice to the film’s narration).
Scrap’s partial blindness as a result of a fight where he just didn’t
give in leaves Frankie with the indelible feeling that he’s ruined people’s
lives. But the pressure from his students, who want nothing more than
to fight, just keeps coming — his most successful boxer even leaves him
because Frankie refuses to set him up for the big, but risky, championship
fights. And Maggie, the rising amateur, constantly asks Frankie to
move her up the field as she stunningly dominates every match. Frankie is
always hesitant, but he succumbs in the end. The results are brutal.
It’s a careful trick of the film that we know, deep down, something
depressing is about to happen to Maggie. Frankie is too worried, too
paranoid about his influence over her for there not to be a significant
consequence. The engineering of the audience’s anticipation gives the
film its real weight and amplifies our eventual frustration, devastation and
acceptance about Maggie’s injury in equal measure. The altogether negative
influence of Maggie’s family — first unsupportive, then indifferent
and ungrateful, and ultimately manipulative — certainly doesn’t help, but
it elevates Frankie’s role in her life, and we come to identify beauty and
tragedy in their relationship.
There is something disturbing and morbidly fascinating about boxing
that has made it the most interesting sport as a subject for film. Many
great films, whether uplifting, depressing or some weird combination of
the two — including Scorsese’s Raging Bull, David O Russel’s The Fighter
and Jacques Audiard’s Rust and Bone — have explored ideas of heal-
46 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

FILM & TV
ing, injury and obsession through a vigorous focus on boxing as a sport
that can destroy its competitors. But these films also show us that these
competitors can be remarkable people — people with relentless determination,
a fascinating appetite for combat, and overpowering self-belief.
Million Dollar Baby presents to us both the allure of the sport and a dark
caution about its frightening risks. We always see these things together:
scenes of Maggie’s charming and magnetic rise, performed impeccably by
Hillary Swank, interrupted by those of Frankie’s tormented reflections,
presented by that characteristic Eastwood expression. It should be said,
though, that Maggie’s (successful) fights are truly the most entertaining
and even comic scenes of the film. The film doesn’t downplay the ‘magic’
of boxing; it even goes to poetic lengths to explain it to us.
Scrap says the ‘magic’ about the sport lies in ‘fighting battles beyond
endurance, beyond cracked ribs … risking everything for a dream that
nobody sees but you’. Maggie clearly feels the same way, but her passion
for the sport is further founded in a kind of all-or-nothing choice. Maggie
sees boxing as her way out of everything. Her charming personality and
optimism is never enough to hide her deep dissatisfaction with her life
outside the sport. Eastwood sets up a decision where the allure of the
game is the trump card in Maggie’s decision. This is not to say that the
sport vitiates her career choices, but simply to stress that the film highlights
something disarming about sports, even those which are the closest
to unrestrained physical combat — to fighting, pure and simple. And it
is Maggie’s attraction to the sport which makes the incident, arising out
of her opponent’s malicious conduct, all the more painful. To be sure, the
film makes us feel truly great anger about the opponent, but it equally and
soberly reminds us of an inconvenient truth: that this conduct is a deplorable,
but maybe unavoidable, by-product of a sport premised on inflicting
physical injury.
Scrap is the only person who can rationalise the whole thing and
come to some sort of peace about it. He tries to comfort Frankie and give
him perspective about his sense of responsibility for Maggie’s condition.
Scrap’s thoughts give us a painful but honest account of the desperation
and joy with which Maggie and all boxers alike hope to find success in
their sport:
“It was because of you that she was fighting the championship of
the world. You did that. People die everyday, Frankie — mopping floors,
washing dishes and you know what their last thought is? I never got my
shot. Because of you Maggie got her shot. If she dies today you know what
her last thought would be? I think I did all right.”
The film presents this as a persuasive interpretation — a feasible
translation of the American Dream to boxing — but it doesn’t, I think,
give us enough cause to accept it outright. Yes, it shows us these pictures
of Maggie running up and down the beach, relentlessly training herself to
impress Frankie, but it also leaves us with Frankie as a deeply tormented,
‘lost’ man. It is a measure of the film that it doesn’t try to assuage our
moral qualms about Frankie’s final actions or to condemn our possible
sympathy for them. It simply leaves us in a position without clear answers,
and where, unusually, you might even find yourself watching all of the
credits, listening to the slow piano-chord soundtrack, trying to come to
terms with everything that just happened.

PERFORMING ARTS
SEARCHING FOR
THE MOUNTAINTOP
David Nowak
Well, I don’t know what will happen now. We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn’t really matter with
me now. Because I’ve been to the mountaintop. I don’t mind. Like anybody, I would like to live - a long life; longevity
has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to
go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But
I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the Promised Land. So I’m happy, tonight. I’m not
worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.
-Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
On 4 April, 1968, Dr Martin Luther King Jr. gave his last speech. We
know that on that night he went to stay at a motel where he is believed
to have formed an intimate relationship with a maid there. The following
day, he was assassinated on his balcony.
Katrori Hall came at this history with an imaginative gaze, creating
a tale of that night based on what we know about the personalities
of those two figures. It’s a strange mix of fictionalisation and reality
which he turned into a play called The Mountaintop. Now, it hasn’t yet
been released here in Melbourne, but had a humble location in Theatre
503 in London before being noticed, and moved on to the West End to
receive critical acclaim. I hear good things about it, and it sounds like a
fascinating idea, but it’s hard to really appreciate this if the cast are being
so secretive about the plot. Under the direction of Alkinos Tsilimidos,
Melbourne Theatre Company’s Bert LaBonté and Zahra Newman are
bringing this work to the city in November, and I got them both to open
up where they could.
Newman, as polite and good natured as she was, went on to tell me
about just as much as a PR release will on this point: “It is a playwright
musing on ‘what if’, you know, or what would it have been like for – you
know, no one actually knows.” I turned my hand over to LaBonté: if it
was fiction, did he feel he was playing a character or King himself? When
so little is known about King’s personal life, how can you enter that
mindset?
Maybe it was the recitals doing it, but LaBonté answered back in
another American slanted voice: “I feel like I’m playing a real person and
I feel like the message that the playwright has given in the play is very
much based Dr. King’s own thoughts and ideas about where society needs
to be and needs to grow, and his struggles and his battles through that
whole period of time, and there’s a lot of factual information in the play
as well about things that had happened and trials and tribulations. I feel
like I’m playing the man. I feel like I’m playing the man going through
– not knowingly – the last couple of hours of his life and where he might
have been at that point in time. At times it can be kind of overwhelming
when you’re standing there and you’re saying particular words and you
can only imagine what that would have felt like for him to say, and it can
be really beautiful”.
And then I hear a few small details, and it’s cast on a stormy night.
There are incredibly intimate scenes which build up to its climax with
added flairs. King himself seems to be on a pedestal of greatness, regardless
of the possible affair. One might think the play was in danger of
dehumanising their key star through the dramatic necessities of a play.
However, LaBonté has his only feelings about the role here. “The play
makes him more like one of us. Without giving anything away, you’ll see
moments of the man that we knew and we witnessed and we have footage
of now, but the play, most of the time, is about the man not many people
got to see – the human being not many people got to see – as opposed to
the ‘superstar’”.
It’s a superstar sized pair of shoes to be filled by an actor, and La-
Bonté admits that he didn’t take on the role without a sense of daunting.
“If someone asks you to play Martin Luther King, there’s a pretty simple
48
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

PERFORMING ARTS
answer to that one,” he says with a laugh before going into detail. “It was
a quick, ‘Yes’, and then it was a, ‘Oh, hang on. Ahhhh… No, of course.
Yes, of course I can do that.’ I mean, it’s a huge honour and a privilege
and … I’ve gone through the whole scale of crapping my pants, but it was
a no-brainer. When I read the script – I read the script over a year ago –
and I loved the message in the story. When I knew it was going to be with
Zahra, I had no qualms the whole time with taking it on.”
For co-star Newman, it was entirely about the merit of the script
itself: “… [R]eading the script, it’s very playful. When you read it, it’s kind
of like, ‘Oh, I really want to be doing that.’ I really … want to be engaged
in that story. So for me that was the biggest part in taking it on. And also,
knowing that Bert would be a part of it and knowing that we have a social
and a personal relationship just kind of blends itself to making something
like doing an intense two-hander about a famous public figure – the
friendship that we have – makes doing something like that much easier,
and makes it fun to kind of embark on”.
Newman herself has just come off of a successful run of Chekhov’s
The Cherry Orchard and admits that it has been a big change in gears
moving into this play. “I think the biggest shift really is the shift in energy
and how to focus energy … The Cherry Orchard was such an ensemble
piece and that was a large focus in how we made the work and ultimately
what ended up being on stage was very much driven by the ensemble and
IN REHEARSAL...
having a group energy. This project, The Mountaintop, is more refined and
honed. In this one you have to have laser precision in where you direct
your energy … The Mountaintop [has] more given circumstances, more
specifics in terms of context, time, place, just where these characters are,
how they speak, there’s a lot more guidelines. It is quite a different character.
This character’s a lot more fiery and spicy. I’d say they’re a lot more in
control of their sexuality than Varia [her previous character] was.”
LaBonté himself has transferred from screen time on ABC’s Middle
Class Bogan and playing Rupert. “The whole thing’s been a big transition
for me,” he tells me. “Like Zahra was saying, we were both in quite large
ensemble casts, in kind of long, muscular types ways. But then we come in
to this, which is a lot more intimate, and … the intensity factor certainly
ramps up ten-fifteen degrees, because it’s just the two of us on stage and
it’s ninety minutes and it’s condensed and it’s got to run at a certain ferocity
so that it can continue to build and build and build into the climax of
the play”.
Little in the nature of context to work with, but there certainly
seems to be a lot of secrets hiding in the periphery. All I can say is that
it’ll be interesting to see the answers described on stage when we see the
play open on November 6.
Images: MTC Pam Kleemann
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
49

PERFORMING ARTS
BRING IT INTO FOCUS: FESTIVAL WRAP UP
Patricia Tobin
For the past thirty years, the Melbourne Fringe Festival has been a proud
supporter of independent arts and this year was no different. Melbourne
Fringe 2013 was a fantastic fourteen days packed with more than 3400
artists who performed, exhibited, explored and created a diverse range
of works in over 100 venues. This year's Fringe also entered the digital
realm, with the Digital Gardens initiative – a pop-up space that consisted
of an immersive multiplayer game designed by Wander, a Melbournebased
gaming developer. Donning virtual reality headgear, players could
become a walking tree, a flying gryphon, or other characters to explore a
virtual world (I'd like to testify that it's not as lame as it sounds and was
in fact, really fun). Fringe Furniture, a design exhibition, included twice
as many works as last year, and presented refreshingly innovative works.
Melbourne Fringe also heralded the best in independent Australian
comedy, which included standup from Dave Callan, Adam Knox, Khaled
Kalafalla and my personal favourite, Luke McGregor. McGregor’s best
known for his awkward OCD persona, and his endearing performance was
utterly hilarious. Sketch comedy was not to be missed either, as the endlessly
energetic Wizard Sandwiches won the Fringe 2013 People's Choice
Award. The Experiment clumsily meshed together different comic styles
into an alternative comedy club of sorts. The highlight was comedian
Oliver Clark, a pale caricature of a cheesy 70s TV presenter, reading love
poetry to a sandwich, only to become increasingly aroused and subsequently
stuffing the sandwich down his pants. Comedy, eh? A more solid
comedy performance was Radio Variety Hour, a show that satirised a 1950s
radio experience with its bad sound effects and cliché “lady detective”
story pieces. Backed by a ten-piece band, Kai Smythe starred in Hairy
Soul Man, where he blasted through some righteous soul music. Smythe
was slightly lacking in charisma, but he ended the night with a hysterical
rendition of the viral hit, Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Parodies of
popular culture appeared to be a common theme as well. Stephen Hall
pulled off quite a feat, doing a One Man Lord of the Rings, Indiana Jonesstyle,
in Raiders of the Temple of Doom's Last Crusade. The most talkedabout
parody of Melbourne Fringe was arguably Wolf Creek: the Musical.
With its low-budget props and amateur singing, the musical humorously
mocked the Australian horror film. Another personal favourite of mine
was Winter is Coming, a Game of Thrones parody that was highly absurd,
insanely manic and extremely funny.
Melbourne Fringe's cabaret performances were simply superb as well.
In Here Comes Your Man, MUST's Alex Roe played an assassin that dealt
with the grim matters of death, while still keeping an appealing touch
by singing the blues and, unexpectedly, Portishead. The notion of “girl
power” ruled, but not in a corny Spice Girls way, with Lady Sings It Better.
Defying gender expectations, the girl group took on the most misogynistic
songs by male musicians (Shaggy's It Wasn't Me, anyone?) and reinvented
them as a high energy, feminist cabaret. In A Singer Must Die,
Melissa Langton tells amusing stories and sweet lullabies of aspiration
in between her powerhouse performance of captivating songs. The 2013
Fringe Winner of Best Cabaret, This is Why We Can't Have Nice Things,
featured Gillian Cosgriff producing original songs on very relatable topics
for the modern twenty-something: drunk texts, disgusting ex-boyfriends
and social humiliation.
Never hesitant in exploring the unconventional, Melbourne
Fringe theatre was also truly memorable. MKA: Theatre of New Writing
presented startling productions, like the pulp-violence play Kids Killing
Kids, which won the Fringe 2013 award of Best Experimental Performance.
Also under MKA, Mark Wilson starred in Unsex Me, a riveting
gender-bending solo performance which culminated in a shockingly
disturbing scene involving a microphone. The Fringe 2013 winner of the
Tour Ready Award, FOMO, featured Zoe McDonald who played several
characters discussing social anxiety, the fear of missing out. McDonald
was an engaging performer, but the subject quickly wore thin. Innovation
in Theatre Award Fringe 2013 winner, Black Faggot was a bittersweet and
poignant production about homosexuality set in New Zealand's migrant
Pacific Islands communities. Spoken-word show Love in the Key of Britpop
followed Emily Andersen falling in love against a backdrop where the
Blur vs. Oasis battle is still very much alive. Lastly, A Chekhov Triptych
consisted of three of Chekhov's one-act plays. The show exquisitely reproduced
Chekhov's signature vaudevilles, with an undertone of pathos.
Without forgetting its compelling visual arts exhibitions, such as
101 Vagina Book, a decent range of live art including the award-winning
Confetti, and some pretty remarkable performances from the circus,
dance and kids, this year's Melbourne Fringe was definitely one of the
best. With such bold plays, engrossing performances and riotous comedy,
it is hard to imagine how next year's Fringe would beat this.
50 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

PERFORMING ARTS
MELBOURNE FRINGE
FESTIVAL REVIEWS
It’s Happening in the Space
Between My Face and Yours
Hannah Barker
There is theatre that
makes you want to see
more theatre. There is
theatre that makes you
want to perform more
theatre. There is theatre
that makes you want to
design more theatre. There is theatre that makes you want to write more
theatre. Izzy Roberts Orr’s It’s Happening in the Space Between My Face and
Yours is theatre that makes you want to do a little bit of each.
When a young woman named Jack goes missing from her inner-
Melbourne share house, her roommates are at a loss. They can’t contact
their friend. They can’t pay the rent. They can’t resolve their various
sexual tensions. They can’t deal with the vacuous RIP messages their
acquaintances are posting on Facebook. They can’t ride their fixies too far
at night, can’t roll their cigarettes, can’t fill the void. They can’t drink the
soymilk because the replacement roomie is relentlessly stealing it. Said
soy-thief can’t even describe the new musical direction his band is taking.
Meanwhile, the audience is sporadically confronted by a sullenfaced
Jack (Jennifer Speirs), back from beyond the grave to deliver
ever-more graphic monologues on her experience of death. The stage
is also flanked constantly by two ever-vigilant, ever-scathing ‘wolves’
(Tom Molyneux & Meagan Lawrie), who wait their turn to spit threats
and obscenities that embody the sense of fear permeating through the
story. Mesmerising and penetrative, they might be distracting were their
purpose not so emblematic.
Co-presented by MUST and Spare Room, It’s Happening ran as part
of the Fringe Festival at Sketch and Tulip Café/Bar in North Melbourne.
The upstairs space lent itself to the dingy rawness of the show. Precarious
piles of chairs in either corner of the stage sank into the brick backdrop
seamlessly, and the transformative door cum table cum bed looked as if it
belonged to the venue. Dim lighting threw appropriately eerie shadows
across the floorboards, and across an LED sign to one side of the set ran a
series of alternately lyrical and blunt observations relating to each scene
(because what’s a Fringe show without a bit of Brecht?)
First-time director Nick Fry, also responsible for the lighting and set
design, deserves commendation for his efforts, and kudos similarly go to
sound designer James Hogan, who successfully matched the audience’s
eardrums and heart rates with the characters’.
I’m not saying it’s the most polished piece of theatre – it’s not. Some
scenes were rather clunky, and some characters appeared two-dimensional
and under-developed. That said, the entire cast was infuriatingly attractive
so I’m willing to suggest that these flaws were merely representative
of the kind of ungainly squalor and haughty individuals that every good
twenty-something share house encounters.
Reeking of poeticism and finesse, the script was penned by the
talented and charming Izzy Roberts-Orr, who, whilst gratified with the
production, promises to take the show back to the workshop for reinvigoration
before a second season sometime in the future or so.
Surreal and visceral, It’s Happening in the Space Between My Face
and Yours is at its core an exploration of sex and death, à la hipsterdom.
The tagline says it best: “We love. We fuck. We live. We survive. We’re
afraid.”
Gouti: The God of Them All
Hannah Barker
I honestly do
not have the
words to accurately
describe
the spectacle
that is Gouti:
The God of
Them All. A
two-hour long
combination of musical comedy and absurdist theatre, Gouti (pronounced
GOO-TEE) is a strange, boisterous adventure among the mythical Spanish
gods. It’s as charming as it is peculiar, and probably broaches some
sincere issues to do with human eccentricity - but I just can’t be sure.
Performed at The Owl and the Pussycat in Richmond, in a cramped,
cement space (which is actually cosier that it sounds), Gouti’s cast members
outnumbered the audience on the evening I attended (other nights
were sold out, though). Despite the scale and flamboyance of the show,
the intimate setting played to its advantage, heightening its melodrama
and absurdism tenfold. It also allowed for close admiration of the array of
crude and colourful costumes.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
51

PERFORMING ARTS
Gouti was written, composed and starred in by VCA graduate
Joachim Coghlan. The show was originally presented as part of Melbourne
Uni’s Mudfest in 2011. Back then though, it comprised a mere
single act. In its current manifestation, the story spreads across three
increasingly farcical parts. In the first we meet El Todopoderoso (Christopher
Nye), also known as The God of Them All, in his school for nursery
rhyme composition in Spain. Little Juan (Coghlan) is El Todopoderoso’s
prized student, and all is well amongst the gods. That is until Gouti
(Emily Brown) shows up with her raucously uncouth verses to usurp not
only Little Juan’s rank but also his wife Anita Bonita Maraca Alpaca
(Jessica Harris), and becomes co-God of Them All at the insistence of El
Todopoderoso (or something to that effect).
Following an odd battle in which Gouti and Little Juan each summon
the protagonists of their rhymes, respectively the Triple-Breasted
Whore and a giant spider named Pepito (both marvellously constructed
puppets), and let them battle it out like Pokémon, Little Juan is banished
to New Zealand for the second act. There he meets Tharbor and Aranel
(James Brooks & Holly Sharpe), who suspiciously resemble certain elfin
characters from Lord of the Rings, and their friend Guimo (Christian Gillett),
who happens to be the New Zealand God of Them All and Gouti’s
twin brother.
After a further hour-and-a-half of baffling absurdity, striking operatic
composition, anarchic dance breaks and impossible subplots, Little Juan
and Guimo eventually return to Spain to resolve their differences with
The God(s?) of Them All in the only partially-scripted third act, and
they all live happily ever after – except for Little Juan, who is tragically
killed.
Scattered with references not only to Lord of the Rings and
Pokémon but also Sweeney Todd, Avatar, The Princess Bride, Wicked (The
Musical) and countless other anomalous pop culture fixtures, Gouti is tremendously
postmodern. But its interactivity and constant self-reflexivity
don’t distract from the sheer talent of the cast. There is more than one set
of remarkable, classically trained vocal chords among the ensemble, with
special mentions going to Nye, Harris, Gillett and Sharpe. Similarly, the
small orchestra, comprised of a piano, a saxophone, a flute, a guitar and
an accordion, offers a rather impressively composed addition.
My overall opinion of the show is quashed somewhat by the fact
that I still haven’t quite figured out what exactly I witnessed, but I did
leave with a head sore from befuddlement and a stomach sore from laughter,
which I suppose can only be a nod toward Gouti’s narrative complexity
and comedic triumph. (Image: Raquel Betiz)
Worm Hole
Emma Nobel
It takes a certain degree of
self-confidence for a performer
to simulate having
sex with himself on stage
– never mind if he’s decked out in a blue Lycra suit and an aluminium foil
helmet. But Marek Platek says his suggestive show is all part of physical
comedy.
“I like to involve myself in the jokes and physically just go really over
the top.”
Worm Hole is Platek’s third show, performed at North Melbourne’s
Club Voltaire, as part of the Melbourne Fringe Festival. The performance
centred on the adventures of a time traveller from a distant future, ruled
by Poland, whose actions inconceivably change the past, but not in the
way Hollywood blockbusters would have us imagine.
“Some people often have the idea of going back and changing things,
their mistakes or changing the past to make a better world,” Platek says.
Worm Hole tosses the heroic time traveller cliché aside. Platek’s unnamed
character spends much of his time bragging about life in the future
and his only notable contribution is changing the price of dim sims.
“It’s quite funny because people will expect the show to be like Back
to the Future when Marty McFly goes back in time to save Doc Brown,
whereas I go back in time and change the past by accidently increasing
the price of dim sims. They go from 50 cents to 90 cents,” he says.
A fast food price hike is hardly irreversible damage, but travelling
back in time to meet, and have sex with, his past self, inevitably leads to
Platek nursing a broken heart.
But he dismisses the intimate moments with himself onstage as
worm hole-induced tangents, saying excessive time travel fried his character’s
mind. “There are a lot of tangents but I blame them on the wormhole,
because one of the side effects of travelling through a wormhole, as a
use of time travel, is you come out with wormholes in your brain,” he says.
Even when armed with his exaggerated swagger, Platek’s character
was at times upstaged by his own obscenely skin tight, blue Lycra suit.
But the suit itself has a history: it’s featured in both of its wearer’s
previous shows. For Platek this was reason enough to bring the suit back
for his third stint at the Melbourne Fringe Festival.
“My first show was called Adventures in the Blue Lycra Suit and I really
wanted to bring that suit back because one of the characters in Party
at My House, my show last year, is called Domestos the Acid Fairy and he
wears the suit. People love the suit,” he says.
People might love the suit, but they also love Platek. He’s recently
acquired his first diehard fans, a young couple from Brunswick who attend
nearly every show. It’s a small following and his shows never sell out, but
the man in the blue Lycra suit isn’t fazed. Even when faced with an audience
of just eight, he was unperturbed and began to jokingly spruik his
character’s new book, complete with an impressive mock cover.
In Club Voltaire’s foyer Platek is warm and engaging, happy to compete
with the loud screams heralding the show before his that evening.
It becomes clear how much time he has invested into Worm Hole when
Platek explains the popularity of the sci-fi genre, his speech is littered
with scientific terms and sci-fi jargon.
“There’s the theory of general relativity and all these scientific
formulas that show that wormholes can exist. Things like time travel,
parallel universes, warp speed and the speed of light. I think people’s
52 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

PERFORMING ARTS
imaginations can always relate to that as a really great basis for stories and
movies. You can do anything with sci-fi.”
“I’ve done a fair bit of research about time travel and parallel universes,
but I didn’t want it to be too science-orientated,” he says.
It’s not easy juggling a full-time job with Fringe Festival commitments,
but Platek’s day job isn’t something you’d expect either.
“You’ve got to do everything; I’m my own producer and I work full
time as well...I’m a land surveyor, so I stand behind the instrument on
the tripod and I’m constantly talking to myself, just pushing buttons and
thinking up ideas for shows.”
Next year the stand up comedian, who earned his stripes hosting
trivia nights for six years, plans to employ his own producer and take
Worm Hole to the Melbourne Festival.
If you’ve ever wondered what those people with tripods on the side
of the road are doing, they’re probably writing comedy shows.
The Sheds
Kemal Atlay
Australian Rules
football is one of
the most watched
and most masculine
sports, and is one of
only few sporting codes in the country to not have an openly gay athlete;
the issue of tackling homophobia in AFL has long been a highly contentious
issue.
The Sheds, writer/director James Cunningham’s contribution to this
year’s Melbourne Fringe Festival, attempts to address the homosexuality
in AFL and the wider world of sports.
This one-hour long three-man play depicts the story of Darren Anderson
(Patrick Chirico), the star player for the fictional Fitzroy Fighters
who comes out to the media with grand hopes of being accepted by his
teammates and fans.
“While the topic of how public figures ‘come out’ in the media and
how it’s received is something that interests me, locker room culture is
something that I love to observe and study” says Cunnigham on what
inspired him to write The Sheds.
“Men can act very different in the locker room.”
Set entirely within the confines of a locker room, The Sheds looks
at how Darren’s teammates Liam and Jimmy (Ludwik Exposto and Andii
Mulders, respectively) react to the news of his homosexuality.
Liam is the typical can-do-no-wrong team captain who openly
accepts Darren’s sexuality, whereas Jimmy is an irrational and mentally
troubled teammate who reacts with a mixture of anger, for not being told
by Darren earlier and jealousy, for his new media fame.
“If a player were to come out years after all the other players had
formed close bonds with him, then all the trust is broken, suspicion is
born, and many close fraternal bonds have to be rebuilt,” he says.
“Those friendships are built on trust, truths and courage.
“But coming out to the media is a different story.”
The issue of homosexuality in sports has long been very controversial,
especially in the media. Long have gay rights advocates espoused
ideas of equality, but it has been a slower process for these ideas to merge
with the mainstream values of society. This could be as sport has so long
been seen as highly masculine in nature.
With mounting pressure on all sporting codes to become more inclusive
of gay athletes, there has also been much public debate surrounding
the culture of sport and whether there is the support for gay players to
feel safe coming out
The low point of this ongoing debate was when former AFL player
Jason Akermanis, in a 2010 column in the Herald Sun, warned gay AFL
players who were thinking of coming out to “forget about it”.
There has, however, been some hope in the likes of Jason Ball, the
24-year-old footballer at the Yarra Glen Football Club in the Yarra Valley
Mountain District Football League who came out, first to his teammates
and then the media.
According to Cunningham, “Homosexuality in sports… differs from
sport to sport.
“The culture of diving was an open enough environment for Matthew
Mitcham to come out, but it would be very different for an AFL or
NRL player who wanted to do the same.”
Originally written as a screenplay with sixteen characters and the
intention of making it into a short film, Cunningham instead chose to
turn it into a stage play and had to eliminate a lot of elements to the
story.
“For the stage version I really wanted a private fly-on-the-wall
locker room experience, so I got rid of anyone who wasn’t a footy player,
like the coach and the players’ managers,” says Cunningham.
The cast was narrowed down to four people, but unluckily an uncommitted
actor left Cunningham to remove a character altogether until
the cast was made up of “a protagonist, an antagonist and a narrator.”
The use of a narrator is somewhat perplexing and jarring, as it interrupts
the action and gives information that is unnecessary for understanding
the play.
The masculinity and testosterone-fuelled environment of the locker
room is conveyed through unrestrained bouts of swearing and unashamed
nudity. Loud and vulgar and, literally, in your face (an audience member
in the front row shielded her face when one of the nude actors had a fauxshower
right in front of her) the performance is a stark contrast with the
sensitive nature of the issue it addresses.
Unfortunately a cliché twist at the play’s conclusion seems to
counteract Cunningham’s intention of portraying the reactions of straight
males to news of their teammates homosexuality.
What promises to be a “controversial examination of mateship and
masculinity”, the ambitious and experimental The Sheds falls short of any
such expectations and fails to leave any lasting impression on the audience.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
53

CREATIVE SPACE
Drifter
Joshua Reinders
I limped towards a couple of nearby ground cars and went around one of
them jiggling the doorhandles. The front passenger door clicked open and
I smiled, punched the air and clambered in. I pulled the door shut behind
me.
Inside it was dark. The windscreen and the car windows were
opaque with grime. A pair of fluffy dice dangled from the rear-view mirror
and a knife with dry blood on the blade lay on the dashboard. I grabbed
the knife and slipped it into my pocket, then unwound the pair of fluffy
dice from the rear-view mirror and threw them onto the back seat.
I leaned over and felt around underneath the steering wheel.
There was no ring of keys hanging out of the ignition. I sighed, sat back
and closed my eyes.
*
Something boomed in the distance and echoed nearby. I gasped and sat
up, listened for a moment. I pressed a button on the door beside me so
that when I jiggled the doorhandle the door did not budge.
I clicked open the glovebox. In it were a couple of manuals and
a plastic bag full of some small round objects. I pulled out the plastic bag
and pushed the glovebox shut and then laid the plastic bag on my lap and
tore it open.
The small round objects were stupe cartridges. I picked one out
and twisted off the cap and stared at the needle for a moment, and then
I pulled up my sleeve and felt a sting as I pricked my inner elbow and
squeezed the cartridge.
My arm tingled and went numb. The cartridge rolled out of my
hand. My eyelids drooped shut and my chin hit my chest.
Everything disappeared.
*
The next morning I was crouching next to a boulder in the middle of a
desert plain and the sky above me was grey and sunless.
A pair of headlights appeared on the horizon. It was a limousine.
It glided soundlessly across the plain and then slowed not far away
from the boulder and stopped.
A door on it opened and a man with a moustache stepped out.
He shut the door behind him and glanced around and then slapped the
roof of the limousine and watched as it turned around and started gliding
back towards the horizon.
The man took a lighter and a cigarette packet out of his pocket.
He slid out a cigarette and stuck it between his lips and then slipped the
cigarette packet back into his pocket. He raised the lighter.
‘Hey, you!’ I shouted.
The man lowered the lighter and plucked the cigarette from his
lips. He took a couple of steps towards where he must have thought I was
hiding. ‘Whoever you are,’ he shouted, ‘you ain’t supposed to be out here
at this hour.’
I said nothing for a moment and then raised my voice. ‘I know,’
I said, ‘but then again neither are you.’
He shook his head and tapped the darkly glowing collar around
his neck. ‘I got the clearance, asshole. Curfew don’t apply to me.’
The man stuck the cigarette back between his lips and switched
on the lighter and then held the flame to the end of the cigarette. He
took a puff and blew out a plume of smoke. ‘You going to show yourself already,’
he asked, ‘or am I going to have to call down a couple pain-givers?’
I held my hands in the air and stood up and took a couple of
steps towards him. ‘If it’s all the same to you,’ I said, ‘I’d rather this business
just stay between us.’
He turned and looked at me. ‘What you doing out here, anyway?
Something got you tired of living all of a sudden?’
‘Something like that,’ I replied as I held out my wrists.
He took another puff of the cigarette and then flicked it to the
ground and grinded it into the dirt with the toe of his boot. ‘This the first
time you ever been caught?’ he said as he unlooped a pair of shackles from
his belt.
‘Yes.’
He grinned then and snapped first one shackle and then the
other onto my wrists. ‘You won’t feel a thing, really,’ he said. ‘You’ll just
wake up a couple days from now in one of them rehab facilities, maybe
with an ache in your head at the most—just like any other bender you
ever woke up from, only without all the fun parts beforehand.’
The Structure of
Sand
Amelia Moulis
Tillie’s life—her life on Kangaroo Island—had been eleven years of untempered
blue: azure sky, cobalt sea and the iridescent blues of the bush.
From the beach, the seals bellowed on the sand, beckoned to Tillie, singing:
Come to the water, come in the waves, come Tillie. She spent hours
in the surf every day on the other side of the island, away from their calls.
At night, from her bedroom in the Park Rangers’ hut—the closest hut to
Seal Bay—she fell asleep to their songs pouring through the garden with
the sea breeze, rusting all the hinges.
On the nights when it was most still, her Dad sometimes tiptoed
in, a silhouette against the hallway light, and they would steal out the
backdoor with Liam, the fly screen rapping shut behind them. They crept
on through the paperbarks and the eucalypts of the bush track, past the
banksias and the wattles on the dunes, until their feet squeaked against
54
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

CREATIVE SPACE
the dry white sand glowing under the metallic light of the moon. They
would sit together at the top of the beach and feel the salt hitting their
pores and tightening the skin across their foreheads. With the high tide
lapping out across the shore, they watched the seal pups sleeping, waddling,
waiting for their mums to return with food and to rest with them.
‘You know, this colony has five percent of all the world’s sea lions,’
Dad whispered morsels of trivia. ’And eighty-five percent of the world’s
sea lion population is here in South Australia, that’s something to be
proud of, hey?’
Dad’s pride was endless; he’d never left Australia and he never
wanted to. He was a Park Ranger, the same as Mum. They’d met on the
island and had never before felt the need to leave the bay.
‘There’s one of the mums,’ Dad would say, animated
He pointed as the mums wobbled and tottered, rocking their flippers
up the shore to their pups and curling their necks around each other—
Hey there, I missed you—the mums gently licking the chocolate fur atop
the pups, combing stray hairs flat on their crowns.
‘Look kids, she’s been out fishing,’ he’d say as the pups greedily ate
the fish.
When they returned to bed, their bodies calm with the rolling tide,
specks of sand and broken shells were coarse across their skin. The fragments
fixed to their sheets, to their legs, and stayed there until the sheets
were washed and made fresh once again.
The sand of the desert was different to the sand of the sea. Desert
sand was chalky, the granules smaller and finer. On the road from Adelaide
to Alice Springs, where they stopped for a break, resting on the side
of the road, Tillie sat and ran her hands through the earth. The sand was
more silky than coarse there, and it ran between her fingers, in the gaps
from where her palm split off into five. The remains of the earth stuck to
her palms, gripped her skin, but when she wiped her hands on her shirt,
the particles turned to dust, red handprints smeared on her stomach,
vastly different to the harder, scratching sand of Seal Bay. The sand at
Seal Bay seemed more real to her; it turned your skin into a raw, blushing
red when you rubbed against it. You could feel it press into your skin, feel
it sting, as opposed to the artificial colour, the dyes of the desert, ready to
be wiped away.
The rains arrived the day after they got to Alice Springs. Tillie woke
early to the cool desert morning, dark shadows still draped over the room,
the air still. She slipped out from under her covers and over to Liam,
careful not to wake him. She stole a glance at Liam’s eyes, still closed, his
chest rising, falling. Tillie lay still beside him and tried to sleep but the
raindrops began to whisper above her head, louder, still louder, until they
were yelling into the room.
’Do you think about it much?’ Liam asked, barely audible above the
rain.
‘Think about what?’ Tillie asked, but she knew.
‘Home,’ he said, eyes still closed. ‘Dad.’
The door creaked open and the crown of Mum’s head appeared at
the door, her new husband behind her.
LITERARY NOTES
Thomas Wilson
WRITING WISDOM: ZADIE SMITH
• When still a child, make sure you read a lot of books. Spend more time
doing this than anything else.
• When an adult, try to read your own work as a stranger would read it,
or even better, as an enemy would.
• Don’t romanticise your ‘vocation’. You can either write good sentences
or you can’t. There is no ‘writer’s lifestyle’. All that matters is what you
leave on the page.
• Avoid your weaknesses. But do this without telling yourself that the
things you can’t do aren’t worth doing. Don’t mask self-doubt with
contempt.
• Leave a decent space of time between writing something and editing it.
• Avoid cliques, gangs, groups. The presence of a crowd won’t make your
writing any better than it is.
• Work on a computer that is disconnected from the internet.
• Protect the time and space in which you write. Keep everybody away
from it, even the people who are most important to you.
• Don’t confuse honours with achievement.
• Tell the truth through whichever veil comes to hand — but tell it.
• Resign yourself to the lifelong sadness that comes from never being
satisfied.
PUBLISHING NEWS AND BLUES
Everybody, Ebooks! After JB Hifi started selling ebooks a few months ago,
it seems everyone is getting on the bandwagon. Similar to major chains in
the United Kingdom, Big W has started selling ebooks through Overdrive
and Google has launched ebookstores in New Zealand a handful of Asian
countries.
Ama-zing: Andrew Wylie, a literary agent who was in partnership
with Amazon, has outright told publishers to reject them. Asked in an
interview for New Republic what it would take for him to sell a book
through the retailer he said, ‘If one of my children were kidnapped and
they were threatening to throw a child off a bridge and I believed them, I
might.’ Harsh, but fair?
REFINING READS
Your choice. This may seem like a bit of a cop out, but truly the best way
to learn how to write better is to emulate the best. Get out your favourite
book, re-read it and find out exactly why. Write out the start of a scene
and try and finish it in a way that would remain consistent to the voice of
the author. Alternatively, read books recommended by friends and family
and work out why they love it. You can never read enough.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
55

THE RAINDROP SWIRLS
DOWN FROM THE SKY
Balraj Singh Saini
The Raindrop swirls down from the sky
Riding on the wind’s stable curls –
The gentle tapping of the tender water
A giant rainbow beneath it unfurls.
SUBHEADING
SUNSET
Ravena Anjalee
POETRY
The thrilling lights of the night-time sky
Play a game so queer.
The magic of the earth unfolds
To all who are eager to hear.
The drums of the sky remind us
That the world is very odd
The strong waves of the sea affirm
With its ever firm nod.
The globe is indeed a very strange place.
A place where you and I survive.
A place where love begets denial.
A place where foul’s in the jive!.
Across the pale canvas, a stroke of deep red
The colour of the liquid that spills when we’ve bled
The orange follows on, not a second in advance
Twisting with the red, they merge and they dance
Yellow cascades down, filling in the gaps
The last remains of canvas it holds and it traps
Red, orange, yellow painted with such grace
Every inch is covered, not the slightest pale space
Then upon this image another colour creeps
The darkest of them all slowly and softly seeps
The black of the shadows created by the light
Draws pictures so familiar, all those in our sight
POETIC DISTURBANCES
Md. Roysul Islam
A life of revolution in dissent
And celebration of freedom in equality,
A destiny forged by fire
When it formed a symbol of humanity.
Poetic disturbances!
A life blessed with pain and agony
But ruled by hope.
An inspiration is born
From the womb of liberty.
A place where one man struggles to walk
And another drives a car.
A place where people starve, but donate
Their money to wage a War.
A place where fair is only a color
But not a deed to man.
A place where lies fetch more amnesties
Than a thousand truths ever can.
A place where power defeats love
And hatred rules the day.
A place where man bequests treachery
And applies it in every way.
Indeed I wonder at the strangeness of the world.
I think but remain bemused.
I live in a place where things are loved,
But people? Oh, they are used!
A solid heavy contrast against the radiant sky
Creatures of the land and even birds up so high
Trees, plants, flowers, natures little gifts
As the light below moves, and dances and shifts
It’s a beauty so exquisite, a wonder of the earth
One that can’t be matched in splendour or in worth
The beauty of the sky, when the sun says goodnight
As it slowly then descends and sinks from our sight
Just before it’s dark, before the darkness falls
Between the sun and moon, the sky loudly calls
Once a bare canvas, so still and so mellow
It is splashed with coloured paint, of red, orange,
yellow
Like a hidden volcano, they erupt
In spontaneity,
Where endless imaginations are mixed with fire.
Like a rampaging river, they flow
In glorious calamity.
Poetic disturbances!
Like lightning, they strike
And burn the cores of all hearts.
The castles of immorality collapse,
When the rhythms of the winds
Compel rogue waves to dance.
This is not what we imagined.
This is not what we crave.
Perhaps a little light to the blind
Will usher a golden wave.
Thus we wait, you and I.
We wait till God looks awake.
One day, we believe, love will beat power,
And we’ll live again for each other’s sake.
Image: Marcus Littlewood

CREATIVE SPACE
PHOTOS IN FOCUS...
RACHMAD IMAM TARECHA
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
57

CULTURE
BATTLE OF THE SEXES:
40 YEARS ON
The gender equality debate in tennis
Fabrice Wilmann
Last month, Serena Williams and Rafael Nadal
became the 2013 champions of the U.S. Open
Grand Slam tournament. For winning the U.S.
Open Series, the two players each received
$3.6 million – the record for the largest prize
money paycheck for a single tennis tournament.
Even though Serena may be one of the
greatest champions of the sport, this parity in
prize money is unjust because, put simply, the
women’s tour at this moment in time is inferior
to the men’s tour.
The issue of equal prize money in the
sport of tennis has been the subject of debate
for decades. Whilst women have enjoyed equal
prize money across all four grand slams since
2007, recent criticism of this equality has been
building within the Association of Tennis
Professionals (ATP) and the wider tennis
audience.
The subject was brought into the spotlight
at last year’s Wimbledon tournament when
French player Gilles Simon, who sits on the
ATP council alongside Roger Federer, stated
that women’s tennis was not as entertaining as
the male equivalent. In addition, Simon argued
that this view was representative of the entire
men’s tour: “It’s not only my point of view, it’s
the point of view of everybody in the locker
room.”
Earlier this year at the Australian Open,
Simon’s compatriot Jo-Wilfred Tsonga expressed
his views on the topic of gender equality,
sparking serious backlash from his female
counterparts. He expressed his belief that “the
girls, they are more unstable emotionally than
us… it’s just about hormones and all this stuff.
We don’t have all these bad things, so we are
physically in a good shape every time, and
you are not. That’s it.” Tsonga’s comments are
evidently sexist in nature, and fail to grasp the
crux of the equality debate.
Whilst Simon’s view that “men’s tennis
is ahead of women’s tennis” is a re-emerging
view in the gender debate, the main point
of contention of gender equality is that at
the Grand Slam level, women do not play
best-of-five-set matches. At the lower levels of
the sport, both men and women play bestof-three
set matches, and in these instances,
equal prize money is warranted. The debate,
therefore, is not about gender at all, but rather
the differences in structure of the men’s and
women’s tours.
Two-time Grand Slam champion Andy
Murray recently reiterated this view, proposing
that women should play for the same number
of sets as men if they are to receive equal
prize money. Murray astutely recognised that
at one point in time, women did play for
the same duration as men: “Steffi Graf and
[Martina] Navratilova and those players were
unbelievable over five sets, and in great shape.
So it’s not that. That isn’t the issue.” The final
of the WTA Tour Championships was a best-offive-set
match between 1984 and 1998 before
reverting to best-of-three, though only three
matches went the distance.
This highly contentious debate has
resurfaced at the most inopportune time for
the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA), as
they are celebrating the 40th anniversary of the
‘Battle of the Sexes’ and the advent of equal
prize money for women at the U.S. Open.
The Battle of the Sexes was the title given
to a series of matches between male and female
tennis players in 1973. American Grand Slam
champion Bobby Riggs began this series of
contests when he challenged Billie Jean King
to a match, claiming that the women’s game
was inferior and that even at the age of 55, he
could beat one of the best women’s players of
that time. After King initially declined, world
number #1 Margaret Court faced off against
Riggs instead, losing in two sets. Four months
later however, King accepted Riggs challenge
and defeated him in straight sets (best-of-five
format), resulting in the U.S. Open becoming
the first Grand Slam to offer equal prize money.
58 LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

CULTURE
The Australian Open and French Open
followed suit in 1984 and 2006 respectively.
King’s win, whilst historic, and a crucial
proponent in acquiring equal money for female
tennis players, drew significant criticism, much
of which was based on the age of the players,
King being 26 years younger than Riggs at the
time. Furthermore, many people speculated that
Riggs threw the match, taking advantage of the
overwhelming odds against King to settle his
debt to the mob.
Several other ‘battles of the sexes’ took
place throughout the decades, the most notable
of which included the Williams sisters. During
the 1998 Australian Open, 203rd ranked male
player Karsten Braasch challenged Venus and
Serena, who were 17 and 16 years of age at the
time respectively, after the sisters had claimed
they could beat any male player ranked above
200. Braasch overwhelmed the sisters by a score
of 6-2 against Venus, and 6-1 against Serena.
The obvious disparities between the men’s
and women’s game, namely speed and power,
continued to inhibit equal prize money being
offered across all four Grand Slams. Despite
years of protesting by Billie Jean King and
other prominent female players, Wimbledon
continued to deny equal pay for female players.
The turning point came in 2006 when Venus
Williams published an essay in The Times in
which she accused Wimbledon of “being on the
wrong side of history.”
A notable part of her essay included
an acknowledgment that women “would be
happy to play five-set matches in Grand Slam
tournaments”, though this has obviously
not come to fruition. Venus Williams also
recognised the uniqueness of the sport of tennis:
“No other sport has men and women competing
for a grand slam championship on the same
stage, at the same time. So in the eyes of the
general public the men’s and women’s games
have the same value.”
In response to Venus’ cry for equality,
British Prime Minister Tony Blair and members
of parliament endorsed her arguments,
ultimately leading to the equal pay for female
tennis players at Wimbledon. Described as the
‘single factor’ that resulted in this momentous
change, Venus would then go on to become
the first benefactor of this equalisation of prize
money at Wimbledon, receiving the same
amount as men’s champion Roger Federer.
Another point discussed by the seventime
Grand Slam champion in her essay is one
that has been challenged by many leading male
players. Williams pronounced that women
“enjoy huge and equal celebrity and are paid
for the value we deliver to broadcasters and
spectators, not the amount of time we spend on
the stage.” It is often argued that men’s tennis
attracts the most spectators. Tickets to men’s
finals, for example, cost more than tickets to the
women’s final at Wimbledon.
Many detractors from equal pay often
speculate that if the WTA were to organise
their own grand slams, separate from the men’s
“This highly contentious
debate has resurfaced at
the most inopportune time
for the Women’s Tennis
Association (WTA), as they
are celebrating the 40th
anniversary of the ‘Battle of
the Sexes’ and the advent of
equal prize money for women
at the U.S. Open.”
tour, they would fail to raise the same amount of
revenue as the ATP. As it stands, female tennis
players benefit from the revenue brought in by
male tennis players.
Andy Roddick stressed that gender
issues should not be at the centre of the
debate; rather, he argued that tennis should be
approached from the point of view of a business.
“I’m sure there’s a way to figure out who people
are coming to watch,” Roddick said. “There’s
TV ratings to look at. I’m sure there are ample
numbers out there to dissect. As any business
goes, you look at those numbers and then
decide where it goes from there.”
Currently, men’s tennis is experiencing
a ‘Golden Era’ of accomplished players and
enticing rivalries. The ‘Big Four’, made up
of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray, are
consistently successful at the Grand Slams, and
their hard-fought battles often define Grand
Slams (Nadal and Djokovic’s almost six-hour
slugfest at the 2012 Australian Open is widely
regarded as one of the greatest finals of all time).
However, the same cannot be said for
women’s tennis. Even Serena Williams, who
recently won her 17th Grand Slam title and
is regarded as the best female tennis player of
our generation, has been unable to maintain
a consistent level of success throughout
the course of her career, though this can be
attributed to injury, family tragedy, and a lack
of interest in her earlier years. There have been
several one-Slam wonders over the past few
years (Ivanovic, Kvitova and Bartoli to name
a few), as well as players who reached the top
of the rankings without winning a Grand Slam
(Safina, Wozniacki and Jankovic). Spectators
constantly complain of the shrieking made by
Azarenka and Sharapova and the encumbering
grunting of Errani and Schiavone. More
importantly, there have been no compelling
rivalries to keep audiences interested.
This is only a representation of the current
state of tennis however. Men’s tennis was
regarded as particularly weak and uninteresting
in the period helmed by Hewitt and Roddick,
whereas women’s tennis enjoyed several periods
of enticing rivalries (involving Graf, Evert, and
Seles) in which a consistently high level of play
was maintained.
This shows that women’s tennis is capable
of catching the attention of tennis audiences
around the world. The emergence of the ‘Big
Three’ in women’s tennis (Serena, Azarenka,
and Sharapova) is definitely a step in the right
direction. As a result of the enthralling five set
showdowns between the ‘Big Four’ in men’s
tennis, however, competitive rivalries will
not be able to shine as brightly in a best-ofthree
sets format, even if stability at the top is
established.
The WTA must realise that the format
of their game is the main obstacle in the
acceptance of equal prize money for women. By
slowly integrating the best-of-five sets format
into Grand Slams (first in finals, then filtered
down), women’s tennis will not only begin to
rival their male counterparts, but they will also
raise the overall level and appeal of their sport.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
59

SUBHEADING
LITERARY FICTION UNDER THE
MICROSCOPE
Amelia Moulis
Since being published earlier this month, a study from the New School
for Social Research in New York has sparked claims that literary fiction
teaches its audience how to read minds, makes individuals better people
and even improves a reader’s soul. This is a worrying prospect: how will
the rest of the world survive when literary elitists can reach into peoples’
minds – like at the end of Chekhov’s The Seagull – and gauge how dearly
the people wished to murder every last character? Hopefully, with their
superior souls, these higher literary beings will bestow forgiveness upon
those poor, misunderstanding mortals. But, in fact, the study itself made
far less dramatic claims.
Social researchers Emanuele Castano and David Comer Kidd
published a study in Science on October 3 that supports the positive correlation
between reading literary fiction and performing well on theory of
mind tests. Theory of mind details the ability to attribute mental states
such as beliefs, intentions, knowledge and desires to oneself and to others.
The experiment required subjects to read ten to fifteen pages of ‘literary’
fiction, popular fiction, nonfiction unrelated to people, or nothing
at all. Literary excerpts featured American National Book Award winners
or short stories by Anton Chekhov or Don DeLillo, whilst somehow
navigating the distinction between ‘high’ and ‘low’ art, which is itself
contentious and historically fickle. The popular works were selected from
Amazon.com topsellers, and nonfiction pieces were taken from Smithsonian
Magazine and included ‘How the Potato Changed the World’.
Immediately after reading, the subjects completed five tests designed
to measure theory of mind, such as Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test
(RMET) where they were asked to match a strip of face to a corresponding
complex emotion. On average, subjects who were exposed to either
breeds of fiction scored better than those who read nonfiction or those
who didn’t read at all. Between the breeds of fiction, subjects who read
literary works scored higher than those who read popular works, yet the
absolute differences were hardly dramatic. For example, on the RMET
test, the literary group outperformed the popular group on average by
about two questions out of 36.
The researchers proposed in their conclusion that “…by prompting
readers to take an active writerly role to form representations of characters’
subjective states, literary fiction recruits Theory of Mind”. Theory of
Mind is an elusive and multifaceted social capacity, and the notion that
reading literary texts can mold one’s social aptitude in such a way is undoubtedly
exciting. In commenting on the study, Louise Erdich, author of
The Round House, a text used in one of the experiments, exclaimed “This
is why I love science … [Because the researchers]found a way to prove
true the intangible benefits of literary fiction.” Nonetheless, these results
must be put into context. First, as scientists know, studies ‘suggest’ rather
than ‘prove’, and second, the benefits of literary fiction have been made
tangible in a host of other studies and essays.
In his book, The Better Angels of Our Nature, Steven Pinker
explains how realistic fiction “… may expand readers’ circle of empathy
by seducing them into thinking and feeling like people very different
from themselves.” In the late 18th Century Humanitarian Revolution,
one such reader – a retired military officer writing to Rousseau about his
epistolary novel Julie, or the New Heloise – lamented, “Never have I wept
such delicious tears. That reading created such a powerful effect on me
that I believe I would have gladly died.” These comments seem especially
telling when reminded that the grieving reader must have had little-tonothing
in common with the heroine, the sensitive and emotive Julie
(despite the reader’s uncanny ability to write like a sensitive female).
Further to this example, Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilych was once
used in medical schools to teach students what it felt like to die, and
many other studies have been conducted to examine and support the
positive impact of long term reading on the capacity to empathise. The
current study even supports these earlier studies in showing a larger
disparity between theory of mind results separated along an ‘Author Recognition
Test’, designed to ascertain how much literary fiction the subject
has read in his or her life prior to participating in the test. The Author
Recognition Test assessed each reader’s previous exposure to fiction and it
was a general finding in the study that a high recognition of authors led to
a significantly better cognitive performance.
This leaves us to wonder: why is this particular indicator of
short-term effects measured by this particular experiment apparently
so groundbreaking? The reality is that its outcomes appear to confirm
something many of us already know is true. Author Louise Erdich admits
that although “… it’s nice to be told what we write is of social value … I
would still write even if novels were useless.” And it’s safe to assume that
readers of literary fiction would still read, no matter if reading such pieces
was proven to have no effect whatsoever on their social or intellectual
competence. Thus it seems absurd that this study is having such wide
coverage. Those of us who write literary fiction know that our writing
affects readers in one way or another, and those of us who read it feel
the effect it has on us. So frankly, if you’re not a writer or a reader, then
you’re missing out no matter what science can ‘prove’.
60
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

LOVE ADVICE WITH...
KARL MARX
- The advice column with class -
Dear Karl,
My boyfriend can’t dance to save his life. the idea of taking him to a
dance party is mortifying. what do I do?
-Embarrassed GF
ps. I don’t think dancing classes will do much good.
Embarrassed GF,
Talk about ‘first world problems!’ If that is the worst thing that you can
fault him for, then he must be pretty swell. So, I presume you’re pretty
satisfied with his personality, looks, commitment to the struggle, and
charm. And yet you want more? C’mon!
Your feelings may be related to this recent phenomenon
in capitalist society today that I have noticed – it’s called ‘selfimprovement.’
It seems to be gaining popularity in many pulp books,
workshops and a general attitude to life that some people adopt. It
is as if it is no longer enough for everyone to just be themselves, but
must improve constantly and endlessly in every way. I think this is a
very dangerous idea that will never lead to happiness. Indeed, many
psychologists have come out to critique this trend as unhealthy.
Accepting others and ourselves and seeking understanding is
recommended as a better attitude.
However, psychologists miss capitalism’s role apropos selfimprovement.
Capitalism must always grow, grow, and grow, like the
Hungry Little Caterpillar book you were perhaps read in kindergarten.
This is why capital always seeks new markets, produces new useless crap
for you to buy, and advertising becomes increasingly pervasive. Now we
are encouraged to feel dissatisfied with ourselves and others. We must
always grow, grow, and grow – not only must we earn more and buy
more, but now we must be more. We are made to feel that we must look
better (by buying new beauty products) or be stronger (by paying to join
a gym) or be thinner (by buying a magazine that describes a celebrity
fad diet) or be more talented (by paying to join some hipster class in art
or cooking). It is never enough, and even people who end up perfectly
moisturised, thin, muscular, wealthy and hip, never seem to end up
happy, as they are pressured to want even more. I believe dance classes
and such (unless you join them for fun, which of course is fine, but
frivolous) are merely another extension of this idea.
Whatever happened to accepting people for who they are? I have
often been quoted as saying, ‘From each according to his (or ‘her’ – I
just revised it) ability, to each according to her/his need.’ Most people
have since focused on the second half of the quote. But I also meant
that people should not get any less just because they might have
different abilities. So, maybe your bloke can’t jiggle his butt around
on the dance floor as well as some others – then I say, appreciate him
‘according to his ability.’
Do you mind if I tangent onto how self-improvement is
perhaps even more oppressive for women in capitalist society? Lately
there is this ‘Super Mum’ trope that you can see in ads everywhere.
It usually portrays a woman who seems much empowered because
she can work and cook and clean and mother her children and be
attractive all at once. Wow! An alluring idea, until you stop and
consider, ‘why should she work herself to death when it would
seem much easier and simpler to demand that men share some of
the burden of housework and parenting, and perhaps not objectify
women to boot?’ Yet advertising prefers to pressure women to
think otherwise. That way, business can sell lots more cleaning
products, cookbooks, beauty products, convenience and time-saving
products to women who feel they must ‘have it all’ or else they are
inadequate. This is part of the reason why some feminists, such as
Bell Hooks, argue that true gender equality is not possible within a
capitalist system.
So the pressure on men to be muscular, high-income earners,
and good dancers is nothing compared to the pressures that are
imposed on women today by capitalism and its insidious idea that we
all pursue self-improvement. Nevertheless, you would be nobler for
trying to overcome your embarrassment and letting go of your desire
to change your boyfriend. Love him for who he is.
Yours,
K. M.

THREE MATES AND A TRUCK
Annabel Pirrie
It’s the first hot day of spring in Melbourne, a day when you’re willing
to overlook the dirty syringes littering St. Kilda Beach for a chance
to swim in the bay, and where the warm glow of the sun on your back
holds the potential for the first sunburn since March. Down the end
of a quiet residential street a crowd is gathering in a backyard of one
of the houses. In one corner of the yard a large, fort-like structure has
been erected and is providing shelter for a group of twenty-somethings
sprawled out on bean bags and old crates who pass around acoustic
guitars, clap sticks, a tambourine, and an electric bass. Opposite, past
odd clusters of chairs and a bin with a sign that reads “FEED ME”, a dog
kennel has been re-imagined as a table and become a gathering point for
others to stand about in conversation. Almost every single person holds
a cup of red, green, or white liquid in their hands from which they sip
intermittently. The centre of attention however, the reason why all are
gathered here today, is a large white trailer parked by the yard’s entrance
that is distributing these drinks. Within its four walls resides BlendCo.,
a superfoods blending company founded by three mates in their early
twenties that is preparing to lay siege upon Melbourne’s festival circuit
this summer. Today is their launch party.
In Melbourne, food is king. We host roughly 70 food events
annually, entice world-renown chefs and cooks to come see what’s on
offer, and are home to a plethora of markets selling food from all corners
of the globe. It’s an ideal breeding ground for innovative food ideas, a
characteristic that younger generations of Melburnians are embracing
wholeheartedly. There’s the Brulée Cart on St Kilda Road started up
by twenty-somethings Jack and Bart White who, at the ripe old ages of
13 and 15, were also owners of the Belgian Waffle Cart. After winning
$70,000 on Deal or No Deal, 23 year old Scotty Bradley created frozen
yoghurt chain Yo-Get-It; where if you can guess the correct weight of your
yoghurt, “yo-get-it” for free. There’s also Kinfolk Café on Bourke Street,
begun by Jarrod Briffa, 28, and Asuka Hara, 27, in 2010, that redistributes
its profits to four development projects based in Rwanda, Ghana, and
Australia. BlendCo. is the newest member to their ranks.
As increasing amounts of young entrepreneurs hit the scene, it’s
interesting to consider what the appeal is for starting up a business at a
younger age. For BlendCo. founders Mat Bate, 21, Morgan Cottee, 22,
and Charlie Maginnes, also 22, youth and inexperience are viewed as
strengths. Says Morgan, “we wanted to get involved earlier because we’re
motivated by passion and not influenced by the pressures that come with
older age.” Indeed the core beliefs driving their company are indicative of
their youth, encouraging risk taking and innovation on any scale.
These are beliefs that the boys have adopted into their own lives
as well; during founders meetings at Charlie’s parents’ house it’s not
unusual to find the trio shrieking and offering hi-fives as a member uses
a “big word” correctly. Despite the fun-loving atmosphere, however, at
the centre of their business lies a keen desire to see BlendCo. succeed.
Acknowledging their Generation Y heritage, the founders have embraced
the tech-savvy nature of their peers and drawn heavily upon the tools
of the internet to grow their company. Social Media networks such
as Facebook and Instagram have been indispensable in establishing a
BlendCo. following, and multimedia websites such as TED Talks are
regularly consulted upon for inspiration and education. One of the more
influential TED Talks the founders have viewed is Simon Sinek’s ‘How
great leaders inspire action’ in which Sinek stated that “people don’t buy
what you do but why you do it.” This has become a central notion in the
running of BlendCo. and is encapsulated in their motto “We Blend.”
Back at the launch, the party is in full swing. From forth the
BlendCo. trailer fly enviro-friendly cups filled to the brim with various
cocktails of health, thrust into the warm air and consumed eagerly by
the waiting crowd. The founders can be seen moving about in the yard;
Charlie is chatting with his Grandma, Morgan is running about with
some tools to fix the trailer’s yoghurt machine, and Mat has picked up a
guitar and joined the crowd of musicians in the fort. It’s an interesting
group gathered together in the throes of the late Sunday afternoon: a
mix of old and young, family and friends, health nuts and party people,
superfood smoothies and celebratory alcohol. Conversations on people,
health, food, experience, the past, and the future intermingle and rise up
into the spring air. Observing the scene in front of them, the founders’
nerves slowly ease into excitement for the oncoming festival season as
they examine the mixing pot of people and ideas they have brought
together. It’s their vision come to life. They’re BlendCo. and they blend.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
63

SUBHEADING
GAME REVIEW: OUTLAST
Has ‘Amnesia: The Dark Descent’ finally met its match?
Anthony Sarian
It has been three years since Amnesia: The Dark Descent both frightened
and delighted fans of the horror genre. Since then the gaming community
has waited with bated breath for something, anything that can
deliver a horror experience that even compares to the visceral terror
that Amnesia provided.
In comes Outlast, a recent title by Red Barrel games. Red Barrel
has made a bold claim. They claim that Outlast qualifies as the “Scariest
Game Ever”.
That’s a big claim, but does the horror live up to the hype?
You play as Miles Upshur, a journalist investigating ‘Mount
Massive Asylum’ for corruption and wrongdoing. You spend the game
running from the mad and the monstrous, through blood soaked hallways,
and through corpse ridden corridors. In a similar vein to Amnesia,
there is no combat. You have only your trusty video camera to stand
between you and the horrors that wait. You need to rely on a mixture of
speed and stealth to survive. You’ll run. You’ll slam doors behind you to
delay pursuers. You’ll hide in closets and lockers. You’ll wait as a creature
searches for you in the darkness.
The core gameplay borrows much from Amnesia, while still introducing
a bit of its own original flair. Like Amnesia, resource management
of your only light source plays a pivotal part of the gameplay. Instead of
a lantern, you will be relying on a night-vision camcorder. The camera
is vital for seeing in the dark, but quickly runs out of battery. You’ll soon
fall into a ritual of searching for batteries in every room, turning off your
camera when it is light, and turning it on when it is dark. Unlike Amnesia,
however, you aren’t discouraged from looking at the creatures that
are out to slaughter you. Instead you’ll stare straight at them, bathed in
the neon-green light of your camera’s night-vision. You will see them,
but they won’t see you. The effect is a delightfully terrifying experience.
You’ll spend much of the game looking at horrible things in this way.
This gives the game an effect comparable to found footage horror films
such as the Blair Witch Project, the Spanish horror film REC or even
Paranormal Activity.
A lot of what Outlast tries to achieve is aided through its use of
atmosphere and sound. The environments have a strong, gritty atmosphere.
You’ll see mangled corpses, blood-soaked mirrors and messages
written in blood. The games graphics help assist this. I played this with
the graphics set to ‘Low’ on my mid-range laptop. It ran perfectly fine,
and still looked excellent. The character models are a bit bland, and
towards the end of the game you will notice some recycling. However,
you’ll spend most of this time staring at them from behind a night-vision
camera, which cleverly serves to mask the graphical flaws in character
designs.
The way your character moves, breathes and talks further aids this
effect. Your avatar, Miles Upshur, moves with a sense of corporality.
When sidling on a wall you see his hands. When you run and crouch the
camera shakes and bounces chaotically; when hiding Miles will hyperventilate.
And unlike many games, the protagonist’s arm stretches out
in full view of the gamer upon opening a door. Subtle touches like this
have the effect of making your in-game presence feel personal and real.
This corporality is mixed in with an excellent and highly intuitive
control scheme. When running away in a moment of panicked frenzy
64
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013

GAMING
you’ll find yourself easily and intuitively jumping, sliding and climbing
at the tap of a key. Hiding spots identify themselves to the player as they
approach with a subtle button prompt, aiding the player without ruining
the tension or atmosphere. A minute into the game and you’ll find yourself
effectively using your camera, reloading the batteries and turning the
night-vision on and off with complete ease.
Yet despite all of its clever game design, Outlast quickly outstays its
welcome. Although only a 6 hour game, after an hour or so of gameplay
Outlast will turn from horrifying and fun to dull and repetitive. Unlike
Amnesia, Outlast lacks subtlety in its horror. You’ll soon grow accustomed
to the sight of madmen suddenly leaping out at you and struggling with
you. Jump scares are everywhere. Jump scares may be fun the first few
times, but they quickly ruin the tension as the player becomes desensitised
to their effect. Soon you’ll find yourself responding with cynicism
rather than fear. The gory and blood soaked levels soon become tired
and cliché, as the levels barely vary in design or feel. A few novel experiences
and levels are thrown in, but for the most part each minute of
Outlast plays much like the last. When the ending credits roll, you’ll be
glad they’ve arrived.
Has Amnesia: The Dark Descent finally met its match? Not really.
Outlast has excellent game design, an intuitive control scheme and is
initially delightfully scary. The tangible and real effect of Miles’ body,
and the sounds of fear he emits, make the game feel real and terrifying.
Unfortunately, Outlast relies too heavily on ‘shock’ horror and jump
scares, and the levels soon grow repetitive and stale. At $19.99 on
Steam, you’re getting good value for your money. But its lack of subtlety
means that Outlast doesn’t live up to the title of ‘Scariest Game Ever’.
IS GAMING CULTURE, CULTURE ?
Jake Spicer
This is the last edition of Lot’s Wife for the year, and also my last video
gaming column. This has caused me to look back and reflect on what
I’ve written over the year. I established a purpose rather early on: to
embed video games in a more general cultural discussion. I wanted to
discuss video game news in a wider creative context. In doing so, I tried
my hand at New Games Journalism, an application of New Journalism
(see Wolfe, Capote, Thompson), using personal anecdotes, literary
techniques and creative analysis and then applying them to video games
(for a seminal and excellent example, Google ‘Bow Nigger’).
One theme that has repeatedly popped up throughout the year is
the justification of video games as a hobby. My first piece, titled Gaming.
A Bloody Waste of Time? was a quickly thrown-together defence in
response to a Facebook friend commanding people to “put down the
controller and read a damn book” (and presumably to get off his damn
lawn, too). It’s not something to dismiss lightly though, it’s important
that we should be analysing whether we are spending our time wisely.
Video games are a relatively new form of entertainment; it’s
no surprise to see a push against it. It has the disadvantage of being a
form of entertainment, and a ubiquitously popular one at that: resulting
in cultural doomsayers pointing their callused fingers at gamers’ callused
thumbs.
An argument that I find persuasive is the concept that video games
try and hook you in in a malicious way. It’s such a competitive market
that publishers would try anything to keep you coming back. League
of Legends, for example, gives you a bonus amount of Influence Points
for your first win of the day. In the context of gaming, this is a process
known as ‘gamification’: using regular, small rewards to condition you
to want more. While effective, the tactic feels dirty. Of course, other
media aren’t completely innocent. Cliff-hangers, pulpy twists, and wishfulfillment
are found across books and film. But video games have more
direct access to our brains. You don’t see as many book addicts. While
it doesn’t mean we should outlaw video games, it does certainly require
more care.
Another argument is the idea that video games are a
predominantly solo hobby. Shouldn’t we spend our spare time building
and strengthening your interpersonal relationships rather than in an
unproductive time sink? Disregarding the fact that many people play
multi-player games with their friends, a lot of people play so they can
join in broader cultural discussion. Have you ever felt social pressure to
watch a TV show like Game of Thrones or Breaking Bad? It’s the same
thing. Social groups are built around the discussion of this kind of stuff.
I know I’ve played games in the past just so I can feel included. Video
games are clearly not the only media we consume in private for the
purpose of public discussion. We’ve built our culture around these games
in the same way we’ve built our culture around books and movies.
It’s an ongoing dilemma in my head; the constant
questioning, rationalising, and perhaps excuse-making regarding the
time I spend playing video games. Recently I’ve found I use games as
more of a relaxation process with injections of ‘good feeling’, rather than
an exploration of artistic creativity. But that doesn’t mean I’m not taking
something away from the experience. My views have remained much
the same throughout the year: perturbed yet devoted. As I write this I
can feel the soft tug of my PC, luring me into some new, exciting and –
believe it or not – intellectually stimulating gamescape... Luckily I have
a community of likeminded friends with which to discuss the cultural
implications of gaming after this column reaches an end.
Farewell, dear readers.
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 8 • 2013
65

SUBHEADING
66
LOT’S WIFE EDITION 7 • 2013