JENNY’SJUGS page 3

TWILIGHT: NEW MOON, PUBLIC ENEMIES AND JULIAN CASABLANCAS REVIEWED

SCIENCE vs ARTS

It just got personal.

Agony unt

December 2009FREE

“Welcome to Altrincham Grammar’s first completely 6th form run magazine - by the students, for the students. Here at HOWL we aim to give the student body a voice with which they can discuss topical issues, but also have a laugh and take the mickey. We have been working hard since September to set up a framework for future issues, and then bringing our first issue to you. We hope that you too can get involved by sending articles into our email address (howl.agsb@hotmail.co.uk), and advertising 6th form related events and activities. I want to say a big thank you to all the lads who have worked hard on this issue, especially in designing and producing HOWL. I would also like to thank the Mr. Gartside who has offered us support and advice, and Mr Timmins who has helped to get our ideas off the ground and onto this new shiny magazine! We all hope you enjoy this issue, and the issues to come. Enjoy!”

From the Editor:

“As the face of the first issue of HOWL, I’m flattered to be a part of this engaging and fun magazine. HOWL is a great read, and a fantastic platform for the vocal student body. It’s is a great way to pass those lazy free periods and I’m looking forward to the next issue!”

From the Howell:

HOWL is:

not forgetting Henry Flint, Sam Spring, Junaid Alvi and Darije Custovic

Jenny

Science and Humanities never seem to be put on a level ground, and which is higher depends on who you ask. While Science tends to keep to itself, con-tent with its own subject area, for some reason the Humanities feel they need to talk about, form opinions on and essentially misinterpret Science.

The most subtle and deceitful part of this misinter-pretation is the fact that the stereotype and pub-lic image of Science – for example scientists be-ing aloof and self promoted authority figures, or Science containing wacky truths that constantly change and are near impossible to understand – is one that has been created by the Humanities.

If we were to hold a debate, with Science vs. Hu-manities, doubtlessly the Humanities would win. Not because Humanities are better than Science (they are not), but because that is what the Hu-manities have been trained to do. The Humanities have been trained to formulate eloquent arguments and emotive speeches to win the minds of the au-dience, whereas all that the Scientists have been trained to do is the put forward the facts. Darije Custovic could stand up and make a concise and flawless argument, but all the audience would re-member would be Rory Sherlock’s wit and charisma.

This problem extends to all of society, where Sci-entists, who are more at home expressing their thoughts in short and precise statements to their peers are expected to be able to hold their own against reporters who have been taught to steer the interview to get whichever conclusion they want.

Science wants to inform their audience, whereas Humanities wants to captivate them, and this can lead to a conflict of interests. For example you may have seen an episode of Brainiac, in which vari-ous alkali earth metals (lithium, potassium, etc.) are thrown into bath tubs to make explosions.

The density of caesium ensured it hit the bottom of the bath like a lead weight. The sheer volume of water there totally drowned out the thermal shock-wave I was expecting to shatter the bath. That was an expensive filming day. They had hired part of Pinewood studies and had an ambulance and fire engine plus crew on standby. They could not go home empty handed. So they rigged a bomb in the bottom of the bath and blew the [hell] out of it.

The last metal they use – Caesium, they claim would go up like a depth charge, which if you be-lieve what Brainiac shows you, is what happens.

The onsite scientist however tells another story: So we have the media – controlled by the Hu-manities giving a false representation of science. Sometimes this is done knowingly, but sometimes not. This could be in part because while the Hu-manities learn how to be verbose, the Sciences will teach how to interpret statistics and results.”Another way that this is shown is by the media giving big front page stories on scientific “Breakthroughs”, and these tend to be one off results that go against all current scientific knowledge. As Scientists will know, if you have one result that goes against all of your other results, it is usually wrong, Humani-ties however are not burdened by this knowledge, and the media will pay this one (probably wrong) result lots attention. And to top the stupidity of the situation, when Scientific bodies prove the result was wrong, the Humanities will draw attention to this and propagate the idea that Sciences are full of uncer-tain, always changing facts and ruin their authority. It should also be pointed out that the conclusions of Science are based on non-subjective rules, and so when a scientist speaks with authority it is from this secure foundation, and not from personal opinions.

Protests against Nuclear Power and Genetic Engi-neering have been rife, due to large scale ignorance (the government would call it unawareness) on the subjects, and the main method to counter this is nor-mally education. However for every step forward that is taken, the media manage to push two steps back, with articles giving emotive stories about deformed babies from Chenobyl (there were no deformed ba-bies) and the like and filling the public’s mind with prejudice against Science before they even under-stand it. And of course any attempt to stop the news-papers publishing this would be met with outcries about freedom of the press (which for some reason is shown as one of the cornerstones of a utopian society).

I must go back to my first point, and state that this is the fault of Humanities – they barge into Science, misinterpret it and present their misun-derstanding to the public, whereas Science makes no encroachment into the domain of Humani-ties, it must be due to the wanting of the seem-ingly unreachable perfection that the Sciences offer.

Peter Conn

Now have your ‘Right-to-Reply’. Email us at howl.agsb@hotmail.co.uk and have your response pub-lished in the next edition!

SCIENCEHUMANITIESVERSUS

“

”

Yeah but its never going to happen, is it?

Revolution in the 21st century, of course not! 22nd cen-tury? Maybe so. Revolutionary socialism doesn’t advocate the overthrow of government by a clique of ‘enlightened’ Bolsheviks taking over power and telling us that we must work for ‘the greater good’. Modern revolutionary social-ists make it clear that those who join the movement must choose to do so, and only when a critical mass of people want a revolution (i.e. a strong majority), then, and only then, will it be acted upon.

It is easy to put revolution down as being utopian; how-ever socialism tries to solve problems long-term that neo-liberalism fails to solve short term. We put limitations on our morality – ‘oh well there will always be unemployment’, ‘well those people are on the other side of the world, what can I do?’, however socialism does not compromise like this. Should we be asking about striving for a goal that is maybe a hundred years away, or should we be asking is that time worth the establishment of a better more socially just society? Revolutionary socialists say yes.

The overthrow of a corrupt and unjust system where the means of production are owned by the few, to exploit the labour of the many, is historically inevitable. However the common misconception is that revolutionary socialism ad-vocates a violent upheaval of government – a planned at-tack. This is untrue.

Well the people in power aren’t going to surrender to this revolutionary movement, no matter how large it is and how ‘just’ it’s aims may be. They have the ca-pacity to bring a private army or the police to knock down any revolution.

Then there, comrades; we have the answer. Though revo-lutionary socialism may result in some violence – it is pure-ly defensive. ‘The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles… bourgeoisie and proletari-at’ said Marx and we have identified those two classes. If these people are willing to beat down the will of the mass - then there we have our Bourgeoisie.

Marx Brophy

Now have your ‘Right-to-Reply’. Email us at howl.agsb@hotmail.co.uk and have your response published in the next edition!

‘One solution… REVOLUTION!’ shouted red-faced ranks of anti-fascist protestors –regardless of their political persua-sion, the rhythmic chant burnt across our mass like wild-fire. It was the afternoon of the counter-protest, against the English Defence League in Manchester city centre, and we were there to tell the EDL that they were not welcome in our city.

Great! Another commie rant…

Okay, so it’s easy to think that given the nature of the protest that people would shout any old chant at these St. George’s flag donning Neanderthals. I mean, the word ‘Revolution’ means nothing - except to a greying, knitted-sweater clad, armchair communist who smells of meals-on-wheels and woodbines. However, though revolutionary ideas have on the whole been rejected in the current era, they still remain as relevant now as they did thirty years ago, and though the seem dated, Marxist ideas can still be applied today.

So why do we need a revolution?

On this I could fill this whole magazine, and even that wouldn’t come close to the thousand or so pages of Karl Marx’s Das Kapital. Currently the working class bear the of the brunt of a capitalist system; bosses in big business and (even the public sector) choose to ‘make cutbacks’ in rather than compromise their own paycheques. Where is their compassion and duty to their fellow man?

How about the banking crisis? Well when the bankers messed up what did we do? Yes we may have nationalised some of our banks; but now the public are stakeholders in the banks – why are we still seeing the same people who failed to run their banks still in place, creaming off big bo-nuses?

Take a global perspective – is it morally justifiable that we strive for a luxurious standard of living when there are people dying elsewhere because they will not have enough food to live for another week? Capitalism is wrecking the lives of millions and endangering the planet. A new society can only be constructed when the workers take control of the wealth and plan its production and distribution for hu-man need and not profit.

Twilight: New MoonFilm Review by Sam Spring

Having gone to the cinema out of love rather than choice, it was with trepidation that I sank into a cinema packed with teenage girls debating whether they were ‘Team Robert’ or ‘Team Taylor’. Personally, I am in Team Robert. This judgement is less my opinion, and more a spoon fed com-ment that I’m obliged to include.

The lights dimmed. The audience gasped. And the pre-movie trailers start to a collective groan. With the crowd restless after 30 minutes of trailers (by my watch), the film finally started; unsurprisingly greeted with much shushing and rustling, as people settled down to watch the film.

What was surprising was the reaction when Edward Cullen (Robert Patterson), the vampire, first showed his pale prominent cheek-boned face. At least one girl shrieked. Many gasped, swooned and gaped at him - I laughed, not a clever idea gents, be prepared to be hit for your trouble. As the film unfolded, Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner) entered to a similar reaction. Again I laughed. Again I was hit. It was getting repetitive now. Unfortu-nately so was the plotline.

The film featured a startlingly shallow romance, in which Bella (Kirsten Stewart) toils over which guy she prefers. Many men (me included) won-dered why she didn’t choose Jacob - since Edward left her unceremoniously. But a woman’s mind is complex and even Jacob’s impressive physique could not sway Bella’s mind. Packed with brooding montages from Bella, combined with chat up lines lifted straight from The Two Ronnies (supplied with unfailing cheese by Jacob), filled most of the two and a half hours. The rest was filled with semi-action where Jacob, a werewolf, is pitted against his fellows, or mental combat held between the strange love triangle.

Failing to buy into the romance, and unimpressed by the acting, the film turned into a farce. I didn’t know what was more amusing; Jacob remov-ing his shirt (to numerous shrieks from the crowd) stemming the flow of blood artistically applied to Bella’s head, or Edward removing his shirt, for no apparent reason, except to give the screeching girls another opportunity to test the range of my hearing. It turns out, perhaps to my downfall; my hearing is just too good.

Two and a half hours later and with my patience wearing thin, and my arm beginning to bruise, the film was left on a fairly predictable cliff-hanger. Don’t worry guys I won’t ruin the ending for you. But be prepared for angry outcries as the screen goes black and many will be distraught by the oh-so obvious ending. It is a shame that such a highly anticipated film, stumbled so easily. So it is with a heavy heart that I left the cinema, that such an iconic book could have been so badly dramatised. Therefore, with a slight hesitation, I give the film a two star rating.

Public EnemiesDVD Review by Lewis Woodward

Based around a true story ‘Public Enemies’ is an American crime film set in the 1930s which most will know is the period commonly referred to as “the great depression” The story revolves around FBI agent Melvin Purvis’ (Christian Bale) hunt for America’s most wanted, or as called in the film public enemy’s number’s one, two and three. The film opens with Public enemy number one, John Dillinger (Johnny Depp), breaking his gang out of prison, who then go on to rob a series of banks in the Chicago area, between robberies Dillinger is very quick to jump into bed with the first woman he meets, Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard), who becomes the love interest throughout the film, thus setting a romantic undertone to the film. After the opening prison break fiasco the film takes a comparably long time establishing itself and setting up the story, which is a little bit boring, and not very gripping.

The film is obviously aimed at a more mature audience, with very few moments of action, concentrating on the story, character development, and trying to create a good film, which it does. So make no mistake this film is not an action film with explosions every other shot and is instead tar-geted towards the drama genre.

Johnny Depp gives a fantastic performance as always, but I feel that Depp may have been limited by the need to be as close to the real John Dillinger as possible, which whilst not necessarily a bad thing, does limit Depp’s usually over the top characters that we have become acquainted to. Christian Bale also gives a good performance, admittedly not as well as Depps, but still convincing. However on occasion he did remind me of George Bush, mainly in the way he delivers lines, which was just a little bit off-putting.

My main criticism of the film is its length; it does seem a little bit too long, combine this with moments of boredom, which can lead to a loss of the audience’s attention, makes the film at times rather unexciting.

If you enjoy American crime drama’s or if you are a fan of Johnny Depp then I definatley recommend this film. However, if you are looking for an action film, have a short attention span or dislike Johnny Depp then I would definitley give this film a miss. Whilst it is a good film, it’s the boring bits that stick in your head and seem to shadow the parts of the film that are very good, and are fantastic pieces of cinema.

Phrazes for the Young - Julian CasablancasAlbum Review by Henry Flint

Most of you reading this, who might or might not have heard of Julian Casablancas, will know of his day job-fronting the impeccable NYC music scene veterans ‘The Strokes’. So when I first heard he’d be releasing a solo album I had mixed emotions. After hearing the two songs released via YouTube by Casablancas (‘11th Dimension’, ‘River of Brakelights’), I couldn’t wait to hear the rest. Seeing as the two songs are in contrast to each other, I was intrigued to see if he could meet halfway.

The first song, ‘Out Of The Blue’, is about Casablancas’ fears of the future and what the world we be like after his death. We hear about his anxiety of people ‘Pissing on his casket’, and this sets the tone of the whole album. With the influence of Nick Valensi’s (a fellow member of the strokes) piercing guitar lines gliding across either ear, and the synth pads that’ll be reverberating long after Julians death, it’s a promising start to what could be a classic album.

There are some songs, however, which made me raise an eyebrow. For instance, with songs such as ‘Left & Right in the Dark’ (which at first listen sounded like a 1980s direct-response advertisement), which is a prime example of his experimentation of boutique guitar tones blended with ana-logue synths and drum machines - a song which is near in winning me over.

Another is ‘Ludlow St.’, which is a sonic blend of Johnny Cash/ My Morning Jacket guitar lines, and eerie samples of oriental instruments, which to my surprise, works exceptionally well. The lyrics in the song are interesting too, as he sings ‘everything seems to go wrong when I start drinking’, which could be linked back to his drug taking, alcoholic Is This It days.

Phrazes For The Young also showcases some of Julian’s more mellow songwriting skills, especially with the evangelistic ‘4 Chords of the Apoca-lypse’. It includes a dirty fender rhodes and a BB King style guitar solo. It’s songs like these which amplify the benefit of more than one producer, as I’m sure that Casablancas didn’t think to merge a Hammond B3 with futuristic synths and a drum machine on his own!

At the end of the day, it may not reach the top of the UK or US billboard chart, but you cannot shrug the album off for this reason. Phrazes For The Young almost reminds me somewhat of a lost art, which may not be appreciated today, but after this generation, or the next, it will be laying the benchmark to artists everywhere. Maybe it’s too far-fetched for the music industry today, but soon enough it will be - four out of five.

Dear Agony Aunt,I often find myself spending up to 6 hours a day playing online with my Xbox live homies on Modern Warfare 2; and I choose to play over meeting my friends, and masturbation. Have I got my priorities in order?T. Robinson / H Streuli / C. Scott etc.

Let’s tackle these prob-lems in reverse or-der. First, nurture your world-class level of skill by learning to play one-handed. Then, you have an excuse to invite your friends over to show off your newfound mastery. Having done this, join a travelling freak show, where you can play for six hours a day, display-ing your skills to the public, whilst getting paid for it. Et voila!

Dear Agony Aunt,It’s swollen. Help!Anon.

Are you mad? It’s gotten bigger and you want help?!

Dear Agony Aunt,After posing for the front cover of a chemistry text book, I don’t know what to do next. Should I go for page 3 modelling?C. Wall

I just typed page 3 mod-elling into a certain fa-mous search engine. All I can say is, I hope you’re female (or Junaid).

Dear Agony Aunt,I have a problem with crumpets – I find they just have too many holes through which my hot, melting butter can seep. Can you suggest to me an alternative breakfast treat?Anon.

Have asparagus be-forehand. Apparently, it makes the task of but-tering crumpets more desirable.

Dear Agony Aunt,I am secretly jealous about Paul’s dancing, but don’t want to admit it. I tried Salsa but it did not go well.A. GaniDear reader, I do sym-pathise with you. All that hot, saucy stuff just makes me run to the toilet, ruining whatever move I was about to do.

Dear Agony Aunt,In school I maintain a hard, manly, Eastern European persona; but deep inside I just want to express myself though interpretive dance. How do I tell my friends that I’m leaving to join the Royal Academy of Dance?Anon.

I’m puzzled. Haven’t you answered your own question?

Rugby, a sport for men who like to touch each other just that bit too much, or something we as a school can be proud of? Well although we may still be strug-gling to dispute the first state-ment the 1st XV have at least given us a school team we can cheer on without feeling embar-rassed.

This season the team have had a somewhat unprecedented run in the Daily Mail Cup reach-ing the towering heights of the fourth round. “Aha” I hear you saying, “that means we beat at least 3 teams, and perhaps some more if there were pre-liminary rounds”. Well, not quite - in fact we only beat one, and took a bizarre route to the fourth round, that was almost as controversial as Thierry Henry’s handling skills.

In the first round we were granted a bye due to the fact there wasn’t the right number of teams, lucky yes, but a perk many other teams around the country also experienced. The second round was even more peculiar. The team was drawn

against Bishop Heber; with the match to be played one fine Wednesday lunchtime at AGSB. This seemed a good thing, the home advantage surely boosting our chances; however I doubt anyone could have guessed quite how much of an advan-tage it would turn out to be. The team went on to the field ready to start warming up, eagerly awaiting their opponents, oppo-nents who in fact never showed up. In a stroke of almost unbe-lievable luck it turned out that Bishop Heber believed the match was at their school, thereby forfeiting the match by not arriv-ing.

I’m sure you’re wondering by now whether the team is ever going to win, or at least play a game. Unfortunately no-one’s luck can hold out that long and instead the team had to turn to skill to get through round three, a tactic unheard of before Mr. Morris joined the school. An excellent display from our school ended in a 33-25 win over Cheadle Hulme, with some great individual performances. Matt Smith especially stood out,

showing sublime skills at flanker, which were rewarded when he scored a try.

So the team was into the fourth round, a record-breaking achievement. Was the fairy-tale going to last? We were up against the mighty Kings Mac-clesfield, a school whose reputa-tion precedes them. Even among the team there were doubts as to how much of a chance they stood of winning, doubts that were all too sadly realised. A sterling second half perform-ance, which finished just 7-3 to Kings Mac, was not enough to reverse a weak first half, where the team were outclassed, leav-ing the field at half time 26-0 down.

Although the dreams of ultimate success in the cup are now over for another year, at least we can take pride in a strong perform-ance from the team and hope the younger players can build on this in the future.

David Williams

Bye Bye, Cup Success