To Kill a Mockingbird

This is my first post as Miss LLB Hons. I finally have the fancy letters after my name! It therefore seems appropriate to write about the book which inspired me to become a lawyer in the first place. I have always been somewhat of a literary snob. As soon as I was competent enough to read at the age of 3 I did little else, it was either ballet dancing or reading. I was the easiest child to look after because you could stick me in the corner of a room with a book and I'd be content for hours. And by the time I had started primary school I was refusing to read "children's books", instead I read Lewis Carol. So the fact my favourite ever book is essentially a children's novel is a little contradictory, but it will always and forever be my number one book. So much that when I was told my hardback copy have been burnt by a scorned ex boyfriend I cried for the loss of my book rather than the end of the relationship. It is a book I believe EVERYONE should read at least twice during your life, once as a child and once as an adult. I have re read the novel many times. We had to study it during our GCSE's and I was shocked to be the only member of my class that had already read it! During my A-levels I wrote a comparative essay on the book and Arthur Miller's "the crucible" discussing the portrayal of injustice. Needless to say I know the novel inside out and it has been read a thousand times. Although I first read Harper Lee's novel when I was 11, reading it again when I was older had such a stark profound effect on me. I appreciated the quality so much more and the messages within.

The telegraph revealed that "To Kill a Mockingbird" was voted the most inspirational book of all time, beating the bible.  So what makes it such a fantastic literary creation? Perhaps it's the quality of writing and the vivid description which brings to life the small deep southern, Depression-ravaged town of Maycomb. The plot is relatively straight forwards, A lawyer (Atticus Finch) is picked to defend a black man charged with the rape of a white girl. But the subplots make it deliciously complex and grasping. Atticus is the moral backbone of the story, although some literary critics have claimed he's unrealistically perfect, I see him as an inspiration, both as a lawyer and a parent. He is rational, fair, and wise. He always see's the good in everyone and tries to understand and forgive their flaws. As a lawyer, he's committed to justice and would rather stand for what is right than bend to convention. It is a refreshing change to see a lawyer depicted as a hero, rather than as devious & callous. It is Atticus that inspired me to go into law, So I have Harper Lee to thank, or begrudge! 

Although set it the Deep American South, it easily translates to Britain and it's issues with prejudice, racism and class. It reminds me of something my old history teacher said whilst studying British Colonialism; even those on the bottom of the lowest classes in Britain thought they were better than the rest of the empire simply for being white and British. It's the exact same principle within the book. The "white trash" Ewells believe themselves to be better than Tom Robinson simply because of his skin colour. Furthermore, the jury could never be seen to convict a black man over a white man. The prejudice is painful and gripping, as a  reader there is no doubt whatsoever to Tom's innocence yet we have been so very well introduced to Maycomb's way of life & it's customs that we have little hope for justice. 

I am worried that if I keep talking I shall just spoil the enjoyment for everyone that hasn't read it. The film starring Gregory Peck is superb but does leave out some of the side stories which I believe to be crucial for the enjoyment of the novel. So if you're going to pick up a book this summer, forget the badly written porn that seems to be dominating the market, read to Kill a Mockingbird, you won't regret it, I promise. 

Phantom of the Opera UK Tour Review

Phantom is arguably Andrew Lloyd Webber's most famous masterpiece. 25 years since it first was performed it still captures the hearts and minds of audiences, young and old. As a 21st birthday treat my mum offered my the choice of a family meal out or a trip to Phantom of the Opera in Bristol Hippodrome. I got both. Thank you Jamie Oliver in Bath. It wasn't my first experience of Phantom, but there is something magical about being in Bristol Hippodrome and a live performance is always going to be better than a film, even without the gorgeous Gerard Butler. I refused to sit in the "peasantry" stalls as when I went to see Might Boosh in the hippodrome a few years earlier, I was sat in row M, and being vertically challenged I was barely able to see Noel Fielding in his mini metallic dress. So we had front for Grand Circle seats, which gave us a beautiful panoramic where we could see the whole stage uninterrupted. It has been suggested to me that Phantom is outdated but I loved it so much, I returned within the next 6 days, desperate for my boyfriend to experience Phantom for the first time and to be blown away by the outstanding cast, scenery and orchestra. 

Bristol Hippodrome, I was sat front row of the grand circle both times. Excellent viewing,

Based on Gaston Leroux’s 1910 novel Le Fantome de l’Opera, the story of the Phantom and his love of Christine is a story everyone should know. I shall try give a brief and therefore unsubstantial nutshell of the story in case you do not know of it, It is fundamentally a classic triangle love story in the vein of other outcast romances such The Hunchback of Notre Dame. The Phantom, a deformed genius, lives haunts and controlls the happenings at the Paris Opera House.  His obsession and protegee, orphan Christine believes her father has sent her an Angel of music to teach her to sing, although she has all along suspected he is also the infamous Phantom of the Opera. She rises from chorus girl to lead thanks to the Phantoms interference with the Opera House and subsequently is reunited with her childhood sweetheart, Raoul, who is in awe of Christine's voice and has always fondly remembered her. However Raoul's advances enrage the Phantom, he lures Christine to his underground lair where he hides from the light of day and pays homage to music. He plans to use his music to enchant her and make her love him. When Christine awakes the phantom has removed his mask and has his back to her, Christine is determined to see the face of her angel of music but is horrified to see his deformed physique and the Phantom, embarrassed and enraged, sends her away. He is however, still obsessed with Christine and many horrors follow at the opera house, causing Christine to flee with Raoul, they declare their love for each other, Raoul promising to protect Christine from the Phantom. The showdown comes as the Phantom and Raoul vie for Christine’s affections. Christine is initially disgusted by the Phantom's actions, claiming it's not his deformity that repulses her but his soul,  but soon learns he's lived a terrible life, deprived of love and kindness. She kisses the phantom, showing him compassion for the first time in his life. He lets her leave with Raoul and disappears into the night.

Souvenir broach from Mummy. 

The set design was beyond incredible, it was a multipurpose set, Paul Brown's revolving set made the journey to the Phantom's underground lair a breathless joy to watch. From the steps which appear magically, to the mystical boat scene and the breathtaking chandelier which illuminates to the overture. The scenery was well planned and incredible, the Hippodrome is not the biggest of theaters and I was unsure how they would fit such a large production into the stage but his intricate and perfectly planned masterpiece proved me wrong. My only disappointment was that the chandelier never actually fell.  But, considering it was hanging over the crowded stalls it was probably for the best.


The music is, without doubt, the most important part of the production. The Orchestra are the unsung stars. The perfect and precise timing in the pit is what binds the whole production together. I think you really have to be there to understand the impact when you hear those famous songs, Phantom of the Opera, Think of me, Music of the Night etc etc. The songs really do stick in your heard, I literally have a constant orchestra playing in my head from the minute I wake up and find myself humming along. I was treated to the official CD from the Merch box, along with my broach so even if I do start to loose my internal overture I can always regain it. 


Obviously an amazing cast is imperative, even the small parts.  The managers provided comic entertainment without being try hards, the ballet cast were incredible and made me long to take up dancing again, something I haven't done for 4 years. But obviously the big three are the integral components of the show;

John Owen Jones- Phantom

Hailing from South Wales, John is actually the longest running West End Phantom of all time, nearing 2000 performances! His other most famous role is as ValJean in Les Miserables, (another favourite of mine) and was voted the best actor to ever play the role. His presence on stage was dominating and enticing all at the same time, just how the Phantom should be, He was aggressive, obsessive and frightening whilst also being fragile and vulnerable at the same time. He perfectly took the audience on a journey of heartache, pain and longing. His voice was outstanding and commanding, everyone in the audience would have certainly had goosebumps and little shivers sent down their spine when he his those grand notes. He does have an album out "unmasked" which I will be cheekily downloading despite the fact I am now a broke graduate. 

Simon Bailey- Raoul, Vicomte de Changy

Simon gave a new direction to Raoul for this production, he is more than just a pretty & handsome boy, (although he is that as well) he is now a hero in his own right. Raoul genuinely loves his childhood sweetheart Christine, you don't feel he only loves her success, in fact he is proud of her to have done so well and you get the impression he loved her even since he fetched her red scarf from the lake. I have always been team Raoul so say, but Simon's performance has cemented this for me. Which is why I refuse to watch Love Never Dies. Simon is also a friendly fella on twitter. This is not his first time playing Raoul and I find it touching that he dedicates every performance to the memory of his late father. 

Olivia Bereton - Chistine Daae 

It genuinely was impossible to believe she is the alternative Christine, what's more, this is her professional debut. I certainly did not feel short changed having the alternate Miss Daae at both performances, her performance was impeccable. She had the most beautiful vocal range, hitting high A with ease, her performance was one of such fragility and vulnerability it was so believable and touching. She found a fine balance between all the characteristics that makes Christine such a complex character, her grief for her father and constant search for comfort beyond the grave, her fear and disgust at the phantom, not for his physical appearance but for his heartless behaviour, her longing for protection and stability from Raoul and finally her uncontrollable desire for music. to improve her singing, to connect with her father's passion for music. Music over powers her in a way that allows the phantom to have a hypnotic control over her. Olivia encompassed all these qualities with ease and perfection. Her only flaw is that whilst playing a ballet girl she is the only one of the dancers not on pointe, although twitter reliably informs me she is training up and will be on pointe by Dublin performances! If this is merely her debut then we have many great things to expect from her. She is also very lovely and gratuitous to her fans (including myself) on twitter. 

The tour leaves Bristol at the end of June but will most likely be coming to a theatre near you. Check it out for yourself at http://www.thephantomoftheoperatour.com/tour-dates I would thoroughly reccommend seeing it. Even those of you who hate musicals or opera, It will move you in ways you cannot imagine and will open you up to a whole new genre of music. I will almost certainly be going to see it again, probably in Liverpool. It would be nice to see Katie Hall as Christine because I have only heard positive reviews about her! 

Aberystywth May Ball 2012

Aberystwyth May Ball is an odd one. Whilst it's certainly not worth the £40 ticket it's without doubt the best night of the year. But in comparison of other university balls, it's pretty substandard. Most Uni's attract big name acts such as Florence and the Machine, whereas the best we get are the Hoosiers, great in their hey day, but their hey day was 5 years ago. We were also expected to be impressed with Toploader, who's one greatest hit dancing in the moonlight was released well over a decade ago, if not two. It's not something i'm ringing home to brag about. Zane Lowe was surprisingly good, a mich bigger improvement on Westwood, who we were subjected to two years before. But I still wouldn't pay £40 to see him.

My dress from Jack Wills clutch from Spain, Emma's from French Connection, Shoes from Faith.

Photography done by our wonderful bestie Eiry Bateman.

I'm not sure why we bother spending most of the day preening and trying to make ourselves look good, most of the ball is outside and by the time I get off the coach I inevitable look like i've been dragged through a hedge backwards. But still, it gives us something to get excited about. Aber isn't the sort of place where you have to dress up for a night out. There's often girls on the dance floor in flats, jeans and tee shirts. You can even wear trainers on the dancefloor. So the chance to properly dress up is something we relish. Some people go all out and wear proper ball gowns, but we decided to go for slightly more casual formal wear, so that we could enjoy the rides and not ruin our dresses by dragging them through the mud. It is lush that all the boys wear suits though! ;) 

Staying Classy and hiding Gin up Stan's Dress.

The coach journey to Pontrhydfendigaid is a horror, First year I was unfortunate enough to be slightly travel sick, on my boyfriends suit... Needless to say this year my omnibenevolent friends made me sit opposite them rather than sit with me in case my upchuck reflexes went into over drive. So I ended up sitting next to some guy from Luton (being a Wrexham fc fan this was not a good thing and I spent most of the journey chastising him) whilst drinking gin that had been cleverly hidden in Emma's pants. It was a sure sign that things were going to stay classy.

No one would sit with me because of my travel sickness, ended up next to a Luton fan (BOO)

2 Shots for one token!

The drinks were heavily over priced. £10 for 4 drinks tokens. a Jug of pimms was 6 tokes (although 2 were just for a deposit). I ended up on the shots all night as you could purchase 2 sourz for 1 token. It wasn't a particularly messy night by our standards. Despite the copious amount of beverages consumed. The freezing weather was probably to blame! Sub zero temperatures will sober anyone up, have you ever seen a drunk eskimo? I rest my case.

Extortionately priced jug of pimms, extra strawbs ofc.

Luckily for us we have Stan, as she works for the union she seems to know just about everyone and she pulls some strings to get us extra strawbs in our pimms. Everyone loves Strawberries. 

The rides were all free. All four of them. And being an adreneline junkie I was more than happy to spend the warmest (yet still freezing) part of the night on the rides. Poor Ruth ended up being a bag donkey and watching us go round and round as she does not share our love for rides. We did take her on the dodgems and convinced her to come on the twister, which was a beautiful moment for me, not so much for her... I probably shouldn't have laughed the whole time when she was so terrified. I'll use this as a chance to profusely apologies for being so inconsiderate. Crying with laughter at your terrified friend is a horrible thing to do. But it was so funny. 

Headphone discoing

The layout of may ball is; there is one main building for all the "massive acts", a few rides and a few tents. Inside the tents are various bars hosting tribute acts, commedy shows, acoustic music and a headphone disco. Head phone discos are one of my favourite things, you can chose whether to listen to station A or B, so half of the room will be listening to ace of spades and the other half call me maybe. The awkward moment is when you and your friend are singing at each other only to realise you are singing completely different songs. Without a doubt the headphone disco is the saving grace of the mayball. Most of us aren't insterested in seeing the massive "acts" and would much prefer having a laugh at something like this. Perhaps the uni should invest in more tent attractions next year instead of ms dynamite (boring). Just not a foam party tent. I hate foam parties. on account of me being small and easily lost among the foamy horror. 

Headphone disco, Emma probably listening to beyonce whilst i'm on the tennacious d. 

Having our feet nibbled.

Not everything was included in the price. Things like the oxygen tank (A legal high) and the fish spa were optional extras that proved rather costly. Having always wanted to have fish nibble the dead skin from the feet I paid the £5 per person for 4 minutes (yes more than a pound a minute). Although really, we're doing the fish a favour by feeding them, they're getting a free all you can eat buffet down there. It was the strangest sensation ever. A very dull tickle with the occasional wee fish that gets carried away on your ankle or between your toes. I was slightly horrified to hear these were the baby fishes and in the shop they have much bigger ones to nibble you with. It was a nice experience though! 

 

So was it worth it? Of course, this was our last chance to have a night out together before the horror of exams set in. Sadly not all of our friends came but it was still lovely to get out of aberystwyth, even if Pontrhydfendigaid is basically a field in the middle of no where. I was getting so tired of the aber bubble. with its two night clubs and bog standards bars. The chance to dress up and do something different was something to jump at. I couldn't understand why some people were leaving early to go to Yoko's. you can go to that dive any day!  The weather was the biggest let down, I think we nearly froze to death but that can't be helped. A better array of food would be appreciated, we were limited to the choice of general burger vans or starvation. I'm thinking a hog roast or a sushi bar would have been a great success!  And we clearly need to attract bigger names, we deserve better than that! 

Would like to use this chance to thank our bestie Eiry for her lovely photography at the beginning of the night. Her photography proves you can polish a turd provided you have an SLR camera!  x

The threat of "Tesco law".

n

The threat of Alternative Business Structures means that Law firms are under threat from large, non legal, corporations such as Tesco’s who will be offering legal services for a fraction of the price. What is ABS you may ask? The legal services act 2011 means the ownership of legal services providers   will now be open to anyone deemed competent or 'proper', for example a supermarket or building society – hence the sobriquet "Tesco law". These providers will be subject to the same requirements and regulations as solicitors. So soon, tescos will be able to offer cheap divorces or execute an uncontested will or convey property- basically they will be able to perform legal tasks that are currently the monopoly of solicitors. Although the quality of service will be questionable to say the least, we live in a society where the consumer is increasingly cost conscious and price driven, quality is often compromised for the sake of “a good deal”.  This is a serious threat to modern lawyers. 

Tesco law, where quality is questionable.

There has been a scramble to prevent any damage before tescos and co are unleashed on the legal world. QualitySolicitors have launched a national high street branch network in a bid to become the first ‘household name’ legal brand. In the same way that specsavers became a nationally recognised brand, QS are rebranding many high street firms to become an umbrella corporation, with uniforms, logos and quirky animated characters all in an attempt to become the big brand name for legal services. QualitySolicitors chief executive Craig Holt said: ‘The threat posed by “Tesco law”  is so grave because of the lack of recognised, customer service-focused brand names in the legal market. Visibility on the high street, along with a high-profile marketing campaign including on primetime television, will transform QualitySolicitors into the first household name legal brand... we aim to dominate the legal market before the “Tesco law” entrants can even get off the ground'. Branches have extended opening hours including weekends and they are even opening branches in shopping centers.  WHSmiths have leapt onto the bandwagon and now have legal access points in their stores (well I guess no one buys half the stuff there anymore, Kids download music, dvds and books these days! Smart move smiths) Although god knows why Amanda Holden was chosen to announce it's opening.. 

Is this the answer? to me QS is not the solution to the tescos threat. Whilst I understand the logic and think its a great idea, to me something doing quite sit right. Re-branding well established law firms strips a firm of its soul, history and subsequently its cliental, People choose solicitors for their reputation through the community, we appreciate firms that have history because it shows how successful they are. To me, QS is almost tacky advertising! We like our solicitors to have that personal touch and to be recognisable, high streets are not for brand names. Perhaps this would work for large city firms where the personal touch isn't so important. But for a high street it simply wouldn't work. I know where I live, if a branded shop opens in the high street there's an outcry of "greedy corporations ruining our high street!" - although we didn't complain so much when costa coffee opened.  

A legal face lift?

Has the minds behind QS considered the biggest issue with nationwide brands? It only takes for one small office to ruin the whole brands reputation? what happens if these so called "quality" firms aren't so quality after all? I know great firms that are of genuine quality whom have rejected the offer to become part of the brand because they (rightly) felt they have an established reputation within the community and do not fear the threat of ABS enough to forsake this. Which means that those who do join the branding are most likely those that had something to fear, second rate firms without the reputation to survive the tescos monster. Those that felt they needed soulless branding to give them the edge in the new market. 

So should lawyers be threatened by tescos and co? Anyone intelligent would know you have to pay for quality, when it costs about 2k for a divorce by a professional but tescos are offering one for £300 alarm bells would immediately start ringing. Clients who cannot afford experienced legal advice or don’t understand the importance of professional service will jump the chance of using the well known and cheaper brands. However but it is likely that they will subcontract the work to 'law farms' – probably not based in the UK, where the staff are not expensive, and thus not necessarily too experienced.  However, does this counter balance the dropping of legal aid? ABS will make divorce and wills available to those who cannot afford legal services and would usually be the recipient of legal aid.

nHow can we ensure clients don't defect to Tescos? The modern lawyer will have to specialise in niche markets, become an expert in more complex and specific fields. It’s likely non legal businesses will dominate fields such as undefended divorces, simple wills and conveyancing, thus the lawyers should practice more complex areas of law, such as disputed wills, welfare law, human rights- thus the modern lawyer will need to be of the highly knowledgeable, dedicated and passionate about the law.

nFurthermore, the one thing Tesco's and other big corporations will not be able to offer is personal service, Lawyers have, historically, a reputation for being stuffy, old fashioned and out of touch with society but we can pride ourselves on having a good client/solicitor service. Solicitors see cases through from begining to end, this is unlikely to be the case at tescos. If you phone your solicitor they can tell you exactly how far your case has gone, how soon you can expect the decree nisi to be declared etc. Tesco's law farms will not be able to provide this, everything will be stored on computers or in large files, there will be various people handling all the different cases and it will be near on impossible to track your case specifically. In other words, there is no personal touch, no reassuring guidance or human service. This will be the biggest downfall of ABS. n

 

As a law student seeking a training contract, I know the last thing I want it to be working for tescos after 4 years slogging it at law school. Even if it is as a lawyer. The approval of ABS by the law society has left me feeling a little let down. We all know the law society is a fan of free market but this has really tightened the nail in a prospective trainees coffin. With even less demand for trained solicitors what hope in hell do we have securing that ever elusive training contract? I have found a distinct lack of criticism regarding QS too, the law gazette seems to be giving it free advertising by praising it weekly, however when I read the comments from REAL solicitors, I see i'm not alone in my aversion- and i'ts not just because they  don't offer training contracts! One outrages solicitor exclaimed "Is this what my education and training has come to? If I am to be a shop keeper then I would rather sell something that displays better, like cakes" this is certainly a sentiment I share, and not just because I love cake.  But I agree that QS will ruin the reputation of the profession and one can only imagine  the horror of daily mail headlines that will ensue...

Twilight review.

I have written much about things I really like, but any critical blog needs something to slag off. So I thought to myself what do I despise enough to write a long winded rant and publish to the world wide web, then it came to me - Twilight. The books, the film, the whole franchise. I have read the books because someone told me "I'm sure you'll enjoy it, you loved Buffy the vampire slayer back in the day. So I sat down one weekend and read all four books without stopping, trying to convince myself that a plot line was going to come along or eventually the writer would remember literacy requires some form of literate grammar. But alas, when I closed the books I was thoroughly disappointed and realised I'd wasted an entire evening on what I can only describe as bollocks.

There are many dark reasons I hate the book, I've seen one film as I was dragged along and I used the time wisely to catch up on beauty sleep. I ask myself time and time again why the book is so popular when the literature is so crap and the storyline so weak? The answer is Bella is so pathetic and has no personality that any teenage looser can put themselves in her shoes. Hopefully these girls are so indoctrinated by Meyer that they spend their whole lives waiting for a man like Edward that they never procreate themselves.

My main issue with twilight is the explicit sexualisation of violence, it gives the message to young girls that it's okay to love a man who could easily hurt you, in fact it's sexy. Bella finds it highly arousing that Edward has to fight off all desire to drain her of blood and murder her senseless. Edward is an emotionally unstable, manipulative and aggressive, constantly he is warning Bella what he could murder her at any second and that when he first met her he wanted to kill her. Apparently fans were desperate to see Edward’s “headboard-busting” sex and his wife Bella’s black and blue bruised body, because this my fellow readers is "the perfect honeymoon". He may be presented as the ideal gentleman, who is chivalrous, thoughtful honorable and protective, however, anyone who has studied the symptoms of abuse will know that these "justifications" are exactly the sort of thing victims will tell themselves and others, just read this extract for yourself and consider it in context of what we've just discussed: "There was a faint shadow across one of my cheekbones, and my lips were a little swollen…The rest of me was decorated with patches of blue and purple. I concentrated on the bruises that would be the hardest to hide—my arms and my shoulders. … Of course, these were just developing. I’d look even worse tomorrow. "Sounds just like a monologue or soliloquy you'd hear from a battered wife. The film is intensely erotic whilst highly dangerous, this is very worrying when you consider that one in three women will be abused in their life. A 2005 survey showed that 37% of teenage girls believe it's okay for their boyfriend to abuse them if they believe they've been cheating on them.  Is this really the message we want to send out to our young girls? That it's acceptable for a man to be aggressive, how is this even attractive? Having myself been in a manipulative relationship once I find advocating this behaviour unacceptable. Is Stephanie Meyer oblivious to this evil monster she has created, or is she sick and twisted enough to want to ruin everything Pizzey and the rest of the 1970's feminist movement stood for? Perhaps Meyer should read Scream quietly or the neighbours will hear you before she writes any more novels romanticising domestic violence. 

Another vile reason I cannot stand this vile piece of awful literature is it's clearly mormon proganda. Meyer belongs to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and whilst I can appreciate the advocation of chastity and criticising our "abortion on demand" state, what really concerns me if that Meyer clearly believes abortions are unnaceptable full stop, even if the fetus is killing you in a horrific manner. Edward even drops his traditional beliefs and begs Bella to have an abortion, but no, she would rather die than kill the evil half vampire monster inside of her. Whilst she's in labour her spine physically cracks in half and even then she refuses and abortion. Then Bella dies all so this creature could be brought safely into the earth. Luckily Bella is surrounded by vampires who bring her back from the brink of death and then they all realise how wrong they were to ask her to abort the thing, she only died you know guys. It's a clear anti-abortion message seductively packaged as a true-love fairy tale. I'm not a fan of the way many young slappers treat abortion as a contraception and I genuinely believe people should be in a loving and stable relationship if they are going to embark on naughty relations but the extreme view that a mother should die for her baby is not what we should be advocating, many pro life supporters even agree that this is the only time when an abortion is acceptable. Everything feminist bitches worked for over the last century has literally been destroyed by Meyer, lets chain her to the kitchen sink and get her husband to beat her - with a stick no wider than his finger of course. It's a good job Meyer deviated far from the original standards and rules for vampires, in Buffy I clearly remember the only way someone could become a vampire was if they sucked a vampires blood in return. This implies a blood transfusion, and we all know where this would lead. 

So these are my major huffs with Twilight. Men wearing eyeliner and glittering doesn't even bother me that much, if all the girls want to fancy those skinny douches then it saves the rugby players for us real, sane women! There's about as much emotional depth in the movies as a teaspoon, a teaspoon that has been flattened. And nothing actually happens, there's a lot of whining, fretting about a potential threat, gazing at Edwards dead sparkly face, pining after Edwards dead sparkly face, cheating with a hairy brute of a man who actually loves you but you'd rather pine after the dead, violent man. Meyer has also managed to destroy all precedent and universal definitions of a vampire within a minute paragraph:  "...how can you come out during the daytime?"    He laughed anyway. "Myth."    "Burned by the sun?"   "Myth."    "Sleeping in coffins?"    "Myth." ... "I can't sleep." So effectively she's created a completely different type of supernatural creature, but taken one of the most popular myths of modern culture and forever more tainted the reputation of all other vampire novels and films.

I do wish that Edward caved into his vampire instincts and just killed Bella when he first met her. Tht would have been a much better story and we wouldn't have a world infested with twihards.

The [Legally Voidable] Wedding of River Song.

Everyone has been asking for a review from me on this episode. I guess the fact River Song made an honest man out of the Doctor had everyone thinking I'd be enraged that my least favourite character EVER has actually married the doctor. And you are right, I was disgusted. But I actually rather enjoyed that episode up until that point. Infact I've been enjoying all the episodes recently, I've just not blogged about them because I've been very busy, not even watching the episodes until a week later, being in paris and moving back to uni, which actually takes longer than it does for me to get to bristol airport, get a plane to charles de gaulle, get on the RER, change at challet les halles, get off at Chatou Croissy, and walk to my bourgeois mansion in villa lambert. (yes I stayed in a real mansion, my boyfriend has friends in high places) So I'd happily go back to paris any day rather than drive to Abersytwyth wich my travel sickness. But as I was saying, The God delusion was brilliant, I love a psychoanalysis study of faith and Doctor Who deconstructing this was just excellent. I also enjoyed last weeks episode, despite my hatred for James Corden. I believe he's only funny when he's been scripted for, he himself, is an annoying man who can't take other people calling him fat, when his sole career has been built on the fact he's tubby. Which is why that episode actually worked, but I kept worrying the baby was suddenly going to be announced as the evil one, I just seemed to be inclining that way.

But obviously you want my opinion on this episode, the season final. Although thanks to the huge gap mid series, I'm left feeling rather deflated and short changed. There was a distinct lack of fluency and clarity in the script. Matt Smith quickly goes from morbid to exuberant faster than light and this inconsistency makes the episode weak. On a positive note, Matt put in much effort in every one of his scenes, despite poor writing.

The best part was that the conclusion was actually relatively simple. Something my boyfriend who isn't a whovian could actually follow. It irks me the need to over complicate Doctor Who these days, too much technobabble and not enough story line. The idea that is wasn't the Doctor who died, but actually the doctor was hidden inside a teselector double. Basically the Doctor in a doctor suit. Brilliant. And when River looked into his eye it was hilarious to see him flamboyantly flouncing about. Moffat wrong-footed us by making us think it would be the Flesh Doctor on the beach, it’s still in essence the same get-out clause – a double. I also rather enjoyed the way the Doctor's morbidity and sense of self hatred which had been darkening out saturday evenings was overturned and he was finally portrayed as the much loved hero he is. The whole universe wanting to help him and appreciating him. It took us back to the Tennant times when the doctor was viewed by the universe a a saviour, not a fearsome warrior and I much prefer it that way.

As a law student however, I was to comment on the legitimacy of the marriage. I don't believe it's a valid marriage and would be declared void under any court ruling. Firstly, since 5 November 2007, a couple getting married are required to to give notification in person of their intention to marry to a Registrar at least 3 months before the intended date of the marriage, this is to allow people the chance to come say "I object" if they do so know of any unlawful reason that would void the marriage. This clearly did not happen, it was very spur of the moment and quicker than a Vegas ceremony. Unless the doctor uses his time machine to go back three months and publish the wedding, but I highly doubt any objectors would be able to find the marriage ceremony. Which leads to my other argument on the invalidity of the marriage, technically, the marriage never even happened. River reassured her mother that she hadn't really killed anyone so therefore if the murder never happened, then neither did the marriage. 

Furthermore, I'm pretty certain it wasn't performed in a legalised and registered location, The Marriages (Approved Premises) Regulations 1995 allow civil marriages to take place regularly in hotels, stately homes, pubs and football stadiums without compromising the fundamental principles of English marriage law and Parliament's intention to maintain the solemnity of the occasion. the validity of a venue requires prior agreement of the superintendent Registrar. Marriages and it must take place in readily identifiable premises to prevent marriages taking place in the open air, in transport or any other unsuitable location. - may I point that the ceremony in question was actually in open air and it certainly was not a "readily identifiable location". It must also be a dignified place in good state of repair, I do not believe the collapse of time itself is deemed a dignified place, it also lacked the fire precautions required by the fire authority. Yes I am being petty, but it annoyed me that much. 

Also. This one's a bit far fetched but it's a reasonable argument. The vows are "til death do us part". Technically River is already dead on the Doctors' timeline. Therefore death has parted them. And if the doctor is believed to be dead, the state won't recognise the existence of their marriage. Moreover, technically River married the robot doctor, not the actual Doctor. It wasn't the doctor who spoke the words, it was the robot. Therefore I deem the marriage totally void. I like to think the Doctor is fully aware of this and is simply having a bit of fun with no strings attached. Even so, he has genuine grounds for divorce under s1(2)(b) of the Matrimonial Clauses Act. Killing him is almost certainly classed as "unreasonable behaviour".

Moving on from my legal rant... Since the great Tennant years, we've always been warned of "fixed points in time" and finally we see what happens if one is messed with. To be quite honest I would enjoy living in a world where Dickens was regularly gracing my television. But surely as the Doctor didn't actually die, the "fixed point in time" has still been messed with? This episode had some great bits, some quality acting and a great storyline up until the wedding. It was so random and unneeded. There genuinely is no sexual tension between the Doctor and River, no matter how many flirty lines you throw around the script, there is just no spark. She has no endearing qualities about her and up until now the Doctor has always seemed surprised and cautious whenever she's made a move on him. There has been no change of heart nor any moment where we as viewers have seen him fall in love with her- discovering she's Amy's daughter wasn't a pivotal moment in their relationship romantically.  So I'm very confused as to when this change of heart happened.

So the time old question is Dr Who? It will probably end up being something completely mundane and it's a question that should never be answered as it would undermine the sanity of Dr Who's mystery. What is more important is the Christmas episode, featuring my West Country homeboy Bill Bailey, it's about time Dr Who had the slice of the West. Billy Piper is from Swindon (my nearest city AND she went to my ballet school) however she ignored her home roots, ditched the pompous farmer accent in favour of a Landan' twang. Shame on her. I hope Bill Bailey doesn't follow suit.

Are law students over worked or just plain neurotic?

It's been four months since those ghastly examinations and we've had a beautifully long summer to recover from the stress. Many students, law students in particular, strain under the monumental amount of pressure exams cause. I've known relationships to break up because of it, friendships fall apart and mental breakdowns too. I personally end up very ill around exam times, firstly my wrist can't cope with the strenuous and avid essay writing I put it through, I end up with blisters on my fingers, a swollen wrist and a locked arm. Also I become physically exhausted but too scared to sleep more than the recommended seven hours in case I am wasting valuable revision time. I get headaches and nausea from the consistent reading and note taking, only to be made worse by the inevitable crying fit i'll have induced by blind neurotic paranoia that "i'm going to fail, my life is over." And even after the exams are over we all seem to be in a post traumatic daze, it's as if there's an empty gap in our lives, to be precise a 17 hour gap. What do we do with ourselves now exams are over? Of course we drink, and part of the "post traumatic daze" is probably just a hangover but I do find myself rather confused and lost after the exams. 

I'm not suggesting  those who take other subjects don't feel the stress but obviously I'm so self absorbed in my own stress around these times I only notice how other law students are coping. But I do feel law students are under a hideous amount of pressure to do well in exams. We're under pressure from ourselves, there's pressure from your parents, who've proudly told all their friends, the other mum's in yoga class and the dad's on the golf course that their precious child is a lawyer and now you have to live up to this high expectation. There's also the pressure to beat cocky students who tell you to only expect low grades as you "spend far too much time partying and not in the library like me" just to prove to them that playing World of Warcraft in the Library doesn't make you a legal eagle. There's also the dreaded moment when you've decided you've done enough revision today, log onto facebook or twitter and see everyone else proclaiming how much more revision they've done, "I've done three all nighters" or "I've written 15 pages of notes on easements, your spider diagram is so concise", pressuring us to keep up with them. There's also the fact we're applying for training contracts and these companies expect the highest marks, passing is not enough, we know that we're competing against oxbridge students who's parents have already put in a good word for them at the firm. Those who aren't aiming for a particular career have the luxury of doing "the best that they can", there's no pressure to get a particular mark, a 2:2 in Literature, Maths or any subject really is highly respectable, sure a 2:1 would be better, but at least a 2:2 wouldn't mean the end of their career. So there's slightly less pressure there, for us though it's a case of Do excellent or you've basically wasted three years, vast amounts of money and lost all sanity. 

The sort of people who obnoxiously claim a 3rd in law is better than a first in any other subject are kidding themselves. I'll be the first to admit I am quite snooty about "proper degrees" but I include degrees other than law in my list of what I deem to be a respectable degree, such as literature, maths, medicine (obviously) etc. but yes, there are certain degrees that I do turn my nose at and deem worthless which I dare not mention publicly. However, I could never believe a 3rd in law is better than a 1st in Literature. A first in Literature would open so many doors for you whereas a third in law closes all desirable ones. 

Basically, what I'm trying to say is, we as law students are under immense pressure to excel, for we have aimed so high and are so determined to achieve that elusive training contract, we cannot allow ourselves to only achieve good marks, we need exceptional ones, else all the hard work is for nothing. This is why we crack during exams & go insane, ironically this actually affects exam performance negatively. It's a catch 22. 

I know four months seems excessive for a summer holiday, most degrees could easily be completed in 2 years if we had a normal 6 week holiday like we did back in compulsive education. Which would save much money, especially considering the extortionate prices students will have to pay as of next year. But I feel I needed the 4 months to recover from the trauma. I also had a chance to do a months work experience and visit the legal practice centre in which I hope to go to next year, this reignited my passion for law and reminded me why I was taking the degree in the first place. 

So in answer to my question, I don't believe we are over worked more than other students, sometimes we have a heavier timetable whereas other degrees have more coursework and this balances it out. We have set our own standards and expectations too high that we tend to panic and develop neurotic tendencies and whats worse, if we fail to meet those expectations once those results have come out, we make every excuse under the sun. I've seen it all from people claiming it's a harsh marker, to people telling their family that "no one gets above a 2:2 in law" to the worst of all, "well a 3rd in law is better than a high class degree in any other subject so it doesn't matter". We need to relax more as students, revise hard of course, but we need to be realistic about what we are capable of achieving and the amount of pressure our bodies can cope with. we will exceed far better if we could learn to revise effectively rather than trying to out do each other.