Does Big Tobacco sponsor Paolo Sorrentino’s films? Almost certainly not, but their money would be worse spent elsewhere. One of the lasting images from Sorrentino’s latest feature, La Grazia, is of Toni Servillo smoking on the parapets of the Quirinal Palace overlooking Rome. Servillo’s expression is enigmatic, the view exquisite. As viewers of Sorrentino’s 2013 Oscar-winning triumph The Great Beauty will know, there are few things eminently more watchable than Toni Servillo slowly dragging on a cigarette.

La Grazia sees Sorrentino reunited with his long-time muse – and what a welcome reunion it is. Servillo plays the ageing, lame duck president Mariano De Santis, a legal expert who is a “jurist”, not a politician (sound familiar?). He would normally be facing his last six months in office with the same detachment and letter-of-the-law rigidity that have earned him the nickname “Reinforced Concrete”. However, a bill passed through parliament on assisted dying must be signed by him to become law, and thus, the president is faced with a dilemma. If he signs, he is an “assassin”; if he rejects the bill, he is a “torturer”. Two petitions for presidential pardons for convicted murderers complicate the picture: De Santis has the power to offer the titular “grace” to those on all types of life sentences, medical and criminal.  

A tired and grieving De Santis (he lost his wife some years before) proves an excellent vehicle for the film’s meditations on life, loss, and legacy. Who better to weigh up the suitability of euthanasia than a man who has seemingly lost all flair for life himself, who falls asleep when he prays and is still obsessed with an extramarital affair his late wife may have had 40 years ago? “Who owns our days?” is the question that De Santis keeps coming back to with the help of his daughter and legal advisor, Dorotea (an effectively exasperated Anna Ferzetti). But the film also asks: “Why should we care who owns our days?” Though De Santis is a genuine Catholic, the existentialism at the heart of the film is reminiscent of the tortured questioning of a lapsed Catholic at confession.

Boy, does Servillo have range. This is not his first time playing an Italian president, yet the contrast with his muted, shuffling Gulio Andreotti in Il Divo, and his exuberant Silvio Berlusconi in Loro is remarkable. He is able to convey a world of emotion in the most subtle of movements. It is no wonder the Venice Film Festival awarded him the Best Actor award.

As in those films, all the hallmarks of a Sorrentino film are here, if rather downplayed. The trademark big set-piece scenes do not disappoint. The Portuguese president’s welcome to the palace in biblical rain is reason alone to head to the cinema. A dinner for veterans of the Alpini, Italy’s mountain regiment, at which De Santis is the guest of honour, is profoundly moving. As ever with Sorrentino, the soundtrack is full of thumping electronic music, although this time with the humorous (you’ll see why) addition of some Italian rap. You will leave the cinema with a host of unexpected, striking images – and a surprising affection for a horse called Elvis.

This is the most melancholic of Sorrentino’s films that I have seen, but it was nonetheless much funnier than I expected from a film about assisted dying. From the reactions of those around me, the Ultimate Picture Palace audience certainly agreed. Much of the comic relief comes in the form of the acerbic Coco Valori (Milvia Marigliano), De Santis’ old friend, whom I could happily watch an entire film about. (Or maybe I already have? As a critic-cum-impresario, she is like a female version of Servillo’s man about town in The Great Beauty.)

If the film fails to fully capture the deep sadness of the assisted dying debate, it is due in part to the at-times clunky dialogue, also, unfortunately, something that can be expected of Sorrentino’s films. The ending might strike some as too saccharine, but if you allow yourself to be swept up by the admittedly contrived plot, you will leave the cinema feeling pleasantly revived. Sorrentino’s more muted direction here might also surprise those who came expecting the bright colours and relentless opulence of The Great Beauty. Sorrentino’s famous maximalism may be gone, but the dry humour is certainly still there, just not wrapped in a bouquet of colour but instead a dull, wintry palette.

Will this be the definitive film about euthanasia? Probably not. But it certainly makes you ponder the similarities between death and justice, and to question the suitability of those who wield such decisions. If nothing else, it is worth going for Toni Servillo’s performance alone.

I was recently given the opportunity to attend the press view of Worcester College’s new sculpture exhibition, The Storytellers. Set in the college’s breathtaking gardens, the exhibition, expertly curated by Iwona Blazwick and Katie Delamere, is a journey through contemporary figurative sculpture, mostly from the 2020s. It is also a rare example of an exhibition whose setting complements and transforms the artworks. From the first moments, The Storytellers feels unusually thoughtful, generous, and alive. 

The exhibition, which is free of charge, covers a lot of ground, both literally and figuratively. Despite its breadth, though, , The Storytellers is one of the best-curated exhibitions I have seen in a long time. Covering a large area of the college’s gardens, The Storytellers is split into five ‘acts’, each named after a line from Shakespeare, in an homage to the Buskins, the college’s student drama troupe. These acts cover far-reaching themes: “One touch of nature makes the whole world kin” (from Troilus and Cressida) shows sculptures which morph the human with the vegetal, while “Thou, Nature, art my goddess” (from King Lear) delves into cultural tradition with its depictions of totemic deities. This kind of structure could easily have felt forced, but instead it gives the exhibition a theatrical logic.

There was clearly a lot of thought put into the curation of this exhibition, as combined with their intrinsic meaning, each sculpture’s location fits with its aesthetic appearance. Artworks emerge from hedges, sit beside water, or contrast against the college architecture. This makes for a cohesive, engaging, and visually interesting experience, in which every artwork is perfectly and poignantly placed, rewarding both close attention and casual wandering. 

The artists featured are greatly varied, with 14 artists coming from all over the world, all with something vastly different to say in their work. Despite this, The Storytellers doesn’t feel as though it is spreading itself too thin – I found that the overarching theme of ‘human in conversation with nature’ binds together all of the pieces, despite their differences in material, scale, or mood. The artworks vary in quality from ‘nice’ to ‘beautiful’, with no real lowlights, and there are enough highlights for something to resonate with anybody who visits. For me, it was Daniel Silver’s duo of sculptures, Fly With Me and Me, found in the main quad, that were the most striking. Silver has said that he wants to create “something you can look at and feel looked back by”, and these works achieve precisely that. By having all of the sculptures be of figures, the exhibition allows the viewer to engage in dialogue with the artworks, and in Silver’s figures, the reciprocal gaze is palpable.

As if that wasn’t enough, the exhibition is checkpointed by various works of performance art. The first, performed by recent Ruskin graduate Jarad Jackson, was a mesmerising piece of postmodern dance, bringing movement and bodily presence into conversation with the stillness of the sculptures. The second, performed by Lorna Ough, Hazel Dowling, and Lauren Dyer-Amazeen, created a delicate acoustic soundscape against the backdrop of the gardens. These performances felt less like decorative additions than extensions of the exhibition’s central concern of the relationship between bodies, stories, and place, and they helped make the exhibition feel like a living encounter, rather than a static display.

However, the star of The Storytellers is, of course, the gardens themselves. Though I have visited them before for an afternoon stroll, this exhibition made me appreciate the beauty of Worcester College’s natural scenery in a way I never did before. As I travelled across the quads, around the lake, and through the orchard, I felt totally at peace, even on the cloudy day on which I saw it. The sculptures appeared as figures emerging from the setting, rather than objects simply placed there. The Storytellers is an exhibition which is completely dependent on the natural environment around it, and this is one of its greatest strengths. As new flowers blossom in the late spring, and as the sun reemerges from the clouds, the exhibition will change, and the pieces will take on new meaning. Shadows will fall differently; surfaces will catch the light in new ways; the gardens themselves will become part of the storytelling. Few exhibitions make such persuasive use of time, weather, and place. 

I therefore find myself strongly encouraging readers to visit this exhibition this term, before it closes on the 5th of July. If not for the sculptures, which are as varied and thought-provoking as they are nice to look at, then for the gardens, which in the coming few weeks will only get more beautiful to stroll through. At its best, the exhibition does what outdoor sculpture should: it changes the way you look at the space around it. The Storytellers, for me, is both one of Oxford’s hidden gems this term, and one of its most rewarding cultural experiences.

A change to Oxford University Rowing Clubs’ (OURCs) Rules of Racing means that only athletes assigned female at birth may now row in a Women’s boat. This applies to boats entered in both inter-collegiate and university-level competitions. 

Several student boat club captains have condemned the new rule change, made on 26th April. OURC’s Captain’s Meeting minutes highlight that issues were raised about the process for verifying athletes’ gender identity, with students particularly raising privacy concerns: under the new rule, claims could be brought against athletes regarding gender verification. To bring a claim against an athlete, complainants would be required to submit evidence, likely involving private information about the complainee, to OURCs, where findings could be seen as ‘outing’ individuals. 

Towards the close of the Captain’s Meeting, an informal vote was proposed to gauge support for the changes to the Rules of Racing. Forty-nine votes were cast against the new rules, whilst only one vote was cast in their favour. Five of those present abstained from voting. Another informal vote asked captains whether they were comfortable competing in an event under the newly imposed rules. Twenty-four votes were cast against this informal motion, with only eight votes in favour of competing under the new rules.

Multiple boat clubs have since released official statements opposing the rule change. In a statement on Instagram, Wadham College Boat Club described the changes as “disproportionate, discriminatory, and impossible to enforce”, adding that they will continue “to fight for the previous rules to be reinstated”. Somerville College Boat Club similarly wrote that they were “deeply saddened by the recent rule change… which threatens our long-standing values of inclusivity and friendship”. Multiple students also told Cherwell of plans that Somerville Boat Club has to encourage all colleges to wear LGBTQ+ wristbands at this term’s Summer VIIIs, the University’s four-day intercollegiate regatta.

The rule change has also faced strong backlash from Oxford’s broader student body. On Instagram, the President of Oxford University LGBTQ+ Society has released a statement on the topic: “I am personally investigating the matter, and it is my top priority to resolve it by whatever means necessary.” The President also told Cherwell that “no contact was made with OULGBTQ+ prior to the change” with all meetings held “after the change was decided”. The President, who also holds the part-time role of LGBTQ+ Officer at the Student Union (SU), was not contacted in their SU capacity either. 

However, a University spokesperson told Cherwell: “The University has met with and engaged with the LGBTQ reps several times throughout the process to facilitate boat clubs meeting their obligations in relation to law & governing body requirements.” They did not specify that these consultations occurred prior to the change. 

Ahead of Summer VIIIs, Oxford University Rowing Clubs have been required by the University to align their policy on competitive eligibility with British Rowing, after previously only being encouraged to do so: in an update to University policy, introduced on 16th March 2026, the Director of Sport informed OURCs via letter that University policy now required clubs to align with NGB policy and asked that OURCs comply as soon as was practically possible.

Whilst OURCs has been aware of its requirement to update the Rules of Racing to align with national guidance as soon as practically possible, following a letter from the Director of Sport on 16th March 2026, the Captain’s Meeting minutes state that there had been an internal understanding between OURCs and Sports Federation that, should any changes be made, they would be done at the end of the academic year, after the competitive season was over. However, on 24th March onwards, a deadline for the rule change of 31st March was communicated to OURCs by the OURCs Senior Member, on behalf of the Proctors and Pro-Vice Chancellor for Sport. 

Given a number of OURCs’ constitutional clauses, holding that OURCs is bound to organise inter-college rowing competitions, conduct all activities in line with University equality policies, and conduct events within the bounds of conditions that the Proctors attach to the running of the event, OURCs has been required to make the rule change to fulfil its constitutional objectives. Summer VIIIs could not proceed without compliance with the rule change, given the club’s reliance upon the insurance provided by the University for the event. 

Subsequently, OURCs introduced a new power in the Constitution, authorised by the Proctors, permitting the Director of Sport to require changes to the Oxford University Rowing Clubs (OURCs) rules in compliance with the University of Oxford’s Diversity and Inclusion policy. OURCs is a student-run organisation which serves as a federation for the Oxford University Boat Club (OUBC) and all 36 Oxford college boat clubs.

Since September 2023, British Rowing policy has been that only people who are assigned female at birth will be eligible to compete in the Women’s category, whilst trans, non-binary, and all other individuals will be eligible to compete in the Open category.

Previously, OURCs’ Rules of Racing stated that, “trans people should be permitted to participate in their affirmed gender identity” at “less competitive levels”, including college-level rowing. Since January 2019, OURCs has allowed for self-identification in all divisions of Torpids and Summer VIIIs. 

On 8th October 2025, the Sports Federation updated its eligibility guidance, mirroring Cambridge University’s guidance update in September 2025, to advise sports clubs to align their Trans eligibility policies with their relevant National Governing Body. At this time, OURCs chose to delay alignment as British Rowing’s policies, which were (and remain) under review. This was possible as OURCs events are not run under the auspices of British Rowing. 

From this point on, Cambridge University Boat Club required oarspersons to self-declare their gender identification to their Captain before entering any Women’s Crew or Mixed Crew into a CUCBC event. If they did not meet British Rowing Women’s Category eligibility criteria from British Rowing’s “Trans and Non-Binary Competition Eligibility Policy and Procedures”, their captain must amend their entry to an event before its first heat (including the Getting on Race), removing and replacing any individuals who have declared that they are not eligible. This rule remains under review in accordance with British Rowing’s policy. According to minutes from the Oxford Captains’ Meeting, “it was made clear…that there was no choice but to comply with the request [made by the University to change the rule, in line with national guidance] and that failure to do so would result in OURCs’ deregistration as a University sports club and inability to run competitions, effective immediately”.

British Rowing’s policy claims that it is fully committed to “ensur[ing] Trans people can continue their participation in rowing whilst and after transitioning”. Their 2023 Competition Eligibility and Procedures policy, now being enforced by Oxford University Rowing Clubs, proposed two categories alongside the Women’s: an Open Category, where all individuals are eligible to compete, and a Mixed category, offered at any level of competition, providing 50% of the crew are eligible from the women’s category stated above. British Rowing encourages trans and non-binary participants to take part in “recreational activity” (non-competing) in the gender they identify as. 

Above college-level rowing, decisions regarding athlete qualification for Varsity competitions have previously been handled on a case-by-case basis, with joint input from both Oxford and Cambridge Directors of Sport. Registered University sports clubs and colleges’ sport organising committees are required to align their policies with the approach and criteria used by the relevant National Governing Body, including British Rowing, when considering the eligibility of transgender athletes.

The Student Union has stressed that it is essential that the University create an environment where all individuals “regardless of their gender identity, expression or sexual orientation, feel safe, welcome, and empowered to participate in sports and physical activities”.
A spokesperson for the University told Cherwell that it “remains committed to being an inclusive university”. The spokesperson also added that regarding competitive sports, “registered sports clubs and committees are required to follow the policies and eligibility criteria set by the relevant national governing body” as “this is necessary to ensure alignment with competition frameworks as well as compliance with the law”.