Unlocking the Love of Literature with Leeds Book Club Society

The University of Leeds is home to over 300 student-led clubs and societies. One of them is the Book Club Society, an innovative and engaging book club that has become a home for thought-provoking discussions with an inviting atmosphere that welcomes readers of all types. I sat down with the committee members, Emily, Emma, and Molly, to discuss reading, being part of a book club and what they think about trends among young readers.

Emily emphasised their preference for books under 250 pages, tackling deeper societal issues. This ensures the diversity of subjects talked about and voices being represented. The society hosts bi-weekly Wednesday night discussions in the Common Ground of the Union. They also organise events like bowling nights or mystery-solving during off-weeks, creating a dynamic space for literary enthusiasts.

The girls encourage everyone to come to the book club meetings, even if they haven’t finished the book or they didn’t like it. “We don’t necessarily want people to love them, we want to bring interesting conversations to the table,” Emma said. Every session starts with a quick quiz on the book and the winner receives a prize at the end. Afterwards, the discussion begins, aided by questions asked by the girls. This is a great way to share your opinions and find different perspectives on what you read. 

Attending these regular book club sessions has consistently been a source of intellectual stimulation for me, extending beyond the literary content discussed. Everyone is incredibly welcoming and it’s always interesting to talk about something you’ve read with someone who may not have received it the same way. As Molly pointed out, it’s these diverse opinions that make conversations more engaging and insightful.

When discussing the role of books in today’s digital age, the girls were quick to acknowledge the impact of platforms like TikTok. They believe that TikTok has significantly helped the publishing industry by promoting books in an entertaining and accessible manner. However, they also recognize that the constant influx of online book recommendations can lead to a sense of competition and anxiety about not reading enough.

In the context of the Leeds Book Club Society’s commitment to maintaining a vibrant reading culture, it’s crucial to reconsider prevailing assumptions about attention spans, especially in the age of digital distractions. Recent research challenges the commonly held belief of universally diminishing attention spans, revealing a more nuanced reality. A study conducted by the University of California, Irvine, and published in the journal Nature demonstrated that fluctuations in attention spans are influenced by various factors, including age, culture, and the nature of specific tasks. This insight counters the narrative of a one-size-fits-all decline in attention spans, emphasising the importance of considering diverse factors when evaluating cognitive abilities in the modern era. By fostering an inclusive environment and encouraging discussions on a variety of literary genres, the Book Club aligns with the notion that attention spans are not inherently shrinking but are shaped by a multitude of factors, highlighting the multifaceted nature of contemporary reading experiences. The girls recognise the fact that Tik Tok has had a huge impact on our generation’s reading habits through the vast recommendation videos. However, these communities can sometimes foster negative opinions about certain genres. The girls expressed that in the end reading is reading and that there is no need to judge people’s preferences.

In this regard, the Leeds Book Club Society seeks to counteract this pressure by creating an inviting atmosphere. They encourage people to attend even if they haven’t finished or read the book, fostering a sense of inclusivity and acceptance. By doing so, they create a space where everyone can contribute and learn from one another, regardless of their familiarity with the book in question.

Where reading is often regarded as a solitary activity, the Leeds Book Club Society is a catalyst of communal intellectual exploration. Their motto, “Come and unlock your love of literature with book club,” encapsulates the essence of their mission. The club provides a space for like-minded individuals and curious readers to come together, share their thoughts, and expand their horizons through the power of literature. It’s not just a book club; it’s a community that celebrates the beauty of reading and the rich discussions that follow.

As the world continues to evolve in the digital age, the Leeds Book Club Society remains a steadfast advocate for the joys of reading and the depth of thought that literature can inspire. They invite anyone with a curiosity for books and a desire for engaging discussions to join them so come and unlock your love of literature with the Leeds Book Club Society!

Protests and Partnerships: Examining the University’s Role in Global Political Conflicts

Across the US, protests in response to the October 7 attacks and the ongoing conflict have been cropping up at various Universities. Starting at Columbia University with a peaceful protest that was broken up by the police force on 17 April, a quickly spreading movement began. Students from universities all over the US are organising protests in support of Palestine, with some taking over campuses and organising encampments. At present, over 1,000 people have been arrested after demonstrations that ended in police intervention.

Several pro-Israel counterprotests were organised, demanding the release of hostages. Columbia professor Shai Davidai has accused Palestine supporters of being “pro-terror” and advocated for the clearing of the university’s encampment.

The movement has now reached the UK, where several universities are starting to see an increase in protests on campus. Students in Leeds, Newcastle, Bristol and Warwick, among others, have organised encampments outside university buildings. As of 2 May, UCL started the first London-based encampment and are demanding that the university divest from companies that uphold the system of apartheid, that they condemn Israeli war crimes and they pledge to assist the rebuilding of Gaza’s destroyed universities. A Newcastle student spoke to the BBC about their demands and was quoted saying that “What’s happened at Columbia has obviously inspired us to a degree but we have been thinking about this for a while” and that they have similar goals to US students, but will be “less heavy-handed generally than the US”.

In March, a group of students occupied the Parkinson building for 2 weeks. The occupation was led by the Leeds Socialist Worker Student Society (SWSS), Student Rebellion Leeds and the University of Leeds Palestine Solidarity Group (PSG). Following multiple requests to the University to end their partnerships with BAE systems and Israeli Universities, to stand with Palestine, and to suspend rabbi Zecharia Deutsch, who served in the Israeli army; the groups decided to occupy the main building on campus in order to protest against the lack of communication from the university. The occupation ended on 21 March after university management agreed to negotiate with their demands.

On 2 May, The Union of Jewish Students, representing over 9,000 Jewish students in the UK and Ireland according to their website, issued a statement claiming Jewish students are angry and tired of the antisemtic hatred on campuses since October 7th. They claim that “While students have a right to protest, these encampments create a hostile and toxic atmosphere on campus for Jewish students.”

The 75 year old conflict between Palestine and Israel sits on the cusp between politics and human rights. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) have engaged in separate legal proceedings involving Israel. The ICC, which prosecutes individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, has started an investigation into alleged war crimes in the Palestinian territories in 2021. There is now growing suspicion that the UN’s ICC might seek arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and other political leaders on suspicion of war crimes. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been involved in a significant case brought by South Africa against Israel concerning allegations of genocide in the Gaza Strip. In January, the ICJ issued provisional measures instructing Israel to refrain from committing acts that could fall under the Genocide Convention.

University of Leeds currently has several industrial partners that provide training, placements, hardware and software for Fluid Dynamic research. One of these partnering companies is BAE Systems, a British multinational defence, security, and aerospace company. A report by Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) claims that the company has supplied F-35 fighter jets to Israel, which have been used in their attack on the Gaza Strip, which has, as of March 2024, killed over 31,000 Palestinians and injured over 70,000. BAE’s client list is very secretive, thus accurate information on how their arms are being used is uncertain. The university also currently partners with two Israeli universities, Reichman University and The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The president of Reichman University, Boaz Ganor, has written several highly political articles following October 7, some of them quoting: “Their lives [Palestinians] in Gaza, which were difficult already, will now become unbearable for many years to come,” “The prevailing issue on US campuses today revolves around the ignorance of useful idiots who align themselves with both modern and classic antisemites,” the latter in response to student organisations announcing their support for Palestine.

Universities have long stood as pillars of knowledge and debate, where the exchange of ideas is not only encouraged but essential for the academic and ethical development of students. As global conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian issue persist, an important question arises: do universities hold a moral or ethical responsibility to address these international political issues? Universities are faced with the dilemma of remaining impartial platforms for open debate or taking active stances on political issues such as war, with opinions divided on whether neutrality preserves academic freedom or if engagement is necessary for advocating human rights. The ongoing campus protests and partnerships with corporations and foreign universities are central to this debate, highlighting deep divisions within the academic community on the appropriate role for educational institutions in global politics.

The ongoing conflict challenges universities to define their roles in an interconnected world: should they remain detached observers, or active participants in advocating for global justice and human rights?

Online dating: The quest for intimacy in the online world

Dating apps have enveloped our generation. 

They suck users in with ego-boosting likes on hinge profiles, where you remain eternally sun kissed and stunning in the pictures from your girls holiday. You check your messages and matches, rotting away in bed, disheartened that the stunner of your dreams hasn’t popped onto your feed. You sigh, wondering if one-worded sexual compliments from unidentifiable strangers in group photos are really as good as it’s going to get. Your dream of bumping into and falling in love with Paul Mescal puts any potential matches to shame; but what is a girl to do when real life interaction and intimacy has started to feel unattainable.

The easiest place to find solace after a breakup or rejection is in the warm arms of the dating apps. The matches, messages and likes are quick validation, assuring us that we are attractive and appealing, when we can’t seem to muster up the love to tell ourselves. It doesn’t take long for the attention to become addictive, and when no one has liked your profile in a few days, we are left feeling as though we aren’t enough. When a match finally pings itself across your phone screen you allow the grip of validation to hook you. 

A huge issue with dating apps is that your profile is not representative of you. Instead, it is a contorted highlight reel of your life, designed to fit into a few prompts. What others see of you is a polished top trump card, and whilst this may make us feel confident, it acts as a barricade to intimacy. The bellow of your laugh and the passion you have for the things that you love are not what people see when they like your profile, and I worry that our interpretations of electronic gestures take us further and further away from genuine human connection. On top of this, the amount of choice that is available at your fingertips is so far from reality. We flick through profiles without so much as a second glance, discarding people at the first sight of something we don’t like about their physicality. Whilst it’s important to know what you’re looking for in a partner, I sometimes wonder if the array of choice leaves us always waiting for ‘the best’, running on a hamster wheel, determined to find a carbon copy of our ideal match. 

Dating apps make access to casual sex simple, and in my opinion, have been revolutionary for women’s ability to wield their sexual liberty. The freedom to choose to have sex with as many people as you please is not something that women should ever be shamed for, although I think it’s incredibly important that casual sex is engaged in for self-empowerment rather than in pursuit of validation or plastic intimacy. The danger of this never-ending access to casual sex is our desensitisation to the fact that these profiles belong to real people. The way that dating apps make us feel as though we’re playing a game encourages the idea that the people behind these profiles are disposable. My concern is that this further entrenches a harmful belief held by some, that users, specifically women, are sexual objects. Obviously, this is not an issue born out of dating apps but rather another factor that women have to navigate in the extensive web of misogyny that shrouds dating culture. The combination of not having to see someone in real life and having the freedom to message them whatever you want, leaves women open to experiencing gross sexual harassment and misconduct online, and constitutes one of the darkest parts of the world of dating. 

My biggest hope, especially for women who have been made to feel worthless and deflated after using dating apps, is that they never forget how truly lovable they are. Your dating profile doesn’t dictate your worth. Nobody can take that away from you.

The Tyranny of Trump: Should he be allowed to run in 2024?

Whilst United States politics may seem extremely distant from the University of Leeds, Trump’s term in office shows that this is a global issue. Currently, the US court of appeals for DC is arguing that the second impeachment of Trump is sufficient evidence for him to be disallowed from re-running for president this year. According to Time Magazine, in order to protect the separation of powers, the courts and legislature must be able to check (and restrict where necessary) who is allowed to come into power. From an American history perspective, this protects against an overly powerful executive, against which the constitution itself was written under post-British-colonial control.

Whilst the separation of powers is clearly vital to the preservation of democracy, if previous presidents get banned from incumbency, this could cause huge problems for future executives. The backlash from Trump supporters, as summarised by a spokesman for his campaign, comes from the fact that “if immunity is not granted to a president, every future president who leaves office will be immediately indicted by the opposing party,” meaning presidents would be unable to act how they see fit throughout their time in office (according to BBC news). 

Before Trump failed to be re-elected in 2020, his term in office was fuelled by controversial actions that increased polarisation amongst American citizens. Whilst the presidency as a whole seemed extremely chaotic due to constant claims of sexual assault and racist bigotry, his second impeachment trial stands out as the most obvious cause for banning him from running again. This impeachment falls on the basis that he incited violence in the capitol leading to the deadly January 6th insurrection, according to the New York Times. With unpublished tweets supposedly reading “March to the Capitol after. Stop the steal!” (Time magazine), Trump hoped to overturn the recent election results which he claimed were rigged. During the impeachment, according to an ABC News poll, 56% of voters agreed that he should be convicted and barred from office, resulting in a huge drop in support for the current candidate.

It is without a doubt that Trump should be held accountable for his incitement of violence towards the end of his presidency, followed by his failure to wilfully step down as president, therefore suggesting he cannot receive presidential immunity post-term. However, if Congress were to rule in favour of preventing him from running again, this would take the power away from the public to successfully elect a president. 

With less than a quarter of the British public supporting Trump in any way, according to Politico.eu stats, it is clear why there is a huge backing for disallowing his re-election. However, the importance of this debate goes far beyond Trump alone. The threat Congress would put on democracy by ruling a popular (if not preferred) candidate unable to run for election, is bigger than any hatred for Trump and even goes beyond only affecting the United States. If he were to be voted in through the longstanding electoral system of the US, then surely it is the will of the people? If this is the case, then it is also important to consider the complexity and inaccessibility of the US voting system. In particular, whilst the British seem to hold a particular distaste for Trump, we must also recognise that the US election system is arguably far more complex than the UK alternative, and is not always considered fair and equal. For example, the ability for a candidate to win the popular vote but lose the overall election proves that it is not as simple as meets the eye, according to AP News. Therefore, if Trump is allowed to run again and manages to be voted in, it is crucial this is done through a trusted voting system. 

Leading on from this, his attempt to overturn Biden’s electoral win was based on the fact that the election had been rigged due to sudden changes in state votes and additions of postal votes in favour of Biden (USA Today). This resulted in vast speculation on how fair the voting system was and led to increased mistrust in elections. Whilst this would surely be deemed irrelevant by Trump himself once he was in office, if he were to be elected via the very system that he claimed was rigged, his appointment in itself should be deemed flawed. This would act as self-sabotage for Trump, and therefore he should arguably be given the chance to be proven wrong. On the other hand, if the system is a fraud as he claims, this would suggest that his election could also be rigged in order to put him in office. 

Therefore, if Trump is to be given the opportunity to be re-elected to preserve the rights of public election, one would hope that this is done through a fair and trusted voting system in order to protect multi-national democratic principles. Can this be said for the United States electoral system?