The Oxford Student - Official Student Newspaper

A subfuss over nothing

By Richard Hardiman

It is a truth, universally acknowledged, that Oxford is never in step with the rest of the world when it comes to development or change. In this most traditional of universities there will always be a united and concerted opposition to any change which interferes with drinking, dining or marking ourselves out as different to other academic institutions.

It comes as no surprise, then, that the Student Union’s decision to hold an indicative poll (in sixth week) with the question ‘Should wearing subfusc during examinations should be voluntary?’ has provoked some strong reactions. It’s just conceivable that the prosubfusc brigade are overreacting when they argue that this is the defining tradition of the university (I’m sure there’s something about academic standards in there as well), but clearly this is an emotive issue.

The subfusc debate is essentially an off-shoot of the wider tradition vs. modernisation debate, and it’s as well to remember this. What we normally mean when we refer to subfusc is the cap, gown, suit and so on the complete regalia. In fact subfusc clothing (literally ‘dark’ or ‘dusky’ clothing) is just an addendum to academic dress, which is the cap and gown.

This is one of many common misconceptions people hold dear when discussing the much-loved penguin outfit we all have to wear for formal university events. For the record, allow me to set some of these straight: subfusc does not force women to wear skirts, they get the option to pick between skirt and trousers (as well as having a choice between mortar board or snazzy felt cap), although having to wear a bit of ribbon round the neck like a kitten must get pretty bloody irritating.

Nor is it an offence to wear your cap before graduation; in fact, a quick poke around history of Oxford books in the Bod will reveal that you should be wearing it whenever you’re outdoors in full academic dress or in the presence of a high-ranking member of staff in their official capacity. Technically, you should even have your gown on at lectures (just another reason not to go).

With such confusion reigning over the status of subfusc and academic dress is there any point in holding a poll at all? How can we be expected to decide one way or another if we don’t even know for sure what we’re talking about? The academic dress of the university, which is a blueprint for that of other academic institutions across the country and the world, evolved from medieval day wear.

It is not clear when subfusc clothing was added to the dress requirements of the university’s formal events, but the earliest reference to subfusc in this context is recorded in the Oxford English Dictionary, as used in Cuthbert Bede’s 1853 novel The Adventures of Mr Verdent Green.

Even if we’re conservative and say that it took 50 years from the introduction of the custom for it to have become common enough to feature in a novel it seems likely that we’re not talking about a tradition which extends back much further than 200 years hardly an integral part of the fabric of the university.

Even if, once all the votes are counted, the ‘yes’ campaign has managed to record a shock victory it’s not like we’re suddenly going to usher in a new era of students wandering about the city in jeans, unwashed t-shirts and gowns. OUSU president Emma Norris has stated, “In the event of a ‘yes’ vote, we will calculate how representative this is [of the student body], according to turnout. If turnout is high, then results will be taken to the Proctors for serious consideration.

Given that the last OUSU election had a turnout of just 2435, roughly 15 per cent of the student body, it seems unlikely that there’ll be any chance of a convincing student mandate. Even if the coincidences kept mounting up and voter turnout was high enough, the proctors would not be bound to take any action. Dr Brian Gasser, clerk to the proctors, has emphatically stated that, “There is no process of automatically changing the university rules and regulations after a student vote.

The simple fact of the matter is that ignoring anything that goes against the status quo is remarkably easy in this university. Not that the likelihood is that students will want to give up the status quo. Where JCRs are expressing any opinion on the matter at all it’s usually pro-subfusc, more often there’s nothing more than indifference.

Navid Pourghazi, president of Wadham SU, seems to sum up the general feeling across the university: “I think the subfusc has a life span like all other traditions, and its time should only come when the majority of students find it properly burdensome. I will respect the majority’s decision on this one.

The truth is that, as with so much in Oxford politics, the majority won’t actually be making a decision; rather the laissez-faire attitude of most students will ensure that the prosubfusc- ers will have their way. This would be good news for Lincoln JCR president, Ollie Munn, who puts the case for keeping subfusc with simple force: “Personally, I think it’d be a great shame to do away with subfusc.

As far as Oxford traditions go, dressing up in a suit and white bow-tie is a damn sight more fun than sitting through matriculation in Latin or, in college quads, keeping off the grass.” Perhaps these should be the next targets on the modernisers’ lists. Not that there should be any surprise if and when the results of the poll are ruled inadmissable because of low turnout. At the end of the day, the reason for students’ tepid reaction is that there’s no compelling argument either way.

How often do we actually wear subfusc? Not more than a handful of times during our university career. What are the chances that anyone won’t have the relevant kit? Slim to nil. Some claim that wearing subfusc may deter applications from students of a ‘non-traditional’ background (to be honest, I’d be more put off by the phrase ‘non-traditional’) but this seems unlikely.

Given that the majority of students, state educated or otherwise, have to abide by some sort of dress code for exams at school the idea of wearing a uniform to sit mods or finals is probably second nature. Nor is it by any means certain that students would feel more or less comfortable wearing their everyday wear in the exam room; again, there seems to be a general consensus that subfusc clothing is more of an advantage than a burden.

On the other hand, this is not the first time that the issue of academic dress has been raised one librarian in the lower Rad Cam remembers one of the people he graduated with in the late 70s with a ripped gown held together by safety pins. But the debate extends even further back along the 800 year history of academic dress.

Documents unearthed by The Oxford Student show that ‘the reigning party in the University of Oxford’ attempted to do away with caps and gowns, on the grounds that they were ‘Reliques of Popery, and the rags of the Scarlet Whore’, as long ago as 1658. Had the Right Reverend Lord Bishop of Salisbury not stepped in to protect the helpless articles it’s not clear what would have happened...

Perhaps it’s worth looking to Cambridge for a glimpse of how changing the system might affect university life. Where we have only the one commoners’ gown the Tabs have a range of about 20 shared amongst the 30 colleges. You might think that this would make for even fiercer protection of the tradition by the students but this isn’t so; subfusc has been optional in Tabland since the 60s.

CUSU president Laura Walsh said of Cambridge’s more relaxed regime, “Academic dress for exams is not really an issue here, people just wear what they want. The tradition has gone at Cambridge, and I don’t think it’s one that is likely to come back.

Would something similar happen here were we to make subfusc voluntary? Second year biochemist Ian Robertson thinks not: “If enough students enjoy wearing subfusc I’m sure they’re perfectly capable of keeping the tradition going themselves.” He adds that, “Anyone mourning subfusc’s passing is crying over spilt milk, the only difference being that milk has greater nutritional value.

That the hard-core of subfusc loyalists will not be forced to give up their precious streamers should the vote go through is the crux of this debate. Once again, for all the controversy and debate surrounding Oxford and its traditions, a seemingly huge issue has turned out to be a storm in fine bone china. The measures proposed are not radical, which means that the usual Oxford apathy to anything even vaguely political will probably rule the day.

What would be the ideal result of sixth week’s poll? It’s hard to say. Realistically we should all be hoping for an exceptionally high voter turnout whatever our opinions on the question itself. If turnout is about normal for an OUSU-based vote then we’ll just be left facing another few years of indecision until someone decides to raise the issue again.

If this debate has been rumbling on since the 1650s, and god knows how long before that, it now seems time to put it out of its misery. At least then we’ll know for sure what the student body is aiming towards. Sadly, it’s far more likely that we’ll be left, once again, taking the easy way out. The debate on subfusc itself is immaterial, but the importance lies in the light it sheds on the general political scene in the university.

2nd Feb 2006