Why do YOU want to go to Oxbridge?

But he started it, miss!

I had the impression sport, drama, music, debating and other activities are even more important at Oxbridge than anywhere else.

Well that's a load of crap, why would they be more important at Oxford and Cambridge then eslewhere?

Clearly, because they're so much more cultured than the plebs of lesser universities. Is that not obvious?

That's probably because you're a philistine, an uncultured yob. You can't appreciate the wonderful Oxbridge societies. ;oldtimer;

You really are a belligerent little devil, aren't you?

If architecture or age were major factors in your decision, then I'd start to question, amongst other things, your dedication to your chosen subject.

As it stands, I don't personally give a rat's anus if you applied because the purple parrot on your shoulder told you to.

Then why attack all my points?!

I mean VERY academically gifted people(much more gifted than you, and me)

who need to be stretched. If you're gonna go there and get a 2.1, and don't satisfy the other 3 points, then why not do your degree at a top 10 uni and have a smaller work load?

I'm beginning to think you're a numpty. I chose the word desperate because it describes people who have great and unstoppable desire to impress people or join the list of old boys. Most people get over the prestige / building thing, though.

Getting in is the easy bit.

Doing the course is a much greater challenge than at another uni and if you can take that in your stride and enjoy it then great, but personally I think the sacrifices for some are not worth it.

They are probably funded better and, being oxbridge students, people will run them like pros.

But it's not just societies people join for fun... think about spare time, nights out, stress-free time with friends.

The St Andrews Union debating society was and still is incredibly popular at that particular university (incidentally it is the oldest society of its kind in the UK), I recall that one had to turn up rather early to get into the hall for any debate. Of course one can't compare membership figures because at St Andrews every student is automatically a member of the debating society upon matriculation, however, many students have attended at least one debate during their time at the university.

As for rowing, I suspect the fact that there are collegiate rowing clubs will greatly enhance the number of rowers at Oxbridge, no such teams exist at many other universities although I am led to believe that Durham has such a competition in place and has many rowers at collegiate level. As the last example about the footlights is pure speculation it is of little significance, given the large number of independent student drama groups here in Nottingham I should doubt that more are attracted to that kind of thing simply because of the 'brand name' of the footlights.

Well, that's where we differ. You use architecture and prestige as your discriminant. Good for you. I use [subject-specific] reputation, course and location.

I'd sooner study a course that suits me in a concrete hellhole than study a course that I'm not to keen on in a Grade I listed building. I prioritise course.

I'm just sharing my opinion. Don't mistake it for me personally caring about what you do, because it doesn't affect me.

I'd definitely class getting to study in the Bod or living in a castle-like building as fun.

Prestige is pretty similar to reputation, too.

Given that the status of 'university' is one shared by all universities, do you not agree that it would therefore be rather fatuous to cite the fact that 'Oxford is a university' as a 'reason' for choosing Oxford (in the context of university-selection)?

Mindful of the above;

are you sure that that's really a 'contributing' factor, and not merely a contingent one?

Rational persons don't choose Imperial College because it has 'a good reputation' for science;

I use [subject-specific] reputation,

they choose it because it has a better reputation for science than almost anywhere else.

Individuals of a sound temperament don't choose Oxford 'for the architecture'; they choose it because, among a sizeable proportion of British universities that are similarly endowed, Oxford is the most reputable and/or the most prestigious and/or offers some courses that Cambridge doesn't.

By all means, state the reasoning behind your decision to apply to Oxford as 'Grade-I-listed buildings': you'll sound like a crackpot, mind, but it's your prerogative.

Perhaps you're that rare genius who might reasonably expect to flourish irrespective of their alma mater, and can thus prioritise 'architecture' to the exclusion of virtually anything else.

Not tempted?

Edit: That said, I can kind of see where you're coming from.

What the hell? How do you know anything about my academic ability? How do you know I'm not in that category? Because you think I'm a numpty?

Maybe the fact that a larger work load will make you more knowledgeable and better equipped for certain jobs, and a few people out there have a thirst for knowledge? Some people just enjoy learning

Desperate is a ridiculous choice of word in my opinion because many career prospects are enormously enhanced by an Oxbridge degree. If I want to be a barrister or investment banker that doesn't necessarily mean I'm desperate, does it?

I find that at odds with what all current undergraduates have said to me that the admissions process was probably the most stressful part of the entire thing.

You don't have to be amazingly academicaly gifted to enjoy the course though, which is what you earlier suggested

This probably sounds stupid to you, but in my definition of fun I'd definitely include things like Tutorials or having random debates with people in the canteen about free will - things that are so much more prevalent at Oxbridge. I'd definitely class getting to study in the Bod or living in a castle-like building as fun.

That's hopelessly incorrect. Many people are happy going to a good university, and don't need to compare themselves to other universities to feel good about it.

Similar, but with a crucial difference. For example, the prestige of studying English at Oxford is well known. The reputation of the English department among other academics, however, varies widely, and many see it as a ropey and old-fashioned department whose changing of the guard is long overdue. This doesn't detract from its prestige, for which it has history, alumni, and yes, probably even architecture, to thank.

By the way, most college accommodation is far from castle-like - as I'm sure you know. I don't know which college you'll be at, but most have their fair share of ugly sixties buildings, many located inconveniently far from the castle-like central college buildings.

But didn't you say in another thread that you wanted to go to Oxford because the teaching is better (you thought) than that of other universities? I thought one university being better than another was a major contributing factor to your choosing it.

I mean, it is for me too, for most people. I choose to go to York for my PhD because it was better than Oxford for what I wanted to do. If it was just a case of going somewhere good, I could have saved myself the trouble of getting a removal van, and stayed in Oxford...

Seems, madam? ... I know not seems.


You seem to be misreading me.

I doubt anyone chooses anything for a sole reason, but for me, architecture was one of the things that grabbed me. Luckily I'm in good company - Matthew Arnold was a fan too.