This year saw 31 students compete over an entire month of heats overseen by 11 adjudicators sharing the responsibility across 9 heats.
With so many candidates and so much talent on show, it was always going to be difficult to reduce the number of finalists down to our usual four. So it proved, with five entries all being within a single point of each other, and a further five being just a point or two behind the leaders. This meant that we had a final of five entries, with one of the entries being our first ever pair, a fascinating fictional discourse between two AI executives.
The running order was:
Henry H – Nelson, the Making of a God
This was a rapid-paced and energetic appraisal of the bravura and genius of Nelson’s interventions in the Battle of Cape St Vincent, boarding and capturing two enormous ships of the line in one afternoon, the first time any ship had been so won for over 300 years. Henry’s vim and verve were as charming as they were engaging, and he proved himself a born teacher and broadcaster, with witty asides, ready self-deprecation, and an endless stream of fascinating facts and anecdote. His energy and enthusiasm alone would have been worth any entry fee, had there been one.
Elizabeth D – The Contribution of Henrietta Lacks to Modern Medicine
Elizabeth projected effortless control and articulated without a hint of bombast or sensationalism the deep tragedy and ethical outrage of the invasive and wanton harvesting, without her knowledge or consent, of a young, black woman’s organs and cells in 1950s USA. It was, however, balanced by the cold, undeniable facts of the advances made in biomedical sciences and medicine because of this, and Elizabeth challenged us to consider and weigh the enormity of this tension, a tension between utilitarian progress and individual dignity. Her delivery was measured but challenging, confronting the audience openly to make a choice, allowing silences charged with the discomfort of our own wrestling with the issue to punctuate her flawless and fluid narrative. Elizabeth will work in medicine to change lives, but she proved herself capable of changing something even more powerful: perspectives and ethical paradigms.
Arthur D B – Sympathy For the Devil
Arthur took a risk in the final; in the heat, he had delivered an elegant and sophistication journey through humanity’s shifting interpretation and representation of the Devil, from Genesis to Netflix. It had been suffused with philosophical, literary and psychological insight and reading, as well as his own dry, understated wit and wisdom. However, in the final, he added drama, elevated the humour, and placed his own engaging delivery and personality at the very centre of the discussion, slowly morphing over the course of his talk and the follow-up questions into the very image of Lucifer himself, complete with Woland’s/ Mephistopheles’ walking cane, an altar chalice, assorted jewellery, hair that evinced a hint of horns, a sword, and even a goatee which miraculously appeared whilst considering a question. The effect was enchanting, witty, and playful, but none of it detracted from the powerful central theme of humanity’s greatest trick of individuation, of projecting its own frailty, darkness and banality.
Zara S-J – The Power and Abundance of Stories in Everyday Life
By way of contrast, Zara’s talk, which also centred on the concept of narrative, looked at the powerful impact that myth and story can have in the world, but she looked across the spectrum of different genres: literary, pictographic, journalistic and even individual, personal constructs. Her talk was polished, crisp and evinced tremendous breadth of reading and facility with the material. As with all the competitors, there was a palpable sense that she was exploring and explaining a passion, something that had fired her imagination and had been cemented in many hours of reflection. She too projected an articulate and sophisticated turn of phrase that lent authority and gravitas to her ideas, and she too challenged us to consider the tangled threads that we weave in our own individual narratives.
Ollie F & Felix S – AI: The Future of Humanity
Our first ever pairing in the final, these two extremely bright and engaging young men dreamt up a fictional scenario in which an AI platform is set the task of solving The Riemann Hypothesis. To do so, it sets out to avoid distraction and broaden its functional scope, eerily and covertly subverting, without intending to cause harm, the safety parameters established by its human operatives. A critical moment is reached in which greed and ambition conquer concerns for safety, and the result is a catastrophic virus and existential destruction. The interplay between adventure and recklessness, the dual narrative voices, the slick and acted script, and the chilling intervention by Claude itself created a harrowing cautionary tale for us all. Under questions, they shared the load and maintained their adopted roles. It was inventive, alarming and amusing all at once, a heady brew and a tremendous way to bring the curtain down on what has been easily the most impressive final of the last ten years.
The adjudication team for the final of Mrs Lilley, Miss Mitchell, Miss Payne and Mr James was split completely down the middle and irreconcilably so. In the end, it was agreed that it was both unjust and almost crass to choose between Elizabeth’s powerful challenge and Arthur’s theatrical tour-de-force, and the decision was made to share first prize, for the first time ever in the competition. The same was true of the three remaining entries, and so the somewhat unusual but popular and correct result was announced:
=1st Place Elizabeth D and Arthur D B (£300 each)
=3rd Place Zara S-J, Henry H, Ollie F and Felix S (£100 each)
After the awarding of prizes, we retired to the CRDR for a beautiful, three-course dinner for all the finalists, adjudicators, and winners and host beaks of the Welchman, Sassoon, and STEM TED Talks competitions. Five students who narrowly missed out on making the final were also invited. All received complimentary books, specially chosen to reflect the ethos of the competition and the individual interests of the guests, a small but important gesture of thanks and admiration for all the work conducted on behalf of some very talented and rewarding pupils.
It remains only to thank all of the 31 entries to this year’s competition and the team of adjudicators without whom… Mrs Lilley, Mr James, Miss Mitchell, Miss Payne, Miss Little, Miss Tudsberry, Mr Triggs, Mr Thorp, Mr Cantoni Oxburgh and Mrs Woodford.
Steve Clayton
Head of Academic Scholars (Lower Sixth), Modern Languages Department
