Jump to content

Local shops in the Saturday Guardian


klove

Recommended Posts

I take offence to that comment. This is why I choose not to frequent certain shops around here I consider pretentious. If you're going to an established community and wishing to open up a business, how about involving everyone and being inclusive rather than offending a substantial portion of the local population who've lived there since day one with throwaway comments like that.


Louisa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone should take offence; I don't think they were making a comment about the people. I look back a few years (and a lot of years) to an East Dulwich that was a 'bit rough', as in 'rough and ready' or 'rough round the edges' ie untidy, unloved. That's how it always seemed to me; too many empty or run down shops, a few too many semi-derelict houses. Now it looks like someone cares about the place.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AbDabs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't think anyone should take offence; I don't

> think they were making a comment about the people.

> I look back a few years (and a lot of years) to an

> East Dulwich that was a 'bit rough', as in 'rough

> and ready' or 'rough round the edges' ie untidy,

> unloved. That's how it always seemed to me; too

> many empty or run down shops, a few too many

> semi-derelict houses. Now it looks like someone

> cares about the place.


I take your point, and I'm sure the comment was not intended to offend any specific group. However, the fact the area was down at the heel, overwhelmingly working class, with relatively high unemployment were all a reflection on why the area looked as it did, that's not to say the area didn't contain good independent shops back then. I look to farmers, who have been trading on Lordship Lane for decades, and rather successfully too. How come the Guardian doesn't mention them? Instead it chooses a classic couple of examples of gentrification to satisfy the middle classes. Patronising, lazy journalism from them along with unfortunate phraseology from the gentleman quoted, which could be interpreted in any number of ways.


Louisa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Louisa: I think criticising the Guardian for being patronising and lazy over this piece is ludicrous. The butcher is responsible for falsely claiming East Dulwich was rough eight years ago - God knows why - and the Guardian could not seriously be expected to launch a full-scale investigation to determine exactly how rough the locale was.


And maybe the Guardian didn't mention 'the farmers' (who I've never actually come across myself in hundreds of walks down Lordship Lane) because no-one mentioned them to their reporter.


The truth is though that East Dulwich is a classic case of gentrification - no-one needs to twist anything to produce a piece saying that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicholas Spears Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Louisa: I think criticising the Guardian for being

> patronising and lazy over this piece is ludicrous.

> The butcher is responsible for falsely claiming

> East Dulwich was rough eight years ago - God knows

> why - and the Guardian could not seriously be

> expected to launch a full-scale investigation to

> determine exactly how rough the locale was.

>

> And maybe the Guardian didn't mention 'the

> farmers' (who I've never actually come across

> myself in hundreds of walks down Lordship Lane)

> because no-one mentioned them to their reporter.

>

> The truth is though that East Dulwich is a classic

> case of gentrification - no-one needs to twist

> anything to produce a piece saying that.


I thought the article was about supporting local independent shops? If that's the case, then why would they only pick two businesses in the area which have been trading for about a decade, purely post gentrification, rather than other businesses which have been successfully contributing to the local economy for a lot longer? Just a thought. The Guardian does not have to look very far to see how East Dulwich is a classic case of gentrification, and I'm pretty sure most journalists writing about the area would be fully aware of that.


Farmers is the shop sandwiched between GBK and the old locksmiths. It always has a whole host of mops buckets and various other items outside the shop so pretty difficult to miss. Check it out next time you walk down the lane. Very handy for cleaning products, light bulbs, bits and bobs. I'd also fit Dulwich DIY further along the lane into the category of successful independent business, and the Kebab & Wine.



Louisa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Louisa: Ah - Farmers. yes, have used it many times. But I still don't understand your criticisms of the Guardian. A little piece in the paper a reporter had spent half a day on is not going to be an all encompassing source of all things to all people. And since independent butchers have been closing in droves for decades, rather than opening, it's a good example. And a couple of examples is better than just listing loads.

It's just a mystery why the William Rose bloke pretended East Dulwich was rough eight years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was Franklins not all middle class quote that made me chuckle, the manager saying she gets 'all sorts' in her shop. Meaning what? The great unwashed? Agree with others who say they shouldve talked to the traders who've been round for longer than the past few years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The butcher quoted from William rose is from here and he is totally sound bloke (and the opposite do middle class poncey. And I mean that in best possible way)


It would help if people read the article as well as speaking with the people in question. But that might knock some people out of their nit picking comfort zones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------



> How come the Guardian doesn't mention them? Instead it

> chooses a classic couple of examples of

> gentrification to satisfy the middle classes.

> Patronising, lazy journalism from them along with

> unfortunate phraseology from the gentleman quoted,

> which could be interpreted in any number of ways.


The Guardian? Being terribly middle class? And patronising?


Well, that's never happened before...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bawdy-nan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "To be honest when we moved

> here it was a bit rough"


I'd heard it was rough 20 years ago. Irish builders etc in the pubs. Shocking.


It couldn't have been rough 8 years ago, as I was here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether he thought it was a bit rough 8 years ago is only an opinion that really means nothing now. What does mean something now is that there's a thriving shop, employing people, providing a good service at reasonable prices. And we have a high street that's mostly a pleasure to shop in.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I honestly don't understand why everyone is so het up about a comment someone made regarding the area being a bit rough EIGHT years ago.

So what? I hate to spoil everyones delusions but my impressions of the area around that time was that it was a bit sketchy in parts-I was living in West London then and had friends in ED...Funnily enough they sold up about two years ago and moved to Dalston...now that IS sketchy.

Surely what matters is the here and now and wether you actually like the area and enjoy living here.

NOT others perceptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> bawdy-nan Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > "To be honest when we moved

> > here it was a bit rough"

>

> I'd heard it was rough 20 years ago. Irish

> builders etc in the pubs. Shocking.

>

> It couldn't have been rough 8 years ago, as I was

> here.

LOL Mick mac Yeah I can see your point, Irish builders can lower the tone of the place :)

Last Saturday was small business Saturday. Southwark Council hosted Christmas Cracker to celebrate the shop local initiative, and Christmas.

I think its great the guardian highlighted a couple of shops in East Dulwich, I dare say they had lots of different communities to choose from, and they chose ours.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I don't know how spoillable food can be used as evidence in whatever imaginary CSI scenario you are imagining.  And yes, three times. One purchase was me, others were my partner. We don't check in with each other before buying meat. Twice we wrote it off as incidental. But now at three times it seems like a trend.   So the shop will be hearing from me. Though they won't ever see me again that's for sure.  I'd be happy to field any other questions you may have Sue. Your opinion really matters to me. 
    • If you thought they were off, would it not have been a good idea to have kept them rather than throwing them away, as evidence for Environmental Health or whoever? Or indeed the shop? And do you mean this is the third time you have bought chicken from the same shop which has been off? Have you told the shop? Why did you buy it again if you have twice previously had chicken from there which was off? Have I misunderstood?
    • I found this post after we just had to throw away £14 of chicken thighs from Dugard in HH, and probably for the 3rd time. They were roasted thoroughly within an hour of purchase. But they came out of the oven smelling very woofy.  We couldn't take a single bite, they were clearly off. Pizza for dinner it is then. Very disappointing. 
    • interesting read.  We're thinking about the same things for our kids in primary school as well. One thing I don't understand about Charter ED is whether they stream / set kids based on ability.  I got the impression from an open evening that it is done a little as possible. All i could find on-line was this undated letter - https://www.chartereastdulwich.org.uk/_site/data/files/users/18/documents/9473A8A3547CCCD39DBC4A55CA1678DC.pdf?pid=167 For the most part, we believe in mixed ability teaching and do not stream in Year 7 or Year 8. The only exceptions to this are that we have a small nurture class for Maths. This is a provision for students who scored lower than 85 in their SATS exams and is designed to support them to acquire the skills to access the learning in mainstream class. We do not have nurture classes for any other subjects. We take a more streamed - though not a setted - approach in Maths and Science from Year 9 onwards. though unsure if this is still accurate reflection of policy, and unsure of difference between streaming and setting.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...