Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi, im a local student who now has reached my final year and its dissertation time!!


I know this has been mentioned time and time again, on many different threads and could quite possibly be quite boring for you all. however, im focusing on Gentrification, and am carrying out a case study on East Dulwich!! im looking at how Gentrification can cause false aspirations,myth, status anxiety and emotional distress BUT also how it can improve an area greatly.


I would like anyone and everyone to comment on these ideas, id like your ideas, and i know it will probably go over many things that you have already talked about, but it would be really great to be more focused on what i am talking about and all in one thread!!


the main questions i pose to you are:


Do you think gentrification in Dulwich has been a good thing or a bad thing?


Has it gone too far?


Where do u think it will end?



Would be great to hear your thoughts

> im focusing on Gentrification, and am carrying out a case study on East Dulwich!! im looking at how Gentrification can cause false aspirations,myth, status anxiety and emotional distress BUT also how it can improve an area greatly.


Your supervisor might not like the prejudment.

wow...

you are very quick at replying! im new to all this!


Perhaps i should define what im trying to point out...


im not out too pre judge its merely what my research so far has brought to light.


often when speaking to people, i hear,

"i bought this car, because it gets to 130mph", not because it gets me from a to b.


when i asked a young mum why she decided to buy a three-wheeled mama and papa baby buggie, she replied:

"its the norm in ED"


I want to know why its the norm, and whether there is a 'keeping up with the joneses' affect.


and


as for 'Where will it end?'

rather then geographically i meant what is the next step for east dulwich will gentrification continue, and is a continuation possible.


i was away for a month in the summer and when i came back it already looked different!

jayd5


Like the idea for the dissertation - and as you've already noted there is plenty of grist for the mill on this forum


The recent thread about late night behaviour on LL, and it's wider parallels across the country, boils down to pretty much what you seem (to me anyway) to be suggesting - namely that many, many, many people across all socio-economic groups behave because it's what their peers do, or at least without wider consideration.

Which is fine and dandy, and known about but in an age where "individual" is king how can it be?


I hope you share the work you are doing. Don't worry about judging anyone, I'll do that ;-)

> Do you think gentrification in Dulwich has been a

> good thing or a bad thing?

>


Good thing.


> Has it gone too far?

>


No.



> Where do u think it will end?

>

>


Frankie and Benny's New York Style Italian Steak House, multiplex cinema, and a bowling alley.

If you're looking at cause and effect you may want to start off by not spelling it 'affect'.

I get affected when people effect this effect in me.


You don't want to drop to a 2:1 just for poor spelling and grammar now do you.


sorry, it's the old sub-editor in me, difficult to suppress sometimes

JD5 On the Forum you get complaints about general increased ponciness (daytime, tea shops, gift shops, snazzy new Estate agents etc) and complaints about increased yobbish behaviour on Fri and Sat nights down the Strip. Would be good to have someone actually do a "study" rather than purely rely on anecdotal evidence.

Gentrification - good or bad.


Good in the fact that there is a far greater selection of bars/shops/restaurants etc to please more tastes.

Good for the selfish reason that my house is worth considerably more than my mortgage.

Bad in that it may probably start to attract even more chain stores such as Cafe Nero and the White Stuff thus detracting from what made it good in the first place.

Bad in that the high house prices change the demographic of the people moving in here - there is a less diverse mixture of people than there was several years ago.

Has ED been gentrified? The definition being that an area on its arse has gone up in the world, Hoxton for instance.


So, has ED ever been on its arse in that way, or has it always been fairly affluent and it has just become a bit more affluent?


I suspect that the dowty class warriors will soon be leaping into their tanks to fight the good fight on this one.

a Do you think gentrification in Dulwich has been a good thing or a bad thing?


b Has it gone too far?


c Where do u think it will end?


Well, my contribution to your 10,000 words is:


a) Good for the gentry. But the exclusion, or the perceived exclusion, of those who are not economically advantaged is a significant Bad.

b) Surely a loaded question. Why too far? Too far for what? This seems to presuppose some disadvantageous process is in hand. There may well be but it seems loaded.

c) At the fish shop in Nunhead.

Do you think gentrification in Dulwich has been a good thing or a bad thing?


On the whole a good thing, there have been massive improvements to the high street, there are better places to eat and drink, and the primary schools all seem to be doing well. People have been priced out (me included), but that's life, and it happens all over.


Bad side... Well unfortunately, people exist like the mother you spoke to who would by a pram because it's the done thing around ED... What a fecking gob shite


Has it gone too far?


I don't know what you mean by "too far", in my opinion, it will have gone too far the day the CPT gets an all over face lift and starts serving posh nosh.


Where do u think it will end?


No end in sight as yet. People bought in ED say 5-6 yars ago, and will have made a great profit. However, when they need to upsize because they're having bigger families or whatever, they will find themselves priced out, and wealthier people will move in. Can only see it stopping if there is a massive crash in house prices, but that's far from likely.

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

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

> Has ED been gentrified? The definition being that

> an area on its arse has gone up in the world,

> Hoxton for instance.

>

> So, has ED ever been on its arse in that way, or

> has it always been fairly affluent and it has just

> become a bit more affluent?


That's a very good point. People always talk like ED was a working class haven 10 years ago, but it just wasn't. There has always been a real mix in the area, and in that sense it hasn't changed. I would say it's gotten more trendy, but is that the same thing?

mockney piers Wrote:

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

> Nope, it was rhetorical and thus a statement, not

> a sentence. I did give it a moment's thought

> though ;)

> Incidentally, does an emoticon act as a full stop

> in the manner of a question or exclamation mark?


That'll learn me. ;)

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

    • Absolute mugs. That's what they take you for.  
    • Trossachs definitely have one! 
    • A A day-school for girls and a boarding school for boys (even with, by the late '90s, a tiny cadre of girls) are very different places.  Though there are some similarities. I think all schools, for instance, have similar "rules", much as they all nail up notices about "potential" and "achievement" and keeping to the left on the stairs. The private schools go a little further, banging on about "serving the public", as they have since they were set up (either to supply the colonies with District Commissioners, Brigadiers and Missionaries, or the provinces with railway engineers), so they've got the language and rituals down nicely. Which, i suppose, is what visitors and day-pupils expect, and are expected, to see. A boarding school, outside the cloistered hours of lesson-times, once the day-pupils and teaching staff have been sent packing, the gates and chapel safely locked and the brochures put away, becomes a much less ambassadorial place. That's largely because they're filled with several hundred bored, tired, self-supervised adolescents condemned to spend the night together in the flickering, dripping bowels of its ancient buildings, most of which were designed only to impress from the outside, the comfort of their occupants being secondary to the glory of whatever piratical benefactor had, in a last-ditch attempt to sway the judgement of their god, chucked a little of their ill-gotten at the alleged improvement of the better class of urchin. Those adolescents may, to the curious eyes of the outer world, seem privileged but, in that moment, they cannot access any outer world (at least pre-1996 or thereabouts). Their whole existence, for months at a time, takes place in uniformity behind those gates where money, should they have any to hand, cannot purchase better food or warmer clothing. In that peculiar world, there is no difference between the seventh son of a murderous sheikh, the darling child of a ball-bearing magnate, the umpteenth Viscount Smethwick, or the offspring of some hapless Foreign Office drone who's got themselves posted to Minsk. They are egalitarian, in that sense, but that's as far as it goes. In any place where rank and priviilege mean nothing, other measures will evolve, which is why even the best-intentioned of committees will, from time to time, spawn its cliques and launch heated disputes over archaic matters that, in any other context, would have long been forgotten. The same is true of the boarding school which, over the dismal centuries, has developed a certain culture all its own, with a language indended to pass all understanding and attitiudes and practices to match. This is unsurprising as every new intake will, being young and disoriented, eagerly mimic their seniors, and so also learn those words and attitudes and practices which, miserably or otherwise, will more accurately reflect the weight of history than the Guardian's style-guide and, to contemporary eyes and ears, seem outlandish, beastly and deplorably wicked. Which, of course, it all is. But however much we might regret it, and urge headteachers to get up on Sundays and preach about how we should all be tolerant, not kill anyone unnecessarily, and take pity on the oiks, it won't make the blindest bit of difference. William Golding may, according to psychologists, have overstated his case but I doubt that many 20th Century boarders would agree with them. Instead, they might look to Shakespeare, who cheerfully exploits differences of sex and race and belief and ability to arm his bullies, murderers, fraudsters and tyrants and remains celebrated to this day,  Admittedly, this is mostly opinion, borne only of my own regrettable experience and, because I had that experience and heard those words (though, being naive and small-townish, i didn't understand them till much later) and saw and suffered a heap of brutishness*, that might make my opinion both unfair and biased.  If so, then I can only say it's the least that those institutions deserve. Sure, the schools themselves don't willingly foster that culture, which is wholly contrary to everything in the brochures, but there's not much they can do about it without posting staff permanently in corridors and dormitories and washrooms, which would, I'd suggest, create a whole other set of problems, not least financial. So, like any other business, they take care of the money and keep aloof from the rest. That, to my mind, is the problem. They've turned something into a business that really shouldn't be a business. Education is one thing, raising a child is another, and limited-liability corporations, however charitable, tend not to make the best parents. And so, in retrospect, I'm inclined not to blame the students either (though, for years after, I eagerly read the my Old School magazine, my heart doing a little dance at every black-edged announcement of a yachting tragedy, avalanche or coup). They get chucked into this swamp where they have to learn to fend for themselves and so many, naturally, will behave like predators in an attempt to fit in. Not all, certainly. Some will keep their heads down and hope not to be noticed while others, if they have a particular talent, might find that it protects them. But that leaves more than enough to keep the toxic culture alive, and it is no surprise at all that when they emerge they appear damaged to the outside world. For that's exactly what they are. They might, and sometimes do, improve once returned to the normal stream of life if given time and support, and that's good. But the damage lasts, all the same, and isn't a reason to vote for them. * Not, if it helps to disappoint any lawyers, at Dulwich, though there's nothing in the allegations that I didn't instantly recognise, 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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