Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Taking the bus replacement from ED station today, I noted the shop towards the top of Walworth Road with the poetic title "Julie Know's Beauty." As in 'Well regarded for your good taste, this is something that you, Julie, know is beauty.'


I wanted to share the eccentric, lyrical sounding shop name

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/26798-julie-knows-beauty/
Share on other sites

I miss Noodels at the camberwell junction. That typo kept me entertained for years, until someone changed it to Noodles, one sign at a time over a year. When giving people directions to my flat, I'd always give them Noodels as a landmark. Noodels should be said in the same way as Rydel High (of Grease fame) for example. Gutted.

Coman Wrote:

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

> Taking the bus replacement from ED station today,

> I noted the shop towards the top of Walworth Road

> with the poetic title "Julie Know's Beauty."


You do miss a lot of local colour by taking the train.

I don't know about poetic, but Julie Knows Beauty has at least one other branch, on the Walworth Road. On the same road, you'll also find Michael Leigh's Beefy Boys men's clothing shop

Ted Max Wrote:

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

> I feel Coman is only telling half the story here

> and has deliberately quoted the sunshades out of

> context for comic effect. What a heartless

> b*stard.

>

> http://i45.tinypic.com/11t1uev.jpg


In response, I distinctly remember the shop name, Julie Know's Beauty. However checking Google Maps it seems I can only find the same store you have found.


I suspect that the shop owners started with the name Julia Knows Beauty and altered the name, perhaps in the hope that the deliberate misspelling would attract more business to the shop. This would be a careful guess.


To recap on my first post, I have included the words "Julie Know's Beauty" in a context where these words make sense, and I found the resulting sentence to sound fun and lyrical. I appreciate that the shop name could simply be wrong punctuation, but on closer analysis, I established that this may not be the only possibility.


I would like to commend the shop, even though I have no vested interest in it, for creating a noticeable name, and for nonethless creating a name which adheres to grammar.


I can appreciate how you thought I may have made the shop name up, however this is not the case. All the same, please let me know the reason that you consider me to be 'heartless b*stard."


Ray Coman

I think it was a joke Ray ;-)


I can't work out a way in which both approaches could be simultaneously grammatically correct?


If her name was Julia Know, then the apostrophe would work, but the lack of one would not.


However I suspect it's just an imperfect conjugation of the verb 'to know' for the third person singular.


If it was a sales and marketing strategy it was a poor one, since the deliberate error would only appeal to grammar pedants whose obsession with words suggests that like me they're no oil painting.

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> I think it was a joke Ray ;-)

>

> I can't work out a way in which both approaches

> could be simultaneously grammatically correct?

>

> If her name was Julia Know, then the apostrophe

> would work, but the lack of one would not.


Unless the larger (non-awning) 'title' was intended as an informal 'first-name-basis' declaration of what Julia does, indeed, know and the awning statement (hereinafter referred to as the second 'conning') a description of what can be found in the windows o'ershadowed by said awnings and, this time, giving Julia's full name and deciding that her products were such as could be described as her 'beauty'.


There is a bucket of scallions round the back bearing the legend Julia Know's Her Onions which is a whole other kettle of fish.

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

    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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