Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I really do think he meant rough [around the edges].

It was a bit, a few more empty units, a few more windows covered in whitewash like the old mirror shop, the tyre shop and so on.

It has been a bit more spruced up since.


I'm consistently amazed at how quick people are to take offence, you'd think people enjoy it or something.

Frankly I would rather move to a 'rough round the edges' area and watch it gentrify than move into an already gentrified overpriced area.

As an example until two years ago I had lived my entire life in Notting Hill and North Kensington. In the late 70's and through the 80's It was considered a very sketchy area (I'm not talking about Holland park, that was always 'posh" But around Posrtobello Road, All Saints Road) and many people really weren't happy to come and visit me cos of all the drug dealers and muggings. By the mid 90's the area had begun its transformation and those people who were anti the area were now desperate to move there.

The area I lived in is now unrecognisable and also incredibly bland. I don't care if people say the area was rough in the 80's so what.. I don't take it as an assumption that I am tarred with the same brush as the drug dealers crack heads or muggers just because I lived there then.

I feel people are being incredibly precious and as I stated before who cares about others perceptions all that matters is that you like where you live...that is unless of course you are the kind of person who buys in an area cos its perceived as fashionable or upmarket, not because you actually LIKE it.

Its like people who buy Designer handbags for the name only not because they actually like or suit them.

I'd say the exact opposite. I've lived here for almost 15 years and find the description of ED as 'rough' 8 years ago laughable. It was less chichi than now - no pop up shops for example - but it was a lovely place to live with decent shops and a neighbourhood feel. It makes me wonder what sort of people would have considered it rough. It was already unrecognisable from the Easy Dulwich I first moved to.

It is highly likely that this article was conceived by a local journo, or someone with mates here, who is keen to big up the area. It probably had its origins in more of a "oh look I live in a 'posh' place with an organic butchers" than a full blown serious assessment of the economic development of the area.


And if the butcher wants to talk 'rough spots', then their original spot in Vauxhall was about 1000x grimmer than ED but since they moved has also undergone coffee shop gentrification alongside long-term surviving businesses.

El Pibe Wrote:

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

> If he was born and bread here he probably said it

> was dough in the old days (he said, desperately

> trying to get a tedious circular thread lounged).



Probably baked using the Chorleywood method: "he said it was never rough ...just a bit dull but pleasant."


The middle class sourdough eaters clearly prefer a rougher texture.

Lived here all my life and it was never rough , well apart from

What was Yilmaz and Casablanca but other than that , it was never a no go area .

William Rose came to Dulwich because they knew the people in the area would flock to their shop, and spend their cash on free range and 'organic ' meat .

Maybe he should have used a better description to describe Dulwich as what he meant ( up and coming maybe ?) is not correctly portrayed with the word 'Rough'.

He might have said "rough around the edges", but a sub decided, rather than madly narrowing the kerning on a line, to knock a couple of words off thinking it would retain its meaning, to make the article fit.


I've seen it done *coughs into hand*

I moved to ED from the Walworth Road 20 years ago, so it seemed most definitely un-rough to me, so it's all relative! It's certainly become more posh since then. My 86 year old mother visits frequently and always insists on saying "ooh, it's very up and coming round here" but the truth is that it upped and came quite some time ago.

I spoke to the man in question today at William Rose and he said he was misquoted and never used the word 'rough'.

I told him to pop on here to explain the article . Not sure if he will but he was lovely about it and not happy with how he was misquoted in the Guardian.

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

    • Hi - I posted a request for some help with a stuck door and possible leaky roof. I had responses from Lukasz at Look_as.com and Pawel at Sublime Builders. I don't see any/many reviews - has anyone used either person?  Could use a recommendation rather then just being contact by the tradespeople... Many Thanks 
    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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