# That place for young hip and trendy people



## Aitch (Dec 6, 2003)

I was down Atlantic Rd last night and noticed that restaurant bar place Atlantics was having its opening night.  It was packed with you guessed it young hip and trendy people.  Maybe we should organise an Urban visit and ruff the place up a bit  

I'm afraid to say that with this added place to Atlantic Road it is one step nearer to becoming Claphamited  We shall see


----------



## rennie (Dec 6, 2003)

was it free booze? damn... i missed it!   

a very good idea it is Aitch...


----------



## hatboy (Dec 6, 2003)

Not keen on all that blonde laminate* wood everywhere in there. So bland and stereotype.

(No comment on the people).  

Shit Aitch - me, you and you know who should have gone yesterday. I didn't feel like drinking tho.

*Please note I've been asked to point out that the floor in Atlantic66 is not laminate. But "high quality".


----------



## fanta (Dec 6, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Aitch _
> *I was down Atlantic Rd last night and noticed that restaurant bar place Atlantics was having its opening night.  It was packed with you guessed it young hip and trendy people.  Maybe we should organise an Urban visit and ruff the place up a bit
> 
> I'm afraid to say that with this added place to Atlantic Road it is one step nearer to becoming Claphamited  We shall see  *



What is it like inside?


----------



## Aitch (Dec 6, 2003)

Bland, bright and boring As Hatboy said very laminate


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 6, 2003)

A little bird told me it would have opened earlier had the river Effra not suddenly started bubbling up into the basement.

A builder swung his pickaxe one morning and found himself knee deep in water. Apparently it was like being in the engine room of the Titanic. Several tons of ready mix had to be poured to discipline the River God.

So maybe the hip and trendy ones, who shalt inherit the Earth or, at least, Brixton, will get a drenching.

_*Oh Tamara! We were dancin' to groovy ambyant computa sounz and suddenly, like, floated away! It was, like, really, like, scary and, like, uncool!! Me and Araminta could have ended up in a sewer culvert!! In Vauxhall!! Fortunately we surfaced in the Living Bar toilets and a nice man called Larry charged us only £16 for a cocktail!! Sorted!!*_

Edited to add:



> The Effra
> 
> Running into the river very close to Vauxhall Bridge is the River Effra, another of London's "lost rivers". Like the others the Effra has been reduced over the years to nothing more than a drain. there are, however, stories that King Canute once sailed up the Effra and that Queen Elizabeth once did the same when visiting Sir Walter Raleigh. These may not be true but what is certain is that in 1664 the Effra was of sufficient size and importance for Lord Loughborough to propose converting it into a navigable canal from Brixton to the Thames.


----------



## Pie 1 (Dec 7, 2003)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *
> (No comment on the people).
> 
> *



 

Walked past it yesterday - looks a bit cheap & nasty if you ask me - Seems they're "concept dining experience" didn't really make it past the laminate floor shop on acre lane


----------



## detective-boy (Dec 7, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Oh Tamara! We were dancin' to groovy ambyant computa sounz and suddenly, like, floated away! It was, like, really, like, scary and, like, uncool!! Me and Araminta could have ended up in a sewer culvert!! In Vauxhall!! Fortunately we surfaced in the Living Bar toilets and a nice man called Larry charged us only £16 for a cocktail!! Sorted!!
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 7, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> * We were dancin' to groovy ambyant computa sounz [/i]
> 
> *


* 
played by a popular beat combo on the gramophone? How we waltzed the night away. I didn't get to bed til 1 in the morning! Pass the pipe and slippers.*


----------



## WasGeri (Dec 7, 2003)

Is laminate flooring naff then? I quite like mine


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 8, 2003)

My flat's done in laminate too  - I fucking hate carpets


----------



## hatboy (Dec 8, 2003)

I think describing things as "very laminate" could catch on.

Yeah wood floors are nice, but it's when it's that bleached-out colour. In this place it's all so faded-out looking. Bland, bland, bland.


----------



## hendo (Dec 8, 2003)

I don't have anything to do with the new business setting up on Atlantic Road, but I wish it all the best.

That site was half derelict until they moved in and refurbished it, and its nice to see some more money and jobs arriving in that part of the street. It must be cheerful for the people who own flats above it to have them open, since having a derelict shop underneath them must have been a headache. 

I won't lie awake at night worrying that an increasingly prosperous Brixton might look on the surface to be a bit like Clapham. IMHO Clapham is looking rather run down anyway.

We can all sneer about the laminate. But it takes guts to open a legitimate business, and hard work to run a restaurant; so fair play to them.


----------



## fanta (Dec 8, 2003)

What exactly is wrong with Clapham? 

Why does the place and the people who live there incur so much antipathy and derision?

Apart from the cost - which is applicable to London anyway!

(not directed at you personally hendo)


----------



## hatboy (Dec 8, 2003)

Despite popular perception I never mention Clapham like that myself.

"We can all sneer about the laminate. But it takes guts to open a legitimate business, and hard work to run a restaurant; so fair play to them".

Yes, but why when things change round here why is it always in one direction - blandly upmarket? And what's stopping them making it more imaginative in style? Perhaps cost, perhaps alot of people (those some call yuppies) feel comfortable with bland.

Plus that building, "Pacific Mews" (yeah whatever) is the most bodged, rip-off, con-artist unfinished piece of "regeneration" I've seen in awhile. Luxury apartments - bollocks, the place is falling apart!


----------



## hendo (Dec 8, 2003)

Putting the debate about Clapham aside for a mo, surely there couldn't really be a case for leaving that building as it was; it looked very sad.

I see what you mean about bland, HB, but if it isn't what people want it'll shut. 

I reckon it'll do OK, but I'd be amazed if it usurps the fantastic Lounge in my affections.


----------



## hatboy (Dec 8, 2003)

Of course it shouldn't stay derelict. But it should have been done up properly. Look at that building closely. Nothing is finished off properly. It's a great big rip-off bodge and I think people who bought over-priced flats there should complain to the developer that they haven't finished the work!

"I see what you mean about bland, HB, but if it isn't what people want it'll shut."

It probably is what some people want. Conservative young professionals like bland bar interiors.


----------



## Bond (Dec 8, 2003)

Might check it out soon


----------



## Pie 1 (Dec 9, 2003)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> * Luxury apartments - bollocks, the place is falling apart! *



Literally.
 The whole of the front fell off it about a year or so ago didn't it, closing Atlantic road for a couple of days.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Dec 9, 2003)

I think the place is called 66 Atlantic. One thing I don't like about a lot of these new bars is that they can't even be bothered to think up a proper name! SW9, the 333 Club, the 100 pub etc etc - they could have thought up something interesting, relevant to the local community/culture etc. It just shows a lack of imagination IMO.


> Maybe we should organise an Urban visit and ruff the place up a bit


 Well, this I definitely agree with! 



> That site was half derelict until they moved in and refurbished it.


 Not exactly true. I believe that a property developer did the whole row of shops up a few years ago and this is one of the last to be rented out. To be fair though, it's good that there's a variety of shops along there now, compared to the state they were in about 4 years ago, and yes, new jobs are always welcome.


----------



## hatboy (Dec 9, 2003)

In general I think the regeneration of upper Atlantic Rd is a success. It's just all these bland bars that leave me cold. Shame Railton above is still a bit of a dump, mainly due to previous poor planning of new buildings post riot and a postcode boundary affecting funding I think.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 9, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Brixton Hatter _
> *I think the place is called 66 Atlantic. One thing I don't like about a lot of these new bars is that they can't even be bothered to think up a proper name! SW9, the 333 Club, the 100 pub etc etc - they could have thought up something interesting, relevant to the local community/culture etc. It just shows a lack of imagination IMO. *




Yes, something like 333bah, 100bah and SW9bah


BTW:  George IV is now officially called the George Four evidenced by a brand new pub sign.  

Must be for the people who were crap at Roman numerals


----------



## dum dum (Dec 9, 2003)

Checked this place out today it sucked.


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 9, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Minnie_the_Minx _
> *George IV is now officially called the George Four evidenced by a brand new pub sign.
> Must be for the people who were crap at Roman numerals*


 Yeah, everybody thought it was short for George Intra-Venous. 

Dum dum: _THEY LET YOU IN????_


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 9, 2003)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Yeah, everybody thought it was short for George Intra-Venous.
> I]*




Having seen the punters outside, that's quite possible  

Never seen the pub look such a shithole as it does the night after one of their late night sessions.  Total disgrace


----------



## hendo (Dec 9, 2003)

Did you eat there Dum Dum? What was it like?


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 9, 2003)

I wouldn't dare go in George IV - it's like something out of Bosch painting - The Fridge bar is bad enough - it makes me come over all Anna Key - hellish moronic music danced to by irritating gurning fluffybooted ketmonkeys


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 9, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *I wouldn't dare go in George IV - it's like something out of Bosch painting - The Fridge bar is bad enough - it makes me come over all Anna Key - hellish moronic music danced to by irritating gurning fluffybooted ketmonkeys *




I would't know, haven't been in there since it became a clubby type of thing.  

I used to drink in there when it was a REAL pub    


Telegraph looks like shite as well


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 9, 2003)

*So now we know*



> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *The Fridge bar is bad enough - it makes me come all over Anna Key*


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 9, 2003)

*So now we know*



> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *    *



Sorry, maybe I should have asked first


----------



## isvicthere? (Dec 10, 2003)

*George Four*



> _Originally posted by Minnie_the_Minx _
> *Having seen the punters outside, that's quite possible
> 
> Never seen the pub look such a shithole as it does the night after one of their late night sessions.  Total disgrace   *[/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## editor (Dec 10, 2003)

Re: new café/bar
Atlantic Road used to be a barren - and rather uncomfortable - part of Brixton and now there's the excellent mid-priced Lounge, an ultra-cheap café and this laminate-tastic cafe/bar, along with 
 a mixed range of shops catering to a wide range of budgets/tastes.

It's not like some old traditional pub has been suddenly yuppified and all the regulars turfed out - it's just another café/bar on a previously run down part of Brixton (run by a Brixtonite)

I really don't see what the problem is: if you don't like this new café/bar - don't go! It's as simple as that! It's not going to affect earnings in the Albert or the Phoenix, and although the argument that rising business rents is going to affect some areas of Brixton, you can't blame individual shops for that - they're merely responding to the demand. 

I like the choice and don't see how the swanky new cafés can't get along just fine with the old fashioned greasy spoons.


----------



## hatboy (Dec 10, 2003)

My basic feeling is "oh good luck to them" but that sign about "Brixton's hip and happening crowd" and the blandly fashionable and blonde-wood interior really put me off.  

I've said already I think upper Atlantic Rd is a success in regeneration terms, although rent hikes are already forcing out some of the first wave of new shops (eg Compulsion).


----------



## rennie (Dec 10, 2003)

well dum dum n i went it, saw their mural about "never mind the bollocks here comes the atlantic", checked out the cocktail list n then headed to the lounge... so he lied, somewhat!


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Dec 10, 2003)

> My basic feeling is "oh good luck to them" but that sign about "Brixton's hip and happening crowd" and the blandly fashionable and blonde-wood interior really put me off.


 I totally agree. I'm not at all against the new bar and I'm sure I'll pop in for a pint of genius at some point - but as I said before I just think there's so many bland, generic bars around now - where's the imagination? They obviously want to cater for a young middle class crowd who've got money to burn on cocktails etc - which is fine if that's their thing - but why does the actual bar look so bland? I went in a similar "trendy" bar in Lordship Lane  few months ago (can't remember what it's called) that was done really well - nice colour schemes, candles, good pics on the wall by local artists, a mashup of pics of cool/famous men/women on the respective toilet doors etc etc. It doesn't take much imagination to create a interesting environment - IMHO a bland wooden interior is a totally missed opportunity to create something interesting to add to the diverse & intersting area we live in.





> I think upper Atlantic Rd is a success in regeneration terms


 Absolutely. I couldn't agree more. I'd rather Atlantic 666 was there than an empty shop.


----------



## CK1977 (Dec 10, 2003)

> I totally agree. I'm not at all against the new bar and I'm sure I'll pop in for a pint of genius at some point - but as I said before I just think there's so many bland, generic bars around now - where's the imagination?



Yeah i'm with you on this, I gotta admit I'm a fan of "The Lounge" but not that Neon place on the opposite side of the road, it's just plain AWFUL, crap interior, the food I had in their was under cooked and bland, uncomfortable seats, crap drinks list, it's just crap!


----------



## editor (Dec 10, 2003)

I find I can get a lot more upset by seeing yet another old shop turning into yet another fucking neon-lit pink nail bar. 

How many does Brixton need?


----------



## editor (Dec 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by CK1977 _
> *Yeah i'm with you on this, I gotta admit I'm a fan of "The Lounge" *


 I've just  done a little website for them. There's still a few tweaks to do (and more text to add), but you can see the beta version here: www.brixtonlounge.com

Check out the cute animated map done by Eme!


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 10, 2003)

I misread that for a sec as





> Check out the cute animated map done by Ernie!


  Don't tell Eme! 

I still think the Lounge's logo looks like it says DUNG. I told the guy who was doing the signwriting outside when they moved.  He was not impressed.


----------



## editor (Dec 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *I still think the Lounge's logo looks like it says DUNG. I told the guy who was doing the signwriting outside when they moved.   *


 It is a mighty crap logo indeed.

And I've told the owner _all about it_  too!


----------



## CK1977 (Dec 10, 2003)

> I've just done a little website for them. There's still a few tweaks to do (and more text to add), but you can see the beta version here: www.brixtonlounge.com
> 
> Check out the cute animated map done by Eme



That's a really nice site Ed.  I'll certainly be putting my money into the "The Lounge", it's really relaxed in their and the staff are really friendly and make you feel welcome.

Nice work


----------



## lang rabbie (Dec 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by editor _
> *Check out the cute animated map done by Eme! *



I'm sitting here still staring at the animation, completely unable to remember whether the little green car is making an illegal  right turn into Atlantic Road from Brixton Hill.


----------



## grubby local (Dec 10, 2003)

<whispers> er, ed, according to the info on the front page it's only open for an hour. I think you mean 12.00am.

funky map, though.
gx


----------



## Blagsta (Dec 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by CK1977 _
> *but not that Neon place on the opposite side of the road, it's just plain AWFUL, crap interior, the food I had in their was under cooked and bland, uncomfortable seats, crap drinks list, it's just crap! *



Yup, Neon is shit.  I went there on my birthday and my friend's chicken was raw in the middle.


----------



## Blagsta (Dec 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by editor _
> *I've just  done a little website for them. There's still a few tweaks to do (and more text to add), but you can see the beta version here: www.brixtonlounge.com
> 
> Check out the cute animated map done by Eme! *



Nice!


----------



## Pie 1 (Dec 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by lang rabbie _
> *I'm sitting here still staring at the animation, completely unable to remember whether the little green car is making an illegal  right turn into Atlantic Road from Brixton Hill.  *



Totally illegal right turn.   Some serious honking abuse would insue...maybe you could add distinctive Brixton sounds like that to the map too - "Skunkweebskunkweedskunkweedtravelcard
travekcardtravelcardticketsfortonightsacadamy 
as the mouse moves around"


----------



## Pie 1 (Dec 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Blagsta _
> *Yup, Neon is shit.  I went there on my birthday and my friend's chicken was raw in the middle. *



Third that. Went there for my birthday this year - lousy.

Also, I think as far as Atlantic 66 goes, I've got nothing against it being there at all, the more the merrier - I'm just disapointed. They made it sound like it was going to maybe be something a little different, but it's opened looking like that. Just leaves me a bit cold.


----------



## hendo (Dec 11, 2003)

Reckon me and Miss T will check out the food there next week, and report back. 
Sorry to hear about the apparent decline of Neon, where I have enjoyed nice Pizzas in the past.


----------



## editor (Dec 11, 2003)

> _Originally posted by grubby local _
> *<whispers> er, ed, according to the info on the front page it's only open for an hour. I think you mean 12.00am. *


 I'm not sure about that. 12am sounds like midday to me. 

I'd rather say, 'midnight' but - hey! - an artist can only work with what they're given!


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 11, 2003)

> _Originally posted by editor _
> *I'm not sure about that. 12am sounds like midday to me.
> 
> I'd rather say, 'midnight' but - hey! - an artist can only work with what they're given! *



I am afraid he/she's right - 12am is midnight, 12pm is noon -


----------



## rennie (Dec 15, 2003)

I passed by on saturday afternoon n the place was empty.  had a glance on the menu list n im proud to announce that a chef salad can be served for a mere 7 quid. and a risotto for 11. makes me wonder what is in them!  

did the usual, n went to the lounge. cannot see myself going into 66 atlantic. a bit too trendy for me taste, expensive and brightly lit!  still, good luck to them.


----------



## hatboy (Dec 15, 2003)

Re: boring bars _imaginatively_ named after the road or area they are in. Is there a restaurant called Mudshute?


----------



## Ol Nick (Dec 16, 2003)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *Re: boring bars imaginatively named after the road or area they are in. Is there a restaurant called Mudshute? *


Sure. It's not restaurant, though.


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 16, 2003)

I must admit I'm a bit confused because when that somewhat controversial ''new restaurant'' thread  started (that Ms T is SUCH a troublemaker! ), I thought everyone was talking about the place being built from scratch (and still unfinished) on the corner of Vining St and Atlantic Road. 

I saw Atlantic 66 at the w/e* and it just looks boring and rather expensive -- dearer than the Lounge and not as nice.  I think it's 4 quid for scrambled egg on toast!  

*Although I live very near, for some reason I rarely go along that stretch.


----------



## rennie (Dec 16, 2003)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *I must admit I'm a bit confused because when that somewhat controversial ''new restaurant'' thread  started (that Ms T is SUCH a troublemaker! ), I thought everyone was talking about the place being built from scratch (and still unfinished) on the corner of Vining St and Atlantic Road.
> 
> I saw Atlantic 66 at the w/e* and it just looks boring and rather expensive -- dearer than the Lounge and not as nice.  I think it's 4 quid for scrambled egg on toast!
> ...



dum dum tells me that place still unfinished is going to be the new premises for the jewelery  shop diverse.But he's probably got that wrong (easily confused )


----------



## Ms T (Dec 18, 2003)

I've heard it will be a jewellry shop as well.  Perfect for Brixton's hip and happening population.


----------



## rennie (Dec 18, 2003)

i got a briliant bracelet for my birthday from there!


----------



## jayeola (Dec 18, 2003)

"Claphamited" like the word! Makes gentrification worse than "sodomited"


----------



## Bond (Dec 18, 2003)

Still somewhat curious to check this place out properly


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jayeola _
> *"Claphamited" like the word! Makes gentrification worse than "sodomited" *



I prefer 'ciabattered'.


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 20, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *I prefer 'ciabattered'. *


----------



## hipipol (Dec 20, 2003)

Suzee Blue Cheese posting as Hipipol:

It's a minimalist style restaurant bar.  We went a couple of nights ago to check it out.  I was put off going in by the overbright lighting and the fishbowl atmosphere but we'd arranged to meet peeps inside and there was no turning back.  

The food apparantly was good, but looked like very small portions to me, especially the seabass.  I doubt I'd go there to eat.  The food took ages to come, about 45 minutes.  They brought a glass of champagne each to compensate which was a nice touch, especially as me and Hipipol got one too and we weren't even eating.  Maybe the food was so late arriving because there was a birthday crowd in that night.  

The music was global, I liked it.  

I have friends who got together a place in Lordship Lane - I know how much hard work and planning that took and the financial risk they took to get it off the ground.  Best of luck to the crew behind this one - as has been pointed out, if you don't like it don't go.  It's not like it's replaced anything.  Though I did have a great fondness for the red, blue and yellow of the old Howes facade.

And I'm with Mike on offering thanks to above it's not another nail bar


----------



## hatboy (Dec 21, 2003)

"I have friends who got together a place in Lordship Lane - I know how much hard work and planning that took and the financial risk they took to get it off the ground. Best of luck to the crew behind this one - as has been pointed out, if you don't like it don't go. It's not like it's replaced anything. Though I did have a great fondness for the red, blue and yellow of the old Howes facade."

I do agree with this. And I do realise it's easy to criticise. But nevertheless I find this place terrifically bland and predictable looking. It seems to be attracting people who are nicely-dressed, not too loud, not very noticeable, etc, etc.  It's pretty irrelevant to  many people in Brixton I feel. Too expensive and too damn dull. Sorry.  

All I can say to the people runnng it is that I hope they can in time give it more character and personality (which in a way is anti-style, anti-fashion). Then again if they want the office party crowd I'm sure it'll do just fine as it is.


----------



## hatboy (Dec 21, 2003)

Reposted from comments in the politics forum:

"In a study in gentrified areas of Lambeth, Islington, Hackney, Lewisham and Wandsworth, Tim Butler found “little evidence of the middle class deploying its resources for the benefits of the wider community.” He says: “London’s middle classes share a common relationship to each other which is largely exclusive of those who are not ‘people like us’ – most strikingly perhaps in relation to their ethnicity. In a city that is massively multi-ethnic, its middle classes, despite long rhetorical flushes in favour of multi-culturalism and diversity, huddle together into essentially white settlements in the inner city. Their children have friends like their parents and most of their parents’ friends are people like themselves.”

Sadly this is true of many people.


----------



## hatboy (Dec 21, 2003)

Also people had expectations of Atlantic 666 to be somehow special. It was promoted by the sign on the wall outside as "Brixton's Biggest Concept Dining Space" I recall.  Perhaps someone would like to tell me what the "concept" is. I'm buggered if I can see it.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 21, 2003)

I did walk by it a last week.I believe the Chef is the guy who used to work in the Dogstar on Sundays(I saw him through the window).He has been knocking around Brixton for a long time and lives locally.I dont know him that well but I know he has wanted to try and get his own place for a while.

  Atlantic Rd always did have a range of shops in it-regeneration just means that they are different.I remember a useful second-hand shop run by an old lady who had lived in Brixton all her life.You could get second hand gas fires their etc(u cant do that these days)which where handy for "self help" repairs.

   Their also used to be a pie shop as well.

   Atlantic Rd did have a large off licence and at times the "Frontline" did reach that for down.

   The interesting characters who ran the shops have now finally retired.


----------



## CK1977 (Dec 22, 2003)

> Reposted from comments in the politics forum:
> 
> "In a study in gentrified areas of Lambeth, Islington, Hackney, Lewisham and Wandsworth, Tim Butler found “little evidence of the middle class deploying its resources for the benefits of the wider community.” He says: “London’s middle classes share a common relationship to each other which is largely exclusive of those who are not ‘people like us’ – most strikingly perhaps in relation to their ethnicity. In a city that is massively multi-ethnic, its middle classes, despite long rhetorical flushes in favour of multi-culturalism and diversity, huddle together into essentially white settlements in the inner city. Their children have friends like their parents and most of their parents’ friends are people like themselves.”
> 
> Sadly this is true of many people.



Hatboy, you always hit on the right points, thanks for posting this.

The problem with half of these new spots ("Nu-Minamilist Style Bars/Dining Concepts") is that they simply cater for middle class "white" people ONLY! 

The menu's, the drinks list, the pricelist, the door policies, need I say anymore!!!


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 22, 2003)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *"In a city that is massively multi-ethnic, its middle classes, despite long rhetorical flushes in favour of multi-culturalism and diversity, huddle together into essentially white settlements in the inner city. Their children have friends like their parents and most of their parents’ friends are people like themselves.” *


Exactly. There's something essentially racist about gentrification where there's a large working class ethnic minority population, i.e. in Lambeth (190 languages spoken within a population of some 270,000).

Why? For precisely for the reasons given by Tim Butler. The non-white UK middle class is small compared to the white middle class. So if a multi-racial area is gentrified it drives out the non-whites in favour of whites.

In an employment situation such a practice would be illegal - it would be indirect race discrimination (which may attract uncapped damages at an employment tribunal). But it's legal - apparently - to do this in the housing field via market-led gentrification.

BTW is that Tim Butler from East London University?


----------



## lang rabbie (Dec 22, 2003)

The article with the Tim Butler quote was written from a London Tenant Federation perspective and appeared in  London Housing magazine.   The site is a pain to navigate full article here


----------



## hatboy (Dec 23, 2003)

I've read the whole of that article and I agree with all of it except the last line. I think you can have "socially-mixed" areas in any way I can think of, except when there's a big disparity in wealth and access to housing. And there are other things as well, but what I'm getting at is that I don't think people of different religions, different races, different nationalities, etc generally have much problem with eachother until things like access to housing and rich/poor being too far apart come into such sharp focus. Oh, and policing. I mean million pound houses next to council estates (even if they're not falling to bits) is rubbing it in a bit IMHO.


----------



## Giles (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Exactly. There's something essentially racist about gentrification where there's a large working class ethnic minority population, i.e. in Lambeth (190 languages spoken within a population of some 270,000).
> 
> Why? For precisely for the reasons given by Tim Butler. The non-white UK middle class is small compared to the white middle class. So if a multi-racial area is gentrified it drives out the non-whites in favour of whites.
> ...



The key difference between "race discrimination" in employment and the effects of gentrification on an area is that in the former case, there is a central person you can blame for causing that discrimination, whereas the gentrification of an area happens because of a thousand individual decisions that people make about where they want to buy or rent houses and flats, and work, and those decisions are not made because of racism, are they?

Giles..


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Giles _
> *The key difference between "race discrimination" in employment and the effects of gentrification on an area is that in the former case, there is a central person you can blame for causing that discrimination, whereas the gentrification of an area happens because of a thousand individual decisions that people make about where they want to buy or rent houses and flats, and work, and those decisions are not made because of racism, are they?
> 
> Giles.. *


Totally untrue. Gentrification occurs because local politicians permit it, e.g. signing off public housing to be flogged to property developers and yuppies. And sometimes turning up at the auction to bid for it themselves!!! (see other thread).

They can then pretend - to avoid political flack - it's all due to forces beyond their control. It's the great 'market forces' politicial trick. You permit market forces to let rip then pretend it's all beyond your control.

This applies especially in Brixton where gentrification is essentially racist - it drives out blacks in favour of whites. 

And what Brixton politician wants to be (quite properly) accused of being racist in housing provision? It's a politicial kiss of death.

Luckly lots of people are watching the buggers closely and will have their bollocks if they try to play this racist trick in any major way in central Brixton.


----------



## editor (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Totally untrue. Gentrification occurs because local politicians permit it, e.g. signing off public housing to be flogged to property developers and yuppies.*


 I think that's too simplistic: the seeds of gentrification are often sewn by artists/musicians/creative types moving into a run-down area and creating the sort of vibrant 'Boho' community that yuppies want a slice of.

Private landlords and entrepreneurs are usually first in line to up the rent as the place starts to feature in the style mags and thus the process of driving out locals begins.

I can't see how you can blame that process _entirely_ on politicians, although they no doubt play a part in the later development of a yuppified area.


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Totally untrue. Gentrification occurs because local politicians permit it, e.g. signing off public housing to be flogged to property developers and yuppies. And sometimes turning up at the auction to bid for it themselves!!! (see other thread).
> 
> They can then pretend - to avoid political flack - it's all due to forces beyond their control. It's the great 'market forces' politicial trick. You permit market forces to let rip then pretend it's all beyond your control.
> ...



I'm very interested by your argument, and it's not something I've considerd before.  However, I'm not sure that I agree with you entirely.  How does it 'drive out blacks in favour of whites'?  Are black people leaving because they don't want to live there, or because they can't afford to?  Also, how would you remedy the problem?


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by editor _
> *I think that's too simplistic: the seeds of gentrification are often sewn by artists/musicians/creative types moving into a run-down area and creating the sort of vibrant 'Boho' community that yuppies want a slice of.*


OK fair enough. But there's still no need for the politicians to respond to the gentrifying pressures caused by the Bohos. When the property developers come calling they can take a political decision to tell them to fuck off.

And the politicians _must not attend auctions of public housing in the hope of buying something cheap._


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *How does it 'drive out blacks in favour of whites'? *


For the reasons given. There's only a small non-white UK middle class. So if an area's gentrified it becomes, effectively, a private reserve, a security estate, for relatively wealthy whites. 

Market forces does the actual dirty work _but those who permit market forces to let rip (i.e. local politicians signing off housing for sale to property developers) are responsible for the racist result._


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

But how would you combat it?  Given that it is caused by 'market forces', do you advocate measures to keep prices artificially low?   Would that not impact on those homeowners there, now?  Is that right?


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *But how would you combat it?  *


By voting in non-racist local politicians.


----------



## Giles (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Totally untrue. Gentrification occurs because local politicians permit it, e.g. signing off public housing to be flogged to property developers and yuppies. And sometimes turning up at the auction to bid for it themselves!!! (see other thread).
> 
> They can then pretend - to avoid political flack - it's all due to forces beyond their control. It's the great 'market forces' politicial trick. You permit market forces to let rip then pretend it's all beyond your control.
> ...



Councils selling properties plays a part, but only a small one. Most incoming "gentrifiers" are buying traditional older houses, not ex-local council flats.

Gentrification generally begins when people realise that an inner-city area, previously regarded as undesirable, is actually good value, with lots of (relatively cheap) and nice property.

And then it snowballs from there - once you have a critical mass of richer incomers, property prices rise, and this encourages more existing owners to sell up, and also new businesses (like style bars, upmarket restaurants and so on) start up to cater for the new residents, etc etc, and so it goes on.

And in some areas (including Brixton, and also Hoxton, Shoreditch etc) gentrification is also driven by people wanting to buy in to an area perceived to be "cutting edge", "trendy" etc

It suits your point of view to be able to blame a single entity for the changes in an area, but the truth of it is not that simple.

And as for the "racist" angle, are you saying it is racist because no black people have money? If I buy a house in Brixton for a lot of money, am I being racist? Or is the person who sells it to me racist?

Giles..


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Giles _
> *And as for the "racist" angle, are you saying it is racist because no black people have money? If I buy a house in Brixton for a lot of money, am I being racist? Or is the person who sells it to me racist?*


None of the above. I'm saying it's racist for politicians to permit market forces to apply when they lead to a racist outcome.

The employment analogy of indirect race descrimination is precise.


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *By voting in non-racist local politicians. *



Do you really think the issue is as simple as that?  Do you think that Brixton is becoming gentrified because local politicians are trying to drive out black people by selling properties to developers etc.?  Personally, I'd be more inclined to think that they're encouraging the gentrifiation for financial reasons.


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *Do you think that Brixton is becoming gentrified because local politicians are trying to drive out black people by selling properties to developers etc.?*


No. I don't think they're a bunch of racists. I know a few of them and like them very much. Some of them are simply not doing their job properly. They're failing to _cope_.


> *Personally, I'd be more inclined to think that they're encouraging the gentrifiation for financial reasons. *


I agree.


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *None of the above. I'm saying it's racist for politicians to permit market forces to apply when they lead to a racist outcome.
> 
> The employment analogy of indirect race descrimination is precise. *



By attempting to prevent 'gentrification', the Local Government would be discriminating against the middle class, where, as you have said, white people are over-represented.  Equally, therefore, that would be an instance of 'indirect' discrimination.

I don't necessarily have a problem with that, but I think it's a bit disingenous of you to accuse the Local Government of racial discrimination (seemingly on principle) and then argue for another form of it.


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *By attempting to prevent 'gentrification', the Local Government would be discriminating against the middle class, where, as you have said, white people are over-represented.  Equally, therefore, that would be an instance of 'indirect' discrimination.
> 
> I don't necessarily have a problem with that, but I think it's a bit disingenous of you to accuse the Local Government of racial discrimination (seemingly on principle) and then argue for another form of it. *


No. I'm arguing for the state to use it's considerable powers to prevent market forces shafting poor people. In Brixton many of these poor people will be non-white.

Wealthy whites who want to live in Brixton have tons of houses to buy. The only "discrimination" against whites I'm arguing for is that they not be permitted, by politicians via property developers, to shove poor people out of their homes so they can take them over.

Fair enough?


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 24, 2003)

Athos -- what is your point exactly?  

Are you saying that Anna Key is arguing for racial discrimination? Either you are setting up a particularly nasty straw man or you haven't properly read or understood AK's posts.

If you refute the suggestion that there is  racial discrimination in LBL, I suggest you take a look at the transcripts of the Alex Owolade tribunal, which found CLEAR cases of race discrimination only a few months ago.


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *No. I'm arguing for the state to use it's considerable powers to prevent market forces shafting poor people. In Brixton many of these poor people will be non-white.
> 
> Wealthy whites who want to live in Brixton have tons of houses to buy. The only "discrimination" against whites I'm arguing for is that they not be permitted, by politicians via property developers, to shove poor people out of their homes so they can take them over.
> ...



This is really an issue of poverty and class, rather than one of race.  I feel that your comments on race are a red herring, and distract us from the real issue.  I don't know what your agenda is for framing this issue as one of race, but I think I have shown that, equally, one could argue that taking measures to maintain the status quo are examples of 'indirect discriminatiom'.

With regard to the real issue, I think that there should be plenty of public housing, and more schemes for 'affordable' private housing.  I would halt the selling off of Local Authority housing, and offer incentives for developers to provide cheap housing.

That, however, would not be enough to prevent gentrification, in my opinion.  Do you propose going further in the state using it's 'considerable powers'?


----------



## editor (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> * But there's still no need for the politicians to respond to the gentrifying pressures caused by the Bohos. When the property developers come calling they can take a political decision to tell them to fuck off. *


 Unfortunately, by that time, the property developers are holding all the aces over cash-strapped councils desperate to balance the books....and the councils would argue that by getting a maximum return on their properties they're serving their community better.

Of course, one of the roots of gentrification goes back further to the fucking disgraceful, despicable Tory decision to flog off council properties.

The fucking fuckers.


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *This is really an issue of poverty and class, rather than one of race.*


I disagree. For the reasons already given. Poverty, class and race combine in Brixton. Why do people get so nervous about arguments involving race? If a policy - in this case a housing policy - has an outcome of indirect race discrimination why not say so loud and clear?


> *Do you propose going further in the state using it's 'considerable powers'? *


Compulsory labour for the bourgeoisie!


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Athos -- what is your point exactly?
> 
> Are you saying that Anna Key is arguing for racial discrimination? Either you are setting up a particularly nasty straw man or you haven't properly read or understood AK's posts.
> ...



I am saying that the focus on race is an unjustified one.  In my opinion, this is a matter of poverty and class, not race.

To do so, I highlighted how the argument of 'indirect discrimination' doesn't carry a great deal of weight, because it could equally be applied to any counter-measures to preserve the status quo.

I think I did understand AK comments, and I'm not accusing her of being a racist, any more than she is accusing the local councillors, rather I am saying that measures to keep the middle class out of Brixton are just as much examples of 'indirect discrimination' as measures to get them in.  And that, in discussing it, we're diverted from the real issue.

I didn't refute the suggestion that there is racism in LBL, rather I thought that that is not the motivating factor in the process of gentrification.


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *This is really an issue of poverty and class, rather than one of race.  I feel that your comments on race are a red herring,*


 I can only assume that you don't live in or around Brixton or you would see that race is an absolutely central issue here, particularly when it comes to things like selling social housing stock to property developers, who will then sell it on to the rich -- and predominantly white -- at hugely inflated prices. 

Refusing to acknowledge race as a crucial political issue in an area like this is synonymous with -- and facilitates  -- institutional racism.  It's what happened in the Owolade case, _where victims of racial abuse were disciplined for complaining! _ The council's policy (testified by an officer under oath) was that  all racism  complaints were false and malicious --  _especially if they were made by people of West Indian  origin!_ 

It is an incredible document and a shocking testament to what happens when race is swept under the carpet.


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *I disagree. For the reasons already given. Poverty, class and race combine in Brixton. Why do people get so nervous about arguments involving race? If a policy - in this case a housing policy - has an outcome of indirect race discrimination why not say so loud and clear?
> 
> Compulsory labour for the bourgeoisie!  *



Of course poverty, race and class combine.  I do find, however, that, because people can get so caught up in questions of racism, the real issue i.e. affordable housing, are missed.

Fair enought to say a policy has the result of 'indirect discrimination', but be honest about it.  A policy to prevent gentrification by keeping the middle class out of Brixton would also be an example of 'indiret discrimination'.  Do you accept that?  Are you advocating such 'indirect discrimination'?


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *A policy to prevent gentrification by keeping the middle class out of Brixton would also be an example of 'indiret discrimination'.  Do you accept that?  Are you advocating such 'indirect discrimination'? *


Nonsense. It would be direct discrimination.


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *Of course poverty, race and class combine.  I do find, however, that, because people can get so caught up in questions of racism, the real issue i.e. affordable housing, are missed. *


Not by me matey!


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> * A policy to prevent gentrification by keeping the middle class out of Brixton would also be an example of 'indiret discrimination'. *


 It's nothing to do with  ''keeping out the middle class'' (read the stuff about Robson and Butler already posted).  *It's about keeping existing social housing AS social housing.  *Or do you think this is unfair and it should be sold off so as not to discriminate against  those hard-done-by middle class people?


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

_Originally posted by IntoStella _
*I can only assume that you don't live in or around Brixton*

Noit now, but I used to.

*race is an absolutely central issue here*

We disagree.  I think that the local community should not be driven out of Brixton, regardless of whether they are black or white.  the fact that many of them happen to be black is neither here nor there.

*who will then sell it on to the rich -- and predominantly white -- at hugely inflated prices.*

'Those bloody 'whites' coming in here, taking our houses' 


*Refusing to acknowledge race as a crucial political issue in an area like this is synonymous with -- and facilitates  -- institutional racism.*

I agree that race is an important political issue, but not in this instance.

*It's what happened in the Owolade case, where victims of racial abuse were disciplined for complaining!  The council's policy (testified by an officer under oath) was that  all racism  complaints were false and malicious --  especially if they were made by people of West Indian  origin! 

It is an incredible document and a shocking testament to what happens when race is swept under the carpet. *

That does sound shocking and deplorable, but what does it add to this debate?


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

Oh the poor old discriminated against white London middle classes.

Well done Athos for defending them. Never was there a more worthy cause. Good for you!


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *'Those bloody 'whites' coming in here, taking our houses'  *


 Oh that's just fatuous. Really!  I'm not stooping to argue on that sort of level.  It's just demeaning.


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Nonsense. It would be direct discrimination.  *



No, it wouldn't.  Direcr discrimination would be where white people weren't allowed to move in, something I know you don't advocate.  However, a policy which discouraged the middle class from moving in would be 'indirect discrimination' as white people are over represented in the middle class (just like your argument that, by facilitating their influx, the Local Governmet has shown 'indirect discrimination' against black people because they are under represented in the middle class).

What practical measures should the Local Government take to prevent gentrification, do you think?


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Oh that's just fatuous. Really!  I'm not stooping to argue on that sort of level.  It's just demeaning. *



Lighten up, it was a joke, hence the  .  I didn't mean to offend, and I'm sorry if I did.


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 24, 2003)

Try to understand this very simple concept: we are talking about the defence of *existing *social housing.  Do you really think that not flogging off social housing constitutes unacceptable discrimination against the middle class/wealthy?


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *Lighten up*


Yes IS. Try to be more fun and lighthearted. Pie 1 might be reading!


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *It's nothing to do with  ''keeping out the middle class'' (read the stuff about Robson and Butler already posted).  It's about keeping existing social housing AS social housing.  Or do you think this is unfair and it should be sold off so as not to discriminate against  those hard-done-by middle class people? *



If the measures you propose are limited to keeping social housing as social housing, then you'll see from my posts above that we agree.

I don't mind discriminating agaist the middle class, and the consequent 'indirect discrimination' against whites.  What I do object to is the double standard of arguing that it's a race issue and that the Local Government's facilitation of gentrification is 'indirect discrimination' and is therefore necessarily bad (because it is discriminatory), whilst people won't accept that counter measures would be discriminatory, too.


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Yes IS. Try to be more fun and lighthearted. Pie 1 might be reading! *


 JAWOHL MEIN HERR! >click<


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Try to understand this very simple concept: we are talking about the defence of existing social housing.  Do you really think that not flogging off social housing constitutes unacceptable discrimination against the middle class/wealthy?    *


Try to understand this very simple concept. It it totally unacceptable for the white London middle classes not to get exactly what they want. It's unnatural, against human nature and probably against the laws of physics.


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 24, 2003)

Anyone fancy a pint?


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *JAWOHL MEIN HERR! >click<    *



I don't geddit?! Who is Pie1?


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Athos _
> *whilst people won't accept that counter measures would be discriminatory, too. *


Not this person. I'm all for discriminating against the wealthy. Directly and indirectly.


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *Anyone fancy a pint? *


Me! I'm off to the Beehive in a sec. Where I'm going to discriminate, both directly and indirectly, against a delicious pint of frothing brew.


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Try to understand this very simple concept. It it totally unacceptable for the white London middle classes not to get exactly what they want. It's unnatural, against human nature and probably against the laws of physics. *



That is a scurrilous and gross carictature of my views, as you well know.  

I've just finished work, so, as OrangUtan says, I'm off for a pint!

Happy Christmas everyone.

Born in a manger = lack of affordable housing


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Me! I'm off to the Beehive in a sec. Where I'm going to discriminate, both directly and indirectly, against a delicious pint of frothing brew. *



The Beehive discriminates against rich people. Bet you can't find any Veuve Cliquot in there.


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 24, 2003)

<Stuck in office till 5.30> You're all bastards!!  

(Drunken bastards at that.)


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *<Stuck in office till 5.30> You're all bastards!!
> 
> (Drunken bastards at that.)  *



I'm stuck in the office til 8 but I'm still drinking


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *The Beehive discriminates against rich people. Bet you can't find any Veuve Cliquot in there. *



So where does that leave 'champagne socialists'?


----------



## Anna Key (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *The Beehive discriminates against rich people. Bet you can't find any Veuve Cliquot in there. *


Your right. It's a total disgrace. Athos should put in a formal complaint.


----------



## Athos (Dec 24, 2003)

I'll phone one in from The Met Bar


----------



## pooka (Dec 24, 2003)

Athos: Your right, race is not the central issue to the arguement. Anna's prime concern (on these Boards at least) is maintaining the current community on Rushcroft Road against alleged council plans to sell some of the properties there*, and protecting them from neighbouring intrusions from Coldharbour Lane. His/her commtment to defending his/her street as s/he and his/her neighbours like it, is perfectly understandable. The race issue, which is ingenous,  came very late in the debate - which has covered inumerable threads over recent months.

There is a wider debate around gentrification versus regeneration, are they separable, what should the role of local authorities be and it's one that goes way beyond Rushcroft Rd.

The key driver to gentrification in London is the spriralling cost of housing. This is a consequence of growing  demand (consequent on economic growth, inward migration and declining household size) and an inadaquate supply of new dwellings. There's not a lot that Lambeth can do about that. The solution is to build more houses, London wide and across the region. That will involve looking at the planning system (should we allow Green Belt policies to serve NIMBYs in the Chalfonts at the expense of the inner city?) and the propensity for developers to built land banks in anticipation of further price rise, amongst other things. More houses is what matters first, and secondarily the mix of tenures (public/private/ social, buy/part buy/rent).

Within that context, as you and Anna have both noted, a lot of gentrification has been of properties that the council has no control over. For the last two decades it's been Victorian properties often sold by long standing residents who've sold up at a hefty premium. More recently, its infill developments of derelict land or private owned blocks.

But some has been of public assets (schools and Mansion Blocks particularly). Should the council not retain _all_ of these properties? Well, on balance yes. Not because that will stop gentrification (the effect will be marginal) but because there is a shortage of social housing and public facilities. But only if they can afford to - both refurbish them and maintain them on an ongoing basis. A galnce at the council's accounts would suggest they're not embarrassed by riches - £860m debt and a revenue defict in spite of a 23% Council Tax rise last year. 

Should the Government not stump up the cash? Well, this Government has progressively increased taxes - primarilly for Health (up from £40bn to £67bn), Education and Community Safety and posted a PSBR of £37bn for next year to sustain that spending. Already the siren Tory voices ("It's all being wasted") are gaining credence amongst the electorate. They could increase still further taxes to spend on social housing (in addition that already going through the Housing Corporation and the innumerable New Deals) and gamble everything. Would they get the electoral support with 66% owner occupation nationally? It's a no brainer.

So within the constrains they face, we elect a council to make the decisions. They may decide that they simply can't afford to retain every last block and to forego every last sale. If we don't like it - we can boot them out next time. Will their decision mean the decimation of social housing in Lambeth? No, we already have very high levels by national standards - the properties at issue are a drop in the ocean. Will their sale transform the pace of gentrification? They'll make barely noticable difference - for the reasons Athos and Anna have given.

*Have we any firm evidence of those plans yet?


----------



## IntoStella (Dec 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by pooka _
> The race issue, which is ingenous[/b]


Nice word, Pookster. But what does it  mean? Ingenuous? Ingenious?  I'm sure AK would be most flattered by either 


> Will their decision mean the decimation of social housing in Lambeth? No, we already have very high levels by national standards


I say! That's a bit "disingenous" of you . The fact that we have more social housing than, say, Cirencester, is entirely irrelevant. Housing provision should meet housing _need _which, in Lambeth, is absolutely dire. 





> - the properties at issue are a drop in the ocean.


 If so then the Lib Dems  might care to stop trying to break up this long-standing and vulnerable community.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 29, 2003)

Ive read most of this thread now.Ive also gone back to the original London Housing link stuck up by Lang Rabbie and Hatboy.

   The policy context for Butlers research was the governments mantra that "in order to be sustainable communities must be socially mixed" and the "Governments commitment to try and encourage private sector investment in deprived and run down areas".

   His evidence showed that:

  1)That a "social mix" policy did not work as the middle classes did not deploy their resources for the benefit of the wider community.

 2)"In a city that is massively multiethnic its middle classes huddle together together in white middle class settlements in the inner city."

  Thus the Government(which lays down the guidelines for local Councils) policy on "regeneration" will not lead to a more equal society and could be argued to discriminate against the poorer sections of society and in Cities ethnic minorities.It does not help make the UK a multicultural country.

   Well thats my reading of Butlers research and it backs up what Anna says.It also shows Government policy on regeneration and housing to be under its own criteria a failure.

   The Governments "Third way" lays an emphasis on the "private sector"-read market forces.

   If as Pooka believes their is politically not much local Councils/central Government can do about this then they should be honest about it.As is usually the case with Councils/Government they dress up this gentrification as creating mixed sustainable communities-which is crap.


----------



## hatboy (Dec 29, 2003)

I do think pretty much any type of person can get along with any other (yeah corny I know) , but they've got to want to.  

Things fall down if when people arrive in an area they don't attempt to engage with their neighbours. And if they live behind security gates, in enclaves or similar people, their physical location makes it hard to do this even if they want to and encourages paranoia on one side of the gate and resentment on the other.

The division that is in sharpest focus in Brixton (and many inner-city areas) is levels of wealth, but there's no doubt that impacts on race too IMHO.

I also think that some people who have a good amount of money develop a snottiness, if they didn't have it already, that means they look down on others and people pick up on this and it makes them angry.


----------



## hatboy (Dec 29, 2003)

"1) That a "social mix" policy did not work as the middle classes did not deploy their resources for the benefit of the wider community".

Well generally yes, especially the really middle-class, upscale types. These people need to be aware that it is they who need to make more effort. That their arrival is not a gift in itself and that they shouldn't expect to be welcomed with open arms if they act insular and stand-offish.

It is naive if richer newcomers think the arrival of upmarket and exclusive/excluding shops and bars for their custom is genuine regeneration and that people should necessarily be pleased by their arrival.

You know, "you ungrateful proles, you should be pleased we brought a shiny new cocktail emporium to your crappy neighbourhood".

Response: "well actually mate, I quite liked that premises as a, er, bike shop/cheap clothes shop/butchers/whatever".

Having said that, there are of course decent people of all classes, just less the higher up you go.....!


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 7, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *Having said that, there are of course decent people of all classes, just less the higher up you go.....!    *


 Look never mind making the world a better a place. I have been personally offered TEN POUNDS off a meal at "66 Atlantic" as it seems to be called, by a young lady outside the tube station last night. To think Brixton tube used to be beset by travelcard and incense touts. What a classy step up!

But shit, I'd have to cross a couple of main roads and I've got some nice lamb chops in the fridge and I can mix myself a cocktail for less than £5 so I guess I'll give it a miss.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 7, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ol Nick _
> *I have been personally offered TEN POUNDS off a meal at "66 Atlantic" *


So they're _paying people_ to enter the premises? LOL!

<Rushes down Brixton Tube>


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 7, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ol Nick _
> *But shit, I'd have to cross a couple of main roads and I've got some nice lamb chops in the fridge and I can mix myself a cocktail for less than £5 so I guess I'll give it a miss. *


----------



## hatboy (Jan 7, 2004)

The people look like they should be in "The Office" in there... and Neon is even worse. How much is the meal after ten pounds off then?

Art it up a bit guys if you read this. If you're giving tenners off meals already then it's not popular anyway, start promoting it as something with more character maybe, more different from Neon?

By the way this whole bland, blonde wood style is everywhere now isn't it. Some people must absolutely love it. Weirdos.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 9, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _*
> Art it up a bit guys if you read this. If you're giving tenners off meals already then it's not popular anyway, start promoting it as something with more character maybe, more different from Neon?
> 
> By the way this whole bland, blonde wood style is everywhere now isn't it. Some people must absolutely love it. Weirdos.
> ...


 At the risk of sounding like a yuppy (ah fuck, what's the point) some friends of mine went there and said the food was good and the place seemed to be run by some French fellows. Maybe -- it's not my part of town.

Having said that I went to Neon once. It was OK, but over-priced. However I consider that to be the London house style so I don't complain. The strange -- and not unpleasant -- thing was that they had their huge windows open to Atlantic Road so everyone picking up their Caribbean-style bread next door would walk by 10 cm away from my grlfriend's back. I've never really got "cool". I ws hoping I could get it at Neon, but I think I was wrong.

On the plus side I've just discovered that Fujiyama deliver.


----------



## Blagsta (Jan 9, 2004)

Neon is appalling.  Good place to get food poisoning from their undercooked food.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 9, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Blagsta _
> *Neon is appalling.  Good place to get food poisoning from their undercooked food. *


 Yeah I remember you sayiong that. I think whn we went their it weas 'cause we wanted a pizza and Pangaea and the rest were shut. It was, you know, OK but over-priced. We've never been back. The panna cotta was good.

I do like Friday afternoons.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 9, 2004)

Nick said: "some friends of mine went there and said the food was good and the place seemed to be run by some French fellows".

I've heard the people running it are OK and I'd be the first to put my hand up and say that it's a damn sight easier to criticise a restaurant on an internet bulletin board than run one!

I still think it looks utterly bland tho and you get the feeling of very straight-laced type people eyeing you suspiciously from inside as you walk by. And from Neon, and not just paranoid me saying this either.

Ol Nick, I'm afraid you've sort of proved my point with your comment about people in Atlantic Road passing near your girlfriend's back. I dunno what you're really like, but I can't help saying, was the street a little too close for comfort there?


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 10, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *was the street a little too close for comfort there?
> 
> *


 Do you mean the street or The Street? It was great to have the street close by, it must have been summer as I remember the windows were wide open, and there was lots going on. Lots to watch.

On the other hand Neon would love to be ball-achingly cool, and having The Street so close showed it up to be the kind of British yuppie-cool resto-bar that it is. It's a very British problem, getting decent food without yuppie-cool surroundings. Good food is a class issue in Britain in a way that it isn't in the rest of Europe. That's probably why there are no restaurants selling really good food in Brixton (now that Helter Skelter's gone). Nice places to eat, yeah. But not really good food like you'd find in working class areas of Spain, France or Belgium.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 10, 2004)

OK I get you now I think. You're right, why isn't there more cheap, good food to eat out. Afew falafel shops wouldn't go amiss. In America you get falafel like chips for a dollar fifty or something.

I get the impression that some people passing in Atlantic Rd (the street) see Neon as total wank.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 10, 2004)

Bugger trendy. A bunch of us went to the Asmara last night and it were bloody lovely. I'd had take away before but not eaten in. 

We had a fantastic time. The surroundings (and staff) were lovely, the food was fabulous and cheap, the beer was very reasonable and [mrs magpie mode]the bogs were the most extraordinarily sparkling clean any of us had ever seen[/mrs magpie mode]. 

And there were bugger-all people in there, which is a terrible shame. I expect they were all in the godawful Neon or Laminate 666. 

_Support your local Eritrean eaterie! _ In fact, why don't we have  u75 meal there some time? Loads of veggie and vegan choices as well as fabulous meat dishes. And if you like spice you'll be in orbit.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 10, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ol Nick _
> *It's a very British problem, getting decent food without yuppie-cool surroundings. Good food is a class issue in Britain in a way that it isn't in the rest of Europe. That's probably why there are no restaurants selling really good food in Brixton  *


See Stella's post. Asmara is just an ordinary restaurant for grown-ups: no post-modern trendyness, no ghastly 'hip an' kool' music, no pretending that eating good cheap food in clean surroundings served by a non-grovelling/non-trendy waiter is some sort of 'style' experience. 

Just a normal, city restaurant serving excellent food to ordinary human beings. It's great. And shows that running a good local business in Brixton doesn't mean screwing the community.

Also, after hearing the owner of Neon on the radio during the Brixton Business Expo last year, when he got slated by a woman from Notting Hill for wanting to wreck Brixton in the way Notting Hill's been wrecked, I'll never set foot in the joint. It was all about getting the white yuppie £ into Brixton to stuff his cash register. Nasty stuff.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 10, 2004)

I'd agree about the Asmara, it's brilliant....also I'd take issue on cheap places to eat out with excellent food being thin on the ground. The Asmara or La Mazorca, to name just two off the top of my head. I reckon to be able to stuff your face for a maximum of £15 (and often much less, depending on what you order) is pretty good for a night out with excellent food and service.....also on the cafe front...
www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64948


----------



## Ms T (Jan 10, 2004)

And Hendo and I went to the Gallery just before Xmas (up Brixton Hill) and had a great meal for not many pennies at all.  Asmara is now next on my list, after Stella's rave reviews.  I agree with Hatboy about Atlantic 66 -- we'll probably try it at some point, but I haven't felt that inclined to go in because the interior is so bland.  A real missed opportunity, as Brixton does need another decent restaurant.  On a slightly different tack, I am a bit worried about the Tearoom (site of the old Lounge), which seems distinctly empty, whilst the Lounge gets ever more popular.  I hate to see a business struggle...


----------



## rennie (Jan 10, 2004)

well, dum dum n I did venture into the tea room about 2 months ago one rainy sunday morning as the lounge was full... i ordered a roasted veggie ciabatta which was decent n he ordered the 1.99 full english breakfast... n it wasn't good!
one small piece of scrambled egg with way tooo much milk
a small, thin piece of toast
a tiny almost uncooked rasher of bacon
and tin brown sorry lookin mushroom pieces on the side
NOT good but arguably what you pay for
dum dum then ordered butter n he got the full tub of margarine straight from the fridge

he won't go there again...
not trying to give bad publicity but maybe that could help explain wy the tea room is empty most of the time. too bad...


----------



## Ms T (Jan 12, 2004)

Indeed.  We went to the Tearoom for breakfast shortly after it opened as well, and I have to say I haven't been there since because it just wasn't good enough.

I walked past Atlantic 66 yesterday afternoon and it was packed.  Which might have something to do with the fact that Jay Rayner mentioned it in this week's restaurant review in the Observer.  I've just tried to find a link but couldn't, but he said it was evidence of the democratisation of Brixton that you could now find foie gras on the Frontline, or some other such nonsense.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2004)

I was a bit gobsmacked on friday night,  seeing for the first time in years just how many eateries and bars had been opened in Atlantic and Railton Road.



 

It was nice to see you Hatboy.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

"the democratisation of Brixton that you could now find foie gras on the Frontline, or some other such nonsense."

Democratic? No, elitist. I know that wasn't a quote but someone who thought they couldn't visit Atlantic Road until a posh restaurant opened, surely is a idiot or fearful of Brixton until reassured by the arrival of other people the same as them*. Yes, an idiot.

*See that Tim Butler article on gentrification further up the thread.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 12, 2004)

To be fair to Jay Rayner, he's pretty good as far as restaurant reviewers go. He's good at sticking up for neigbourhood restaurants and value for money, not slavishly reporting from central London's coolest (and most poncey) gastronomic openings. And he seems to hold a flame for South London  - he's done some excellent (and imo accurate) reviews of The Gallery, Neon and other local landmarks.

It could have been a lot worse. It could have been that arrogant and eminently-twattable toff AA Gill. Or Michael Winner for example...

I've got mixed feelings about Atlantic 66. For all their pre-opening talk of 'luxurious surrounds' it looks like they skipped corners and skimped on the design budget ... like they popped down to Ikea at the last minute and bought a few extra 'Knoba' tables on the cheap. Can't really blame 'em though - restaurants are a risky business, and they've probably been advised that this neutral (and bland) scheme is the most affordable and justifiable route.  

Short of having cash to burn (which, judging from that 'bollocks' painting, they haven't) it's difficult to criticize someone for not innovating or being more design led. Maybe the decor will improve if they make a success of the place.

To me the menu seems a little overambitious for the area. It's a plus that it's short and should change regularly. On the other hand, it looked like a ambitiously random hotch-potch of cuisines when I last looked ... and I didn't immediately see anything that I would actually want to eat. It's telling that it's looked most busy for breakfast and Sunday roasts.

I'll pop out and try it soon though - it's at the end of the road after all. And I like the fact that they opened with a mail drop and discount offer for the the local residents...


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

"I'll pop out and try it soon though - it's at the end of the road after all. And I like the fact that they opened with a mail drop and discount offer for the the local residents..."

Did anyone on the Moorlands Estate get that then? It didn't even get delivered further up Railton.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 12, 2004)

By the way, I feel I should stick up for Neon a little.

I wanted to hate this brash, red place at the end of my road - it looked so damn different, a bit too yah-yah for the surroundings. In retrospect, compared to the Ikea-bland-o-rama of Atlantic 66, at least Neon looks a little individual.

But then - after being nagged by the local Italian crew and our neigbours - we tried a meal at Neon and were impressed. Excellent quality Italian food, authentic rustic stuff from a good Italian chef ...and keenly priced (£10 2 course special meal). I had to swallow my pride and admit that they were doing a good job. I kind of like the idea of the chef cutting loose every so often, with Italian feasts and suckling pigs on the menu for special occasions.

I've been to Neon a couple of times since and enjoyed the food, even if the place is a little soulless. 

That said, I haven't been recently and standards may have slipped, as in Blagsta's case. But I'm reluctant to write the place off in food terms  - as much as I don't like how Neon fits in the area. ...


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *"the democratisation of Brixton that you could now find foie gras on the Frontline, or some other such nonsense."
> 
> Democratic? No, elitist. I know that wasn't a quote but someone who thought they couldn't visit Atlantic Road until a posh restaurant opened, surely is a idiot or fearful of Brixton until reassured by the arrival of other people the same as them*. Yes, an idiot.
> ...


 Maybe what he was saying was, "why don't people in Brixton deserve exceptional food"? Not every day at those prices, but maybe as a special night out. Why shouldn't they have good foie gras or cassoulet or choucroute or whatever good things the menu has on it without having to travel miles and pay West End prices.

BTW, they have a website http://www.atlantic66.com/ natch, although it looks to me as if the editor could maybe get himself a commission to (re)design it. And hatboy's right: someone should sort out the interior design. From those photos it looks like a Clapham estate agents'.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

"cassoulet or choucroute". Firstly alot of people won't even know what that is. I don't for a start. Secondly,  it's not democratic since it will not be affordable to a massive proportion of local residents.  But hey, let's not argue about something that may not actually have been said. Anyone got the exact quote?


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *"cassoulet or choucroute". Firstly alot of people won't even know what that is. I don't for a start. Secondly,  it's not democratic since it will not be affordable to a massive proportion of local residents.  But hey, let's not argue about something that may not actually have been said. Anyone got the exact quote? *


 No, it's not online and life's to short to read the Observer.

And surely you're not saying you'd reject a steaming plate of cassoulet or choucroute (assuming it is a French restaurant) just because you'd never heard of it before.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

No, I'll eat anything.  In fact I'd go if they give me a money off voucher (only received in Saltoun Rd apparently).  If the place is run by friendly people with an inclusive attitude and a bit of character that would help alot too IMO.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *No, I'll eat anything.  In fact I'd go if they give me a money off voucher (only received in Saltoun Rd apparently).  If the place is run by friendly people with an inclusive attitude and a bit of character that would help a lot too IMO.   *


 Quite right. Both the elitist and democratic arguments contain a germ of truth. It's clearly a pricier restaurant than any other in the area --  therefore it's elitist; it's tending to gentrify the area. At the same time it's not outrageously expensive compared with, say the correct pair of trainers or a big ticket at the Academy, so it democratises access to good food for those who want it (recognise them by their poor quality trainers). I think you're right: it's their attitude that's going to determine whether or not they turn out to be a Good Thing.

And a bonus is that it might help to raise house prices in the area...


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

"And a bonus is that it might help to raise house prices in the area..."

You are joking yes? Remember to use these please.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *"And a bonus is that it might help to raise house prices in the area..."
> 
> You are joking yes? Remember to use these please.    *


 But surely the joke is in the seed of doubt that the statement sows.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tarannau _
> *To be fair to Jay Rayner, he's pretty good as far as restaurant reviewers go.... It could have been a lot worse.  *


 I strongly disagree.
This is what he actually wrote:
*



			It’s a moment of rare significance: a restaurant has opened in Brixton, south London, serving a foie gras dish. 

Do not bleat on at me about cruelty to animals. My parents kept geese when I was a kid, and they terrorised me. Eating their engorged livers is an act of revenge as far as I’m concerned.

Far more interesting to me is that the new place, Atlantic 66, should occupy a site on Atlantic Road, the street which played host to the famous Brixton riot. It is a mark of the democratisation of food in Britain that they believe central Brixton to be ready for seared foie gras with leeks and ginger on toasted brioche.
		
Click to expand...

 *Pretentious, patronising, insulting, elitist, animal-cruelty-advocating, disgusting SHITE. The man is evidently a cunt. It's an insult  to the denizens of Brixton -- and so is Laminate Animal Torturing 666.  

Here is some information about foie  gras production: 





> _
> Foie Gras: Gourmet Atrocity
> 
> Foie gras-French for "fat liver"-is the term used by "gourmets" for livers of ducks or geese enlarged to many times their normal size by cruel force-feeding. Despite industry attempts to label the process "hand feeding" or to invent other kind-sounding terms, force-feeding is the only foie gras production method. *At a typical foie gras company, workers grab a young adult male bird, stretch his neck upward, force open his bill, shove a hard pipe all the way down his throat to his stomach, and pump in an enormous amount of mashed-up corn mixed with oil, water, and salt. Sometimes force-feeding causes birds' stomachs to burst.*
> ...


 And from here


> Investigators uncovered the aftermath of this forced-feeding at both farms. GourmetCruelty.com documented dying birds covered in their own vomit. The corpses of birds who had suffocated and choked to death from forced-feeding were found in the cages and pens. *Numerous garbage cans filled with dead birds, some of whom appeared to have exploded from the forced-feeding process, were also uncovered. *
> 
> Along with the cans of corpses and the dead birds who were found in the pens and cages, investigators found decaying corpses on the floor, in piles of excrement, and under pens. The stench of death permeated the sheds. The discarded victims of foie gras production were everywhere, laying testament to the cruelty of the industry.


 So this is what the ''discerning businessman'' of Brixton wants, is it? It makes me vomit.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

If you'd have tasted foie gras you wouldn't give a shit about a bunch of geese - it is lovely!
Nothing wrong with Rayner joking about it either.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *If you'd have tasted foie gras you wouldn't give a shit about a bunch of geese - it is lovely!
> Nothing wrong with Rayner joking about it either. *


 Exactly the response I would expect from you.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Exactly the response I would expect from you.  *









Gotcha!


----------



## tarannau (Jan 12, 2004)

OK, so I clearly haven't read that particular review of Rayner's yet.


Generally though, I'll stick by my guns and give qualified praise to his past work. Anyone who sticks up for hearty portions, robust 'unfussy' menus and good neigbourhood restaurants is generally ok in my book. His review of the Gallery, for example, hit the spot perfectly - no pretentiousness, just honest praise for a place he obviously admired.

Foie Gras isn't something I've ever seen him concerned with before. He's no Michael Winner eating unashamedly elitist food week after week, nor some kind of offal-devotee who waxes lyrical about the delights of raw pigs brawn.

And I kind of agree with him - I wouldn't expect to see Foie Gras on the menu of of a Brixton restaurant either. Remember what I was saying about the menu seeming a little over-ambitious and unfocused. I read his comment about the democratisation of food in Brixton as a little tongue in cheek as a result. 

Anyway , that's enough of me sticking up for a fat restaurant critic. Not as though they're a breed who are generally concerned with animal cruelty and elitism is it? I just think - flippant comment sabout geese aside - you could choose some far more objectionable food critics to pick upon. 

And shouldn't you save some of that anger for Atlantic 66, which served the distasteful goose-gunk in the first place...


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tarannau _
> *And shouldn't you save some of that anger for Atlantic 66, which served the distasteful goose-gunk in the first place... *


 Piffle. Making foie gras involves less cruelty than making battery hen eggs and none of you are having a go at the Phoenix for not selling free range.

Foie gras is an easier target because it's French and it's expensive but it's far from being the worst farming practice out there. Think of all the poor wild fish being killed by fertiliser run-off from fields that are producing plalnts for those wicked vegetarians to eat.


----------



## miss minnie (Jan 12, 2004)

mmmm, cassoulet - bean and sausage stew, a peasant dish from the south of france, and mmmm - choucroute = saurkraut, boiled potatoes and boiled meat.  another european peasant dish.  there is no reason that either dish should be expensive, as they are comprised of very cheap ingredients.  i just love the way these mundane things have become 'elitist'.  they were the dishes i ate every day as a child (we never got fois gras).  however, it is proper to label them with their authentic names on a menu as it denotes the origin, perhaps with an english sub-title.  

cheap 'working-class cafes' in brixton?  there are the portuguese places down stockwell road, the sintra and o cantinho (which i love).  i think there's one opposite the dogstar too.  fujiyama does japanese working-class food - ramen and noodles.  then there's the bushman's cafe (takeaway only), under the steps of the brixton rec, serving roti, dumplings and fried chicken, depending on who's cooking it can be great (last time i was there it was too greasy).  why is there not a good, cheap jamaican restaurant in brixton? and where is asmara, btw?

anyway, from what everyone has said, atlantic66 sounds awful, maybe it will find it's feet before it goes under.  the blond wood will eventually get scuffed up and perhaps look a bit better - hopefully people will start etching graffiti into it.  really don't see the need to serve fois gras when there are so many wonderful, cheap, international dishes they could offer instead.  i've often thought that using incredibly expensive ingredients can be the mark of an indifferent cook.  real artistry comes from turning ordinary ingredients into something special.  did anyone see that show about food last week with whatisname hemmingway (red or dead)?  he waxed lyrical about liddle (lidel, lidle?) and got a top-notch chef to prepare a bag of their groceries into a gourmet meal for a bunch of foody elitists.  their faces when he brought the bags and tins out!  precious.

i'd love to start a cafe, but then my menu might sound 'elitist'.  have i ever mentioned that i used to often cook at the old squatter's cafe in bonnington square in the '80's?  no?  well lets talk about me.... 

we used to collect free food from nine elms market using a stolen sainsbury's trolley, then cook up three courses for a pound.  everyone served themselves, brought their own drinks and washed their own plates.  after a while we got reviewed in some magazine (time out?) and trendy types from all over started to come.  it was a laff seeing them uncork their chablis whilst seated at a wobbly, scratched table set up next to the outdoor bog.  they loved the food and i guess they found it amusing to be 'dining on the wild side'.   i used to go home with £12 for my day's labour (sometimes there was a generous tip from the henrys and henriettas), but it was great fun and very satisfying.  once made a pineapple upside down cake that was 2'x3' in size and we had to clear a table of diners so that we could get it out of the tin.  it took four of us and everyone in the caff got up to watch and then applauded!  the last time i was at the bonnington caff was about 5 years ago, prices had gone up to £3.50 for one course, the decor was exactly the same and the hoorays were not evident.  don't know if it's still going.

aaah, welll.  as you were.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ol Nick _
> *Foie gras is an easier target because it's French*


Goose Tormenting Surrender Monkeys.  

I doubt it will stay on the menu for long.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tarannau _
> *And shouldn't you save some of that anger for Atlantic 66, which served the distasteful goose-gunk in the first place... *


  It's a great shame 121 is no longer just up the road. If it had been,  the animal-torture-promoters might well have experienced some impromptu exterior redecoration. But then the demise of 121 and the rise of Animaltorture 666 and its ilk are intimately causally linked.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *If you'd have tasted foie gras you wouldn't give a shit about a bunch of geese - it is lovely!
> Nothing wrong with Rayner joking about it either. *



Dickhead. I worry more about people than animals. But inflicting deliberate cruelty on any creature that feels pain is basically wrong.

Ever seen the film "Society" or "Eat the Rich" by the way?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

*Eat the Rich*



> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *Ever seen the film "Society" or "Eat the Rich" by the way?  *


 Oh that's a brilliant film!   I haven't seen it for years. I wish my video  recorder worked.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

"why is there not a good, cheap jamaican restaurant in brixton?"

There is. It's Bamboula in Acre Lane.    And if you want to eat well and support something that's not all about reading the Evening Standard and wanting to be fashionable by following others., see my comments on the La Cuchara....YUM! thread here:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64948


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *Dickhead. I worry more about people than animals. But inflicting deliberate cruelty on any creature that feels pain is basically wrong.
> 
> Ever seen the film "Society" or "Eat the Rich" by the way?  *



I was on a wind up - I have tasted foie gras before and it does taste great but I wouldn't eat it again.

Love those films.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

Please use emoticons. Remember, we can't see eachother or hear tone and we don't all know eachother. Thankyou.


----------



## miss minnie (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *"why is there not a good, cheap jamaican restaurant in brixton?"
> 
> There is. It's Bamboula in Acre Lane.    And if you want to eat well and support something that's not all about reading the Evening Standard and wanting to be fashionable by following others., see my comments on the La Cuchara....YUM! thread here:
> ...



excellent, i've been past bamboula many times but haven't met a soul who's been in there.  must try it.

used to go to that caff with the cowhide seats in the granville arcade but it's closed down now, so deffo try cuchara, thanks hb. 

btw, this question was buried in that overly-long spiel of mine -  just where _is_ asmara?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by miss minnie _
> *tbtw, this question was buried in that overly-long spiel of mine -  just where is asmara? *



It's on Coldharbour Lane, almost opposite the Dogstar


----------



## miss minnie (Jan 12, 2004)

ta


----------



## Pie 1 (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *
> 
> Pretentious, patronising, insulting, elitist, animal-cruelty-advocating, disgusting SHITE. The man is evidently a cunt. It's an insult  to the denizens of Brixton  [Q]
> ...


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hatboy _
> *Please use emoticons. Remember, we can't see eachother or hear tone and we don't all know eachother. Thankyou.   *



Yes sir. Sorry sir.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

"excellent, I've been past bamboula many times but haven't met a soul who's been in there. must try it."

I can't afford to eat out really, but I didn't pay cos of something I was involved in. The food was really delicious, quite different from dishes with the same names at cheap takeaways and the staff very friendly and welcoming.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

*Neon (and Jay Rayner)*

His views on Neon, http://travel.guardian.co.uk/restaurants/story/0,13739,1010524,00.html.

"the most authentic Italian restaurant in south London"
"something very special indeed going on"
"Neon happens to be only a seven-minute walk away from my house"
"I have tried the pizzas on previous visits and they too are marvellous"

However, his view on Brixton seems very much to be that it will be wholly inhabited by trendy 20somethings within a couple of years.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

"However, his view on Brixton seems very much to be that it will be wholly inhabited by trendy 20somethings within a couple of years".

The world he moves in may be. There will be islands of poor, ignored by "trendy 20somethings", as there are now.

I notice from the review that a meal for two at Neon costs exactly the same as one week's dole money btw.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Pie 1 _
> *
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Puke inducing. *


 Is it true that you have a reputation like Pie 1 says?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ol Nick _
> *Is it true that you have a reputation like Pie 1 says? *


 _For gawd's sake don't tell Anna Key!!_


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

I see user 'jayrayner' is in the house.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 12, 2004)

Hey, I don't even know this Rayner chap, but I feel obliged to defend him. Like Graniad colleague Nigel Slater, he always seems a bit more down to earth and into simple, hearty food than other culinary columnists. I can't help feeling that some of this outrage may better directed towards others, like the proprietor of Atlantic 'we serve Foie Gras' 66.

One reason why I like Jay Rayner is that his reviews don't tend to be about cutting-edge eateries, nor exclusively about expensive and hip hangouts.  The Gallery and the other Potuguese places he's covered certainly don't qualify as expensive. A treat maybe, but you'd be hard pressed to cook so much good food so cheaply yourself.

Even the Neon price Hatboy highlighted is a perhaps a little misleading. It's certainly possible to eat there a lot cheaper - it's only a little more expensive than Pangaea for pizzas, pints are reasonable, and special offers can be quite impressive. In terms of food quality and raw ingredients, I'm guessing that Neon's GP mark-up is comparatively small.

And as for Jay Rayner being primarily interested in 'trendy 20somethings' - well, let's just say I've seen his picture and he clearly enjoys his food.  20-stone somethings maybe....


I'm not going to get snotty about the man. There are more deserving cases.


----------



## jayrayner (Jan 12, 2004)

IntoStella's right, of course. My house is only in brixton if I'm trying to sound cool; if i'm trying to sell it, it is indeed in herne hill. As for the rest of the stuff she said about me, it's what gets me to the keyboard each morning. Just the thought of the intostellas of this world grinding their teeth over sentences like that fills me with a deep aching pleasure. After all, why should Michael Winner get all the abuse? I deserve some too, surely?

A couple of things. Coldharbour lane and the top of Atlantic Rd are pretty well served by cheap or cheapish eateries. My point was that Atlantic66 fills a gap that remained in the market. As somebody said, why should we have to go oop west for something with a little more ambition? Believe it or not there are people who have lived in brixton for 40 years who would prefer to spend their expendable income on food rather than football tickets or a night at the academy. I don't see anything wrong in a restaurant serving them. no idea whether it's any good though. Haven't eaten there.

As to Neon being 'the most authentic Italian in south London', I never wrote those words. It appeared in the standfirst written by the numbnuts sub-editor and has been attributed to me ever since. Then Neon's owner put it on a tube poster. Gosh I was cross.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 12, 2004)

Shit! we were in the lounge yesterday and I forgot to go and see what that new 666 place was like.

Agree about Bamboola, friendly and the food tastes home cooked. Though some dishes are better than others.

Never got to Asmara because by the time you walk past those smelly butchers your hunger is replaced by a nead for beer and it's too easy to carry on for the Effra/Albert.

Once had a pizza in Neon and it was really, really delicious but the guy serving was such a prick we never ventured back. 

Cantinho de Portugal was mentioned by Ms Minnie and imo it is the best value, tastiest food around Brixton. No good for vegetarians though.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tarannau _
> *Hey, I don't even know this Rayner chap, but I feel obliged to defend him.*


 For god's sake make your mind up.  

I find the idea that foie gras on Atlantic Road is somehow ''democratising British food" disgusting -- but not anywhere near as disgusting as the processes used to make foie gras itself. 

If anyone wants to brown-nose jayrayner because he is a bigshot restaurant critic who happens to live in Herne Hill then that is their prerogative but it looks pretty mealy-mouthed  to me.


----------



## jayrayner (Jan 12, 2004)

Is it okay to brownnose me if I live somewhere else then?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by jayrayner _
> IntoStella's right, of course. My house is only in brixton if I'm trying to sound cool; if i'm trying to sell it, it is indeed in herne hill. As for the rest of the stuff she said about me, it's what gets me to the keyboard each morning. Just the thought of the intostellas of this world grinding their teeth over sentences like that fills me with a deep aching pleasure.


 Ugh. Does the idea of animal's stomachs bursting get your rocks off as well? 





> As somebody said, why should we have to go oop west for something with a little more ambition?


 Because you can so very can easily afford to. Unlike the people who are being pushed out of Brixton by gentrification. S'easy, innit? Leave the kids with Nanny (or the au pair), get a cab up town, spend more money in an evening than many of your neighbours (well, probably not your _immediate_ neighbours) earn in a month.  Marvellous!


----------



## miss minnie (Jan 12, 2004)

cantinho de portugal is definitely worth avoiding if you're vegetarian, although they do the tastiest grilled fish for pescatarians.

it can sometimes be a bit difficult even if you are omnivorous.  took two friends for lunch there on a monday and the choices boiled down to liver or octopus.  best avoided on mondays perhaps.  every other time there's been a large selection and variety.

tried that colombian one, the mazorca, the other week and wouldn't go there again.  can only describe it as a sort of ethnic 'harvester'.    not cheap, either.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 12, 2004)

I've never been for lunch. Do they not do the tapas menu at lunch? Can't think of anything better than a pigs ear salad to get you through the day!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 12, 2004)

I knew there'd be trouble when I saw that review that mentioned Atlantic66.....I groaned......nice hatchet job on the other place mentioned though. Well, I thought the foie gras comment was pretty wanky, but having regularly read Mr Rayner on stuff like scandals in old peoples homes without a trace of Donal McIntyre crassness, I'd defend him on the rest of his writing. 

I'm a confirmed carnivore. Despite being from an Anglo-French family, I won't touch foie gras, delicious though it is (last eaten at a very posh wedding many years ago) because its production is undoubtedly cruel.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by miss minnie _
> * can only describe it as a sort of ethnic 'harvester'.    not cheap, either. *


 Ethnic harvesting -- nasty!


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

Well most things seem quite straightforward.

 - Brixton has good cheap eats,
 - Brixton, _post_ Helter Skelter, _pre_ Neon didn't have top quality cooking
 - bad Neon: uber-cool decor, under-cooked chicken, prices
 - good Neon: nice pizzas, delicious panna cotta
 - Jay Rayner champions good food brought to our area of the world
 - Jay Rayner is egregious hell-spawn
 - Atlantic 66 is an unknown quantity. I have despatched my team of yuppy wannabees who will report back later in the week
 - Atlantic 66 has the design principles of an estate agent
 - Shakespeare Road is definitely in Brixton
 - Shakespeare Road is definitely in Herne Hill

Undecided
 - is fois gras worse for the world than battery hen eggs?
 - are smart restaurants a Bad Thing for Brixton?
 - why isn't Jay Rayner's latest column on the Observer web site?

[For HB   ]

My views
 - cheap eats in Brixton are often nice places to be, with copious, tasty, interesting, but not very inspiring food (Asmara: bread and stew, Mazorka: stodge and warm - radiator temperature - wine)
 - smart restaurants with good food are a nice way to spend special occasions when you've got the cash. And I'd be glad not to have to walk down to Clapham for good food.
 - Bamboula lost my booking so I'm sulking and shan't go there


----------



## tarannau (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *For god's sake make your mind up.
> 
> I find the idea that foie gras on Atlantic Road is somehow ''democratising British food" disgusting -- but not anywhere near as disgusting as the processes used to make foie gras itself.
> ...


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by jayrayner _
> *Is it okay to brownnose me if I live somewhere else then? *


no, and you know that isn't the point. I think you're...an alright critic as it happens, but no better than that. More pertinently, my bro' and his best mate - both of whom own & run top flight gastropubs (you'll certainly know one of them, and the other's quite new), didn't go a bundle when your name came up.
And there are 2 important points here:
1)delicious or no, the way foie gras is produced is an indictment of humankind-cruel, callous and revolting. I can't eat the stuff, simply because I can't forget the maker's methods. Your mother always struck me as a very moral woman-I'd like to know her views.
2)  





> My point was that Atlantic66 fills a gap that remained in the market


this gap only exists due to the creeping gentrification ('batterseafication') of brixton, a process that is working almost entirely against the interests of the locals. Brixton is being parcelled up and sold down the river to well-heeled outsiders, shady businessmen (see 'living bar'), developers, designer yuppie types...any one but the local crowd. Atlantic66 strikes me as the sort of place that will be popular with the sort of 'weekend Brixtonians' who drink at dogstar/living club it at Mass's poncier nights, eat at that Satay....and don't give a fuck about the place or its' poeple


----------



## jayrayner (Jan 12, 2004)

Why isn't my column on the web this week. bloody good question. Must look into it.

Let me take a moment, before intostella sprays us with fleks of raging spittle. The foie gras line was there to wind people up and it clearly did the trick. Cheap of me? Gosh yes, guilty as charged, but I can sleep at night. 

I understand why some people don't eat it. Me, I do. Why? Because I just can't get worked up over a fucking goose. Simple as that. Personally, I think that if you're a carnivore - and I am, red in tooth and claw - then to make distinctions is petty and hypocritcal. I eat animals which are raised solely to enable me to do so. I am the reason they exist, which makes the meat eater rather god like. Again, I can sleep at night. Indeed the ravings of some anachronistic class warrior come to me as a lullaby.

Tarannau: thanks for apologising for the 20 stone thing. I can't be an ounce over 18. (All of it the result of eating foie gras, naturally.)


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tarannau _
> [Oh please, stop being so melodramatic. You going to start fighting equally hard against us Guyanese traditionalists being able to buy Sous (cold pigs' face jelly) and chicken feet from our local market-side eatery next? Or start picketing the rows of Halal butchers with dodgily sourced and slaughtered chicken?


It's pretty low to play the race card in this tarannau.  I'm surprised at you as you've alway argued intelligently until now.  Or are you so wowed by our celebrity guest that you can't think straight?

No, there is absolutely no comparison between pig's face jelly and chicken feet and the incredibly cruel methods used to produce foie gras.  So don't try to suggest that I am saying there is. 





> Why should my parents, who settled in Brixton off the boat all those years ago, have to schlop off to the West End if they want to eat a meal?  They've worked hard over the years - who are you to tell them what should be available to eat in their local area?


 And you accuse *me* of being melodramatic? This is a total straw man argument. You know perfectly well that I am not arguing that there should not be good food in Brixton. This argument has been gone over and over on here. Expensive and exclusive doesn't necessarily mean good. Good doesn't have to mean expensive. The idea that I am trying to oppress your  poor old Guyanian parents is dishonest and offensive.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

This thread is making me splutter my cruelty-free hot chocolate all over my screen.


Carry on please


----------



## Blagsta (Jan 12, 2004)

*Neon (and Jay Rayner)*

.


----------



## happyshopper (Jan 12, 2004)

*Where is Brixton*

"Oh, and as a resident of Shakespeare Road, I think you'll find Rayner is a denizen of Herne Hill"

Why is Shakespeare Road considered to be in Herne Hill? And who gets to decide?

I hope it's not just because of the Postal District, as SW2 is very poor definition of Brixton.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by jayrayner _
> *The foie gras line was there to wind people up and it clearly did the trick. Cheap of me? Gosh yes, guilty as charged, but I can sleep at night.  *


 Cheap, indeed, and nasty.

And I don't care a jot if you think it's self-righteous to criticise your condescending, sneering tone. Go gorge yourself on tortured animal's livers for all I care.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 12, 2004)

might I just point out that, if you want a top-class foodie experience, one already exists in Brixton-khan's on brixton Water Lane. MY idea of the perfect neighbourhood indian-an idea shared (memorably and repeatedly) by many a bloated urbanite!


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Red Jezza _
> *might I just point out that, if you want a top-class foodie experience, one already exists in Brixton-khan's on brixton Water Lane. MY idea of the perfect neighbourhood indian-an idea shared (memorably and repeatedly) by many a bloated urbanite! *


 Seconded. And I disagree with Ol Nick about  the Asmara serving ''just stew and bread''. It's great.


----------



## jayrayner (Jan 12, 2004)

totally agree about khan's. Knocks three monkeys off the board.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Go gorge yourself on tortured animal's livers for all I care.   *



I think he will. I've changed my mind - I want to eat foie gras again. Sounds wonderfully decadent.


Insert smilies here if you wish

{HB says: Put them in yourself, especially if you don't want to be mis-understood, please. I'm asking you as a moderator, OK}.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

*Where is Brixton*



> _Originally posted by happyshopper _
> *Why is Shakespeare Road considered to be in Herne Hill? And who gets to decide?
> I hope it's not just because of the Postal District, as SW2 is very poor definition of Brixton. *


Isn't it in SE24?


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Seconded. And I disagree with Ol Nick about  the Asmara serving ''just stew and bread''. It's great. *


 OK I'll go back sober some time.


----------



## jayrayner (Jan 12, 2004)

It is indeed in SE24. See! Even we can find something to agree on. Now, do you want to come round for dinner?


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by jayrayner _
> *totally agree about khan's. Knocks three monkeys off the board. *


 It's good, but I've been spolit for Indian food when I lived in Tooting. Nowhere else quite measures up, especially when you count the pennies. (A big bowl of fenugreek-heavy curry -- you sweat fenugreek for weeks afterwards -- and a naan and a mango lassi from Lahore Karahi - it's the business.)

Actually, I've just thought of a counter-example to my claim that good food in Britain always costs: Kastoori in Tooting. Veggie (and I like my foie gras, mind) cheap and absolutely brilliant food.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 12, 2004)

Jay: there's nowt wrong with smart restaurants. I should know, I was BORN in one (literally). but I do object to the idea that Brixton has been crying out for some poncy, over-priced attitudinal designer gastrodome. What I think brixton is crying out for is for people to stop shoving down its' throat the notion that its' salvation lies in becoming a new Clapham. Brixton's unique character is what makes it special for me-and I don't want to see that branded into oblivion.  
If I've misrepresented or misunderstood what I accept was a few flip comments on your part-then please accept my apologies. And you are more than welcome to join the U75 mainly Brixton Based Curry Club at our next, errm, 'convention'!


----------



## lang rabbie (Jan 12, 2004)

*Re: Where is Brixton*



> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Isn't it in SE24? *



As is most of Railton Road, all of Mayall Road and Marcus Garvey Way.    

postcode boundaries on map


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ol Nick _
> *It's good, but I've been spolit for Indian food when I lived in Tooting. Nowhere else quite measures up, especially when you count the pennies. (A big bowl of fenugreek-heavy curry -- you sweat fenugreek for weeks afterwards -- and a naan and a mango lassi from Lahore Karahi - it's the business.)
> 
> Actually, I've just thought of a counter-example to my claim that good food in Britain always costs: Kastoori in Tooting. Veggie (and I like my foie gras, mind) cheap and absolutely brilliant food. *


by 'eck you ain't wrong there. Kastoori's is yummy. Ol' Nick, I hereby command you to start the 'touring' branch of the UMBBCC


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by jayrayner _
> *It is indeed in SE24. See! Even we can find something to agree on. Now, do you want to come round for dinner? *


  

If you promise not to sneak any tormented animal products on to my plate so that you can then proclaim on urban 75 that ''IntoStella chows down on battered kitten's testicles" or some such.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 12, 2004)

nd the point I'm making is that the food and restaurants argued over here aren't particularly expensive or exclusive. Neon's just slightly more expensive that Pizza Hut, a meal at  Atlantic 66 seems slightly more expensive than Garfunkels'. In the wider scheme of things these places are comparatively affordable now, especially in an era when we spend proportionately less and less of our income on food. 

Why aren't you raging outside the Brixtonian for example? More expensive than either of them. 

I'm not playing the race card. Well, not any more than you are playing the class card ...and at least I don't play the same wildcard so often. And it's certainly not about the oppression of my parents - my point is that they're big enough to make their own choices without you fighting for them. 

The fact is I'm a little worn down with nearly every thread turning into a battlezone about the class and what you believe Brixton's working classes should have.  I don't see it the same way - I've lived here a long time after all - and I sometimes object to the self-righteous rage you lather yourself into on others' behalf. I admire and respect your commitment, but I reserve my right to disagree without a heap of morally-superior invective coming my way.

Foie Gras is cruel and unnecessary. I believe so too. As is intensively reared chicken.

But I'm not going to insult a restaurant critic about a fairly anodyne, throwaway comment. Just as I'm not going to rage against a restaurant owner I don't know, nor build it into wider argument over what you think working class Brixton should be. It's worth bearing in mind that Neon and Atlantic 66 opened in vacant premises (one of many in the road) and have not displaced existing eateries, nor gone into direct competition. I don't see them as a huge threat or problem to Brixton's vitality.

Fair enough?


----------



## lang rabbie (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Red Jezza _
> *by 'eck you ain't wrong there. Kastoori's is yummy. Ol' Nick, I hereby command you to start the 'touring' branch of the UMBBCC *



Just don't let them argue about politics.   The expected noise level is very low.     The last time that I took a group including some politicos to the Kastoori I thought that the management were going to chuck us out - and most of them had only been drinking salt lassis!


----------



## happyshopper (Jan 12, 2004)

*Re: Where is Brixton*



> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Isn't it in SE24? *



This is harder work than expected.

Sorry if the use of an implied double-negative wasn't clear enough but what I wanted to know in my earlier post is why Shakespeare Road is not considered to be in Brixton? Who decides where the border is drawn?

I went on to hope that the decision was not being made on the basis of the postal district. This is because the border between SW2 and the surrounding postal districts (including SE24) is entirely arbitary and is useless as a definition of Brixton. 

So where is the Brixton border and who gets to decide? 

Thanks for any guidance


----------



## hatboy (Jan 12, 2004)

Red Jezza said:

"this gap only exists due to the creeping gentrification ('batterseafication') of brixton, a process that is working almost entirely against the interests of the locals. Brixton is being parcelled up and sold down the river to well-heeled outsiders, shady businessmen (see 'living bar'), developers, designer yuppie types...any one but the local crowd. Atlantic66 strikes me as the sort of place that will be popular with the sort of 'weekend Brixtonians' who drink at dogstar/living club it at Mass's poncier nights, eat at that Satay....and don't give a fuck about the place or its' people".

That's pretty much where I'm at.   I think that this argument is about the bigger issues mentioned by Jezza, as epitomised by places like Living and in some ways (certainly appearance) by Atlantic 66. One thing Jezza, you need to be a bit careful talking about "locals".   I think some locals, newer (5 years plus, lets say) and older (decades or born and bred) have benefited from Brixton's changes over the last decade or so. But probably not as much as some newcomers have.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ol Nick _
> *It's good, but I've been spolit for Indian food when I lived in Tooting. Nowhere else quite measures up, especially when you count the pennies. (A big bowl of fenugreek-heavy curry -- you sweat fenugreek for weeks afterwards -- and a naan and a mango lassi from Lahore Karahi - it's the business.)
> 
> Actually, I've just thought of a counter-example to my claim that good food in Britain always costs: Kastoori in Tooting. Veggie (and I like my foie gras, mind) cheap and absolutely brilliant food. *



I have always been faithful to Mirch Masala (in Norbury first but now Tooting) - is Kastoori better then?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

*Re: Re: Where is Brixton*



> _Originally posted by happyshopper _
> *So where is the Brixton border and who gets to decide?
> 
> *



It's all pretty arbritary - SW9, I am told, is Stockwell, yet Trinity Gardens is in SW9 and is definitely in Brixton. So use your own judgment - if you think it is in Brixton, it is in Brixton


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *I have always been faithful to Mirch Masala (in Norbury first but now Tooting) - is Kastoori better then? *


 I've never been to Mirch Masala and I don't get back much to Tooting having moved away almost 4 years ago. I guess there's only one way to find out.

Looking at the reviews I would guess that Kastoori is aiming at a slightly more refained dining experience. Take your mum.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by jayrayner _
> *It is indeed in SE24. See! Even we can find something to agree on. Now, do you want to come round for dinner? *


there's an offer I can't refuse!
Orang Utan....they've moved Mirch Masala? calumny!


----------



## lang rabbie (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *I have always been faithful to Mirch Masala (in Norbury first but now Tooting) - is Kastoori better then? *



No, they're both excellent for their own varieties of cuisine.

Mirch Masala for Lahori(?) cooking such as mutton falling off the bone in glorious casseroled dishes, served in an unpretentious canteen style environment rather like those to be found close in North Indian/Pakistani city centres.

Kastoori for excellent vegetarian grub of such richness that you can take a convinced carnivore along that they won't complain once.   Also milk and rice puddings to die for!


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Red Jezza _
> *there's an offer I can't refuse!
> Orang Utan....they've moved Mirch Masala? calumny!  *



Don't panic - there's two branches now!


----------



## jayrayner (Jan 12, 2004)

For what it's worth I've also reviewed kastoori v favourable. they're puri are to die for.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tarannau _
> *Why aren't you raging
> morally-superior invective
> Just as I'm not going to rage
> etc*


<sigh> Just because I have argued consistently against gentrification and the problems it is causing in Brixton (and elsewhere) -- because the issue is not going away -- and because I hold certain passionately held convictions doesn't mean I'm ''raging'' -- outside restaurants or anywhere else. This is pretty underhand and only undermines your own argument though I'm not entirely sure what that is -- that everything should be fun and lighthearted, presumably.  You've met me many times.  Any evidence AT ALL of this ''rage'' you speak of? Do you think I go around ''raging'' about everything all the time?  No, of course not, and it's cheap to misrepresent people in this way. Ask yourself this: would you say the same of a bloke? Probably not. But it's _so very easy _to dismiss women with passionately held beliefs as shrill, purple-faced, raging harridans, isn't it?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by jayrayner _
> *For what it's worth I've also reviewed kastoori v favourable. they're puri are to die for. *



Shocking punctuation for a journo.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *Shocking punctuation for a journo. *


 It's because he hasn't got one of us ''numbnuts subeditors'' to hand.


----------



## jayrayner (Jan 12, 2004)

The moment I'd posted that I was smacking my hea dagainst the keyboard 'they're puri'? Fuck me. mind you, pay me to post here and it will be word and comma perfect. Good idea? No I thought not. Well, that's been a lovely long afternoon of distractions. A pleasure doing business with you all.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 12, 2004)

so er-what do peeps think of my idea of a 'touring' UMBBCC'?


----------



## lang rabbie (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Red Jezza _
> *so er-what do peeps think of my idea of a 'touring' UMBBCC'? *



[Looks at waistline]  Get thee behind me, Satan! [/Looks at waistline]

[New Year willpower disintegrates]  Count me in!


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by jayrayner _
> *The moment I'd posted that I was smacking my hea dagainst the keyboard 'they're puri'? Fuck me. mind you, pay me to post here and it will be word and comma perfect. Good idea? No I thought not. Well, that's been a lovely long afternoon of distractions. A pleasure doing business with you all. *


 You can edit your own posts, you know.  But then, of course, you're used to having someone else to do that for you.  

Nighty night!  

Jezza -- what's UMMBBCC or whatever it was?


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 12, 2004)

Urban75 Mainly brixton Based Curry Club.
an institution much loved by those of us who canEat for England without piling on a single ounce.
<looks infuriatingly smug, gestures pityingly towards Mr Rayner and Certain Other Posters >


----------



## hendo (Jan 12, 2004)

This thread is fab. Brixton, Food, Class AND Cruelty to Animals. Who says the Brixton board is sleepy?


----------



## Ms T (Jan 12, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tarannau _
> *nd the point I'm making is that the food and restaurants argued over here aren't particularly expensive or exclusive. Neon's just slightly more expensive that Pizza Hut, a meal at  Atlantic 66 seems slightly more expensive than Garfunkels'. In the wider scheme of things these places are comparatively affordable now, especially in an era when we spend proportionately less and less of our income on food.
> 
> Why aren't you raging outside the Brixtonian for example? More expensive than either of them.
> ...



Great post, Tarranau.

And fair play to Jay Rayner for coming on the boards to defend himself, and for inviting various Urbanites to dinner.

For what it's worth, I think more of us should actually visit Atlantic 66 and find out what it's like before castigating it in such terms.  It's not outrageously expensive, after all, and is trying to cater for what it sees as a gap in the market.  As someone who loves food, and eating out, I'm pleased they've tried to step into the shoes vacated by HelterSkelter some years ago now.  And as has been mentioned, there are restaurants in Brixton to suit all tastes and budgets.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 13, 2004)

mebbe we should-but I am truly horrified by the utterly obscene manner in which foie gras is made. then again, if we applied that to 70% of livestock rearing, I'd probably end up chundering on sight, and - tbh - I love meat too much to give it up. If that makes me a hypocrite-OK, guilty as charged.
And, believe me, I am all for lcoal businesses giving a good time to Brixtoniands. Now, does anyone know the ownership of this one?


----------



## tarannau (Jan 13, 2004)

Well thanks Mrs T


For what it's worth, I really don't want this thread to develop into a slanging match. Above it all, like intostella, I treasure Brixton and all of its variety. Gentrification is a real concern to me as well - no one wants to see Brixton evolve into another bland dormitory town centred around a couple of supermarkets and the usual high street suspects. 

But these two restaurants do seem to have singled out for a disproportionate amount of abuse on this thread. Mostly from people - I'm guessing -  that haven't eaten there or even had a thorough look at the menu. And all this outrage over one (deliberately provocative) paragraph at the start of a review seems a little routine and all too rehearsed, particularly when the review only mentioned Atlantic 66 in passing. Looking at it dispassionately again, it's hard to see why people took such offence; even harder to work out Jay Rayner is being portrayed as some bourgeoisie plant, forcing foie gras on unsuspecting Brixtonians.

I don't see foie gras as representative of an unstopppable, creeping tide of gentrification washing towards Brixton. I see it as more representative of an over-ambitious chef, who's trying put on a bit of a show on opening. Certainly got us talking, if not eating. I'd guess that things may settle down later.

In any case these places aren't oppressively expensive. I've eaten in Khan's many times and it's not masssively cheaper than a comparable meal in Neon, once you've added on the inevitable poppadom based extras . Atlantic 66 - bearing in mind I haven't eaten there - looks like it's reasonably priced and in line with other places (SW9, Bah Humbug, Brixtonian etc). I've seen no evidence of a restrictive door policy, they're independently and locally owned as far as I can tell, they haven't stopped me from going to the Phoenix or my local patty shop. It's not all bad if you ask me; their premises could have become another: a) Fried Chicken shop b)Nail Salon c)Off Licence or d)another tatty shop selling Nokia accessories. 

Time will tell if these places have a future in Brixton. Catering's a tough, competitive business that generally isn't hugely profitable. These places don't seem to be taking the piss in terms of prices and approach - let's give them a chance.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ms T _
> * I'm pleased they've tried to step into the shoes vacated by HelterSkelter some years ago now.  *


 I ate there for a wedding anniversary meal and it was vastly over-priced mediocrity with couldn't-give-a-fuck service. Never again. I'm not surprised they folded. They richly deserved failure, I thought. Twenty Trinity Gardens was really good till Abdulali and his wife left.


----------



## Pie 1 (Jan 13, 2004)

Excelent again, tarannau. You're right, we should all actually give these places a go before passing such scornful judgement
 

But to my suprise, I see that apparently I'm a  'Cronie' and as such I must abandon you all and your little provicial wannabee eateries and head for the low key lights of the private clubs where a selection of richly prepared dead animals accompanied by some fine wine are no doubt awaiting me - I was just contemplating the Atkins diet too - what good timing.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Red Jezza _
> *so er-what do peeps think of my idea of a 'touring' UMBBCC'? *


 I think the skinny and beautiful amongst you should go regularly and I should come along once a year.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by hendo _
> *This thread is fab. Brixton, Food, Class AND Cruelty to Animals. Who says the Brixton board is sleepy?  *


Seconded!

(And an eatery selling foie gras deserves to (a) fail and (b) attract the attentions of the many ALF activists in Brixton.)


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Seconded!
> 
> (And an eatery selling foie gras deserves to (a) fail and (b) attract the attentions of the many ALF activists in Brixton.) *


 A very little Englander approach to aminal protection. Don't go for the big targets where you could make a difference: battery hens, pigs, boycott the Phoenix. Nah, boycott the foreign muck, eh? One little place in Brixton which will sell a couple of livers a month. Save 20 geese a year!

And what's the ALF without Tammy Wynette?


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ol Nick _
> *boycott the Phoenix. *


Big target?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 13, 2004)

Hypocrisy is rife as usual, unless the foie gras detractors also boycott the places that use/sell battery chicken, halal meat, etc etc


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *Hypocrisy is rife as usual, unless the foie gras detractors also boycott the places that use/sell battery chicken, halal meat, etc etc *


Isn't it more class hatred than hypocrisy?


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Big target? *


 Well OK you'd have to boycott all the greasy spoons in the area. I picked on th Phoenix because it's everyone's favourite.

On the other hand, if you're boycotting foie gras as a battle in the class war - well, that's at least consistent. (I reckon it's the only consistent reason for banning hunting too. Respect for animals is a difficult and complex subject: "stuff the toffs" makes sense to everyone.)


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Isn't it more class hatred than hypocrisy? *



Not sure what you mean here but I hope you don't mean it is ok for working classes to eat meat that necessarily involves animal suffering, but unacceptable for middle class people to do the same?


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Ol Nick _
> *Well OK you'd have to boycott all the greasy spoons in the area. I picked on th Phoenix because it's everyone's favourite.
> 
> On the other hand, if you're boycotting foie gras as a battle in the class war - well, that's at least consistent. (I reckon it's the only consistent reason for banning hunting too. Respect for animals is a difficult and complex subject: "stuff the toffs" makes sense to everyone.) *


Exactly. Fois Gras is a great target. The ALF, the Comrades and the anti-gentrifiers unite over a single goose liver.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 13, 2004)

I'll tell you what. If I ever see that Lord Snooty lingering outside Atlantic 66 again, I'll give him a damn good smacking for y'all...


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *Hypocrisy is rife as usual, unless the foie gras detractors also boycott the places that use/sell battery chicken, halal meat, etc etc *


 Well no, because only an absolute blockhead would equate halal meat with foie gras production. 

If there is hypocrisy it certainly isn't just on one side. Argue all you like that the fwightful sparts are trying to reduce choice in Brixton -- and oppressing ethnic minorities to boot, no doubt, with their litte Englander ways -- but it just won't wash because quite the opposite is true.  Gentrification, with restaurants like Animaltorture66 at its cutting edge, brings with it  a soul-crushing deluge of drear-a-like outlets in the Starbucks/Burger King mould, pushing out local businesses that provide real choice, value for money and culinary ethnic diversity, like the Asmara.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *Not sure what you mean here but I hope you don't mean it is ok for working classes to eat meat that necessarily involves animal suffering, but unacceptable for middle class people to do the same? *


Seriously, I've seen an old french peasant woman doing the stuffing and it's a horrible sight. She fitted a metal contraption to the wretched amimal's head, it was very distressed, honking and flapping it's wings, and then she poured gunk into its beak and massaged it's neck to make it eat. 

Anyone eating the stuff at Atlantic 666 is supporting such cruelty. I don't give a toss if lots of other things are cruel too.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by IntoStella _
> *Well no, because only an absolute blockhead would equate halal meat with foie gras production.
> 
> If there is hypocrisy it certainly isn't just on one side. Argue all you like that the fwightful sparts are trying to reduce choice in Brixton -- and oppressing ethnic minorities to boot, no doubt, with their litte Englander ways -- but it just won't wash because quite the opposite is true.  Gentrification, with restaurants like Animaltorture66 at its cutting edge, brings with it  a soul-crushing deluge of drear-a-like outlets in the Starbucks/Burger King mould, pushing out local businesses that provide real choice, value for money and culinary ethnic diversity, like the Asmara. *



Don't put words into my mouth, IS
I don't think the opening of this restaurant has reduced choice - it has increased it. 
I don't see how independently-owned restaurants are comparable to Starbucks/Burger King - this is not a a coffee shop or a takeaway - it's a restaurant.
All I can see is people reacting to a restaurant that doesn't cater to their particular tastes desperately trying to equate that restaurant with some malevolent political force so they can feel better about bleating 'I don't like it'


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *cater to their particular tastes *


Depends whether gross cruelty to animals turns you on or not.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 13, 2004)

That doesn't logically follow. Do McDonalds follow a strategy of opening up restaurants in an area once the foie-gras barrier has been breached then? 

Isn't the presence of a healthy, varied and competitive food scene a disincentive to the chain restaurants? Strong local tastes, coupled with individuality, could be the best defence against mediocre chains. A stagnant, unchanging restarant scene stuck in the past - all fried chicken and bargain basement Greggs - is likely to cause the downfall of a community far quicker. 

Asmara's part of Brixton's restaurant community, representing the cuisine of some locals. So's Neon - there are more than a few Italians based locally. Maybe Atlantic 66 will find its space, but it's hardly flying a flag for the landed gentry in the meantime.

And if you don't like the idea of Atlantic 66 serving Foie Gras, protest to the management and don't eat there. From what I've seen they want to be responsive to local opinion ... they aren't going to last long without regular support.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tarannau _
> *And if you don't like the idea of Atlantic 66 serving Foie Gras, protest to the management and don't eat there. *


I'm going to walk round there in a sec and check the menu. I strongly suspect there'll now be no mention of tortured goose.


----------



## newbie (Jan 13, 2004)

I haven't caught up with this thread until now.  For some reason I didn't think hip trendy and young would have much relevance 

anyway, once again I find myself agreeing with hatboy
you need to be a bit careful talking about "locals". I think some locals, newer (5 years plus, lets say) and older (decades or born and bred) have benefited from Brixton's changes over the last decade or so. But probably not as much as some newcomers have. 

except perhaps the last line, where I'd change 'newcomers ' to 'speculators'.

Also with much of what tarannau said.

Personally I'm not much into restaurants, I'm more able to join in with threads about chipshops.  But no matter, as Brixton reassumes its natural place as an affluent inner commuter dormitory the changes are coming thick and fast.  

I want to disagree with something pooka said pages back though

The key driver to gentrification in London is the spriralling cost of housing. This is a consequence of growing demand (consequent on economic growth, inward migration and declining household size) and an inadaquate supply of new dwellings. There's not a lot that Lambeth can do about that. The solution is to build more houses, London wide and across the region.  

The analysis is right, the prescription is short-termist and wrong, IMO.  The 'solution' is to decrease the attractiveness of London and the Southeast in favour of jobs and people moving to the depressed areas.  Essentially for what happened to Brixton (colonisation, regeneration, gentrification) to be mirrored up north.  

Filling in every square foot of underused space with additional housing is the _problem_ not the solution.  Whether it's the 100+ year ignored strip alongside the railway on Shakespeare or the couple of old garages alongside Kens engines on Water Lane, the effect is the same... more private space, more pressure on resources, less public amentity, greater suburbanisation.

The only way to limit gentrification is to make London in general and Brixton in particular less attractive to live in, comparative to elsewhere.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *Don't put words into my mouth, IS
> I don't think the opening of this restaurant has reduced choice - it has increased it.
> I don't see how independently-owned restaurants are comparable to Starbucks/Burger King - this is not a a coffee shop or a takeaway - it's a restaurant.
> All I can see is people reacting to a restaurant that doesn't cater to their particular tastes desperately trying to equate that restaurant with some malevolent political force so they can feel better about bleating 'I don't like it' *


 You patently didn't understand a word I said. Go back and read it again. Slowly, if necessary.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by newbie _
> *The only way to limit gentrification is to make London in general and Brixton in particular less attractive to live in, comparative to elsewhere. *


 I understand your point in the abstract, but what does this mean in practice? Close down the shops and restaurants, ban the festivals, make the Fridge shut at 11, take buses off the bus route, terminate the Victoria line at Vauxhall? We've already got robbers and car thieves and junkies shooting up in the bushes. What more can we do? Seriously, what should we do?


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

Perhaps what was happening in the 1970s and early 1980s - large government departments were moved away from London into the sticks, e.g. DVLC in Wales and DHSS to Newcastle.

Why couldn't the Stock Exchange relocate to Cumbria?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 13, 2004)

......or Salford.........swathes of empty property there, street upon street of 'bijou period properties with masses of potential'


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Depends whether gross cruelty to animals turns you on or not. *



That doesn't seem to be the reason you are opposing the restaurant though because otherwise you would be trying to shut down Asmara and other restaurants and shops.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Mrs Magpie _
> *......or Salford.........swathes of empty property there, street upon street of 'bijou period properties with masses of potential' *


Salford's welcome. Imagine. London without any stock brokers. Bliss.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 13, 2004)

Orang Utan, I think the production of Foie Gras is obscene, it isn't the same as Halal or anything else. I think militant ALFers are swivel-eyed and barking, I've known some. I'm not particularly worked up about hunting although I don't support it. I will tuck in heartily to Boudin, Steak Tartare, Lobster, Horsemeat and some types of Veal etc but I will not eat Foie Gras.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Orang Utan _
> *That doesn't seem to be the reason you are opposing the restaurant though because otherwise you would be trying to shut down Asmara and other restaurants and shops. *


I hold up my hands. I do see fois gras as a symbol for rich people stuffing their faces while not giving a toss about animal cruelty. 

And the idea of the rich being cruel to animals strikes me as worse, in moral terms, than the poor doing it. Because wealthy people usually have greater choices than the poor. They can choose to buy expensive free-range eggs or whatever. The poor often can't.


----------



## lang rabbie (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Anna Key _
> *Imagine. London without any stock brokers. Bliss. *



Imagine Brixton without the household income provided by the financial services industry and its support services - misery.

And I don't just mean the office cleaners - take a look at the people getting on the buses/tubes to the city in core office hours.  There's been a substantial change (still nowhere near sufficient) in the last decade from when employment in the City was wholly white, perhaps spurred by takeovers by the more meritocratic American banks(!).   

OK, not many black Brixtonians are bond-dealers on six-figure salaries, but the evil City provides a surprising proportion of stable, reasonably well-paid employment for longer established locals, as well as incomers.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by newbie _
> *I haven't caught up with this thread until now.  For some reason I didn't think hip trendy and young would have much relevance
> 
> anyway, once again I find myself agreeing with hatboy
> ...


Ultimately, it may be the only way. But in the meantime, there is an awful lot that can be done, by the council, by us, by anyone who gives a toss about the manor. We can stop the council selling off yet MORE properties, campaign to ensure properties are owned/built by democratically run housing co-ops, not speculators' scams: fight the Likes of Living with all the passion we can muster: support local businesses against soulless corporate invasions; campaign for govt money for youth schemes and community projects:the list is endless.
I may be putting words into yer gob here (if so, apols), but I don't buy we should simoply sit back and accept destination Clapham as an unavoidable future. 
And that also means keeping a close eye on the likes of Atlantic66-not just over animal torture, but over THEIR community commitment.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tarannau _
> *I'll tell you what. If I ever see that Lord Snooty lingering outside Atlantic 66 again, I'll give him a damn good smacking for y'all...
> 
> *


and that's no way to act towards Justin!  (he says, shit stirring merrily away)


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Red Jezza _
> *We can stop the council selling off yet MORE properties, campaign to ensure properties are owned/built by democratically run housing co-ops, not speculators' scams: fight the Likes of Living with all the passion we can muster: support local businesses against soulless corporate invasions; campaign for govt money for youth schemes and community projects:the list is endless.
> I may be putting words into yer gob here (if so, apols), but I don't buy we should simoply sit back and accept destination Clapham as an unavoidable future.
> And that also means keeping a close eye on the likes of Atlantic66-not just over animal torture, but over THEIR community commitment. *


I'll vote for that.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by newbie _
> *Filling in every square foot of underused space with additional housing is the problem not the solution.  Whether it's the 100+ year ignored strip alongside the railway on Shakespeare or the couple of old garages alongside Kens engines on Water Lane, the effect is the same... more private space, more pressure on resources, less public amentity, greater suburbanisation. *


 Ah yes, as you said --  hilariously, I thought -- on the prison thread: 





> The recent trend for building housing on every square foot of the borough has left a major deficit in all sorts of resources. It's not only school places but everything from doctors and dentists to parking and seats on the bus. Piling a few thousand extra people into that site without additional resource provision is exactly the sort of plan I'd expect to see from Lambeth but not on here.


_ So we can't build any more housing in Lambeth because then there won't be enough seats on the bus!! I love it!   _

It is not only patently absurd but reminds me of the naysayers who predicted utter catastrophe would befall Lonon on the first day of the Congestion Charge. 

Your argument seems to me to advocate blanket nimbyism --  ''keep everybody out''. 

I don't understand this bizarre argument you keep putting forward of making Brixton less attractive by strewing needles about the place or something.  I assume you are trying to be rhetorical but you totally ignore the fact that there is such a positive force as genuine long term regeneration, improving housing, schooling, healthcare etc for all, unlike gentrification, which brings nothing of use to the area except restaurants that most people can't afford.

_Edited for syntax.   _


----------



## hatboy (Jan 13, 2004)

If you build more housing you have to build the resources to go with it. There won't be enough seats on the bus all over London if this isn't monitored. This is true.

I've said pretty much all I have to say on Atlantic 66. I feel it's bland-looking and exclusive looking, but we'll see.

I like people and venue's with character. Tarannau says:

"Strong local tastes, coupled with individuality, could be the best defence against mediocre chains."

True, but if you think Atlantic 66 is strong in style terms or individual your measures of such are less demanding than mine. (I do think we are very different in this way tarranau).

I also don't think some of you realise how expensive these places are to people on low incomes or how much some of them look like they've landed from space and are nothing to do with so many people here.

And, yes, many animals die so we can eat them. But foie gras (sp?) strikes me as a particularly decadent, cruel product. Perhaps those who don't see this and enjoy it should have a pipe shoved down their gullets and be force fed it until their stomachs explode..... just like the geese that make it are.


----------



## newbie (Jan 13, 2004)

We can stop the council selling off yet MORE properties, campaign to ensure properties are owned/built by democratically run housing co-ops, not speculators' scams: fight the Likes of Living with all the passion we can muster: support local businesses against soulless corporate invasions; campaign for govt money for youth schemes and community projects:the list is endless. 


I'll also vote for that, but in the longterm it won't make that much difference.  I think destination Clapham is largely unavoidable within the context of London booming.  When it comes to it Brixton is geographically more desirable than Clapham, only the different nature of the planning blight meant that Clapham gentrified first.  Within the context of London booming.

Nick, I don't know the practical answers, I'm not suggesting that we should all rush about vandalising busstops.  But, eg, the tram coming here will increase the pressure of gentrification, because transport links are so vital to London life.  Yet I appear to be the only person hereabouts who has major reservations about it.  The detail of that is for another thread perhaps, but there are all sorts of initiatives which have served, or are serving, to increase the attractions _comparative to elsewhere_.  Proposals, for instance, have surfaced hereabout for a theatre, for a community arts initiative and so on.  These are very much part of gentrification, because they serve to amplify the benefits of local quaklity of life.

As, lets be honest, is the phenomena that is Urban75 and the curry club and all the praise of the Albert or the upcoming nights at the Ritzy.  Just as much as some bland restaurant,  this all serves to make Brixton attractive to people with choices, despite all the problems.  That's not a criticism, I love it personally, but it's an observation.  

Anyone who's been reading this forum for a while will have seen the 'I'm thinking of moving to/visiting Brixton, tell me about it' posts.  Why are you thinking that?  well because U75 makes it appear attractive....

Comparative to eg, Peckham.  Or Burnley.  

A reason U75 is so good, and is very much part of a real community, not a cynical excersise imposed from outside, is that living in Brixton is good for the majority of people.  We like it here, many passionately.  We share that passion.  People coming into London, or moving within it and looking at their options find Brixton more attractive than other places.  Their choices, their money is what's driving gentrification.

I'm not suggesting that explicit steps should be taken to make Brixton _absolutely_ less attractive (I'm not saying 'if you really want to resist the area gentrifying then support the spread of greasy fried chicken outlets, of poundshops and of crackhouses').  I want other places to be made more _comparatively_ attractive, better, places to live.  And I don't think that will be done by simply building more homes - social or otherwise- in Brixton.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 13, 2004)

You don't understand what I mean by theatre. Is "Peckham New Varieties" gentrifying, I don't think so? It's a pool of talent and opportunity for all kids in the area who want to perform. That's what we need here.  Not some poncy, Hampstead "fringe venue" or whatever.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 13, 2004)

> True, but if you think Atlantic 66 is strong in style terms or individual your measures of such are less demanding than mine. (I do think we are very different in this way tarranau).



Aargh. For the last time, I don't even particularly like Atlantic 66. But I did think it was receiving some unjustified criticism on here, hence my qualified defence of a new restaurant.

Truth is, I think the design of Atlantic 66 is a bodge job. Bland old fishbowl of a place, with Ikea fittings and a terrible 'bollocks' poster. Safety first design that doesn't inspire,
And - despite their generous discount voucher dropping through the door - we couldn't find anything on the menu that attracted us to drop in. All too fussy and unfocused, nothing that gripped my imagination. We buggered off to the Portuguese in the end.

But the fact remains that I don't regard a reasonably priced restaurant as growing evidence of unstoppable gentrification, even if it does have an over-ambitious and perhaps ill-judged menu. It'll survive only if Brixtonians want to eat the food in there - it's unlikely to be a sufficient draw  outside of the area.  And I'd far rather have another indepedent restaurant making a go of it rather than another chain or more of the same. 

And let's be honest HB - pretty much any restaurant is a stretch for the low paid and unemployed. Just as it always has been - I remember my parents rarely being able to afford meals out when I was a kid.  This whole 'eat out regularly' food culture (and not cook at home) is recent and has perhaps raised unfair expectations. 

The thing which annoyed me was that these restaurants were being portrayed as some kind of hoity-toity expensive places, which in comparative terms they're certainly not. Well sourced ingredients cost, catering's a hard field to work in and profits aren't huge. These people will be working hard for their money.


----------



## newbie (Jan 13, 2004)

it's not nought to do wit being poncey, it's to do with making Brixton an attractive place to be.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 13, 2004)

"Attractive" is subjective. We need a performance space, but we need an accessible, affordable for users, inclusive performance space. Not a "lovely evening out at the theatre darling". I'm sure you see.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 13, 2004)

I feel like an eves-dropper intruding into a private conversation, but I've just read this thread all the way through and can't help chipping in.

I'm amzaed by the sheer illiberal, intolerance of so many contributors. 

Since when has anyone got a right to dictate to others where they can and can't live?

Since when has anyone got a right to tell someone else which restaurant they can and can't go to?  Or tell a restauranter where he or she can or can't open up their business?

Or suggest forcing said business to close down because they sell something (perfectly legal) the methods of production of which, they happen to disagree?  Or because only a small proportion of people can afford its products?  

Or suggest that one can only have a say in the community in which one lives if one has lived there for the requisite number of years?

Now, I appreciate that foie-gras-eating-stock-brokers are not likely to arouse much sympathy, but SURELY most people can see that the price of regulating their freedom to do what they want is to put at jeopardy your own right to do what you want? 

Freedom's a funny thing. It very often means letting others do things you really hate.  Which is fine, as long as they let you do your thing too (and no one innocent gets hurt).

At the risk of ending on a Jerry Springer like motherhood and apple pie sign-off, IMHO, Brixton is big enough (in the generosity sense), to put up with a posh restaurant, some posh people and, even, (horrors) foie gras on toast.

Now ... bring on the abuse.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 13, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Mr BC _
> *Now ... bring on the abuse. *


You should be made to eat your words!  

Is criticising a cruel dish served in a local eatery _really_ placing civil liberties at risk? 

The goose-tormentors have got a bit of stick on a public bulletin board - good.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 14, 2004)

> Is criticising a cruel dish served in a local eatery really placing civil liberties at risk?




Not at all. Fire away at foie gras. It's pretty grim stuff all told.


It's the other assumptions and judgements I took some objection to. And besides, isn't this all somewhat irrelevant if no-one actually eats in the place. Poncey menu nothwithstanding, there hasn't been one poster who likes the look of Atlantic 66, let alone one that's risked eating there.

Not so good for a 'stylish bar' and 'fabulous restaurant' serving a 'pioneering fusion of modern British cuisine with Eastern inspired flavours'

Looking back at their pre-opening bumph, it's not clear if they're certain what the place should be...


----------



## newbie (Jan 14, 2004)

Of course I see.  But you're not the only one that values 'accessible', 'inclusive' or indeed that old chestnut 'community'.  When people choose where they'll live in the consider whether the area has a good feel as well as for all the other reasons.

I'm not sure what it's like now, but once upon a time Battersea Arts Centre offered all those things.  It was a cheap, accessible, run down space in a tatty old town hall where all sorts of initiatives had space to grow.  Now I read the artistic director is to become head honcho at the National Theatre.  I've no real idea what he's like, or what he's done, but they don't come much poncier than the National.  I'm sure _you_ see 

I want theatre, community initiatives and so on for Brixton.  Of course, the better the quality of life for people- everybody- round here the better.  I'm just trying to point out that as the QoL improves, so will the pressure of people wanting to live here.  And that's what is fuelling gentrification.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 15, 2004)

The person listing all the things people are supposed to have done: I didn't do any of those. 

Anyway, I hear Earth is to be demolished to make way for an interplanetary bypass.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> I feel like an eves-dropper intruding into a private conversation, but I've just read this thread all the way through and can't help chipping in.
> 
> I'm amzaed by the sheer illiberal, intolerance of so many contributors.
> 
> ...


if you insist....yer round the fucking twist pal! WHO is advocating any of these lifestyle-stalinist measures? for my part, I simply reserve the right to
a) criticise others for decisions they take which I disagree with
b) not give my custom to a joint which is sponsoring repulsive cruelty to animals
c) stick up for brixton and brixtonians against all those who could do so much good for the local community, but sell it down the river every time.
Aren't you reading things into this thread which just ain't there?
chill, and change yer prescription.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

>Still reeling a bit from the amazing new interface<

Very well said, Jezza.


BC -- what an incredibly dishonest post. The usual Lib Dem tactic of totally misprepresenting people and branding anyone who has the guts to stand up for something as evil Stalinists trying to take away everyone's rights.  What would the world be like if we were all as pusillanimous as your lot?! I dread to think.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> pusillanimous


What a great word, suggesting pustulence, pestilence _and _sillyness. 

But fantastic that the the Libs are protecting our civil liberties. Bit hard on the poor old goose though. Still. Business is business.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 15, 2004)

ahhh Mr BC is one of champers charlies arse-splintered fence sitters is he? sex it all, dunnit?


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 15, 2004)

My favourite bit:-



			
				Mr BC said:
			
		

> Now, I appreciate that foie-gras-eating-stock-brokers are not likely to arouse much sympathy, but SURELY most people can see that the price of regulating their freedom to do what they want is to put at jeopardy your own right to do what you want?



What's the problem with applying _the most stringent_ regulations to the activities of stock-brokers? Not least because this would:

(a) produce a huge and immediate increase in general happiness (see the film 'Wall Street');
(b) protect from abuse the internal organs of numerous geese; and
(c) reduce the number of braying red-braced buffoons in city pubs.

Mr BC: please explain how any of these measures 'put at jeopardy (my) right to do what I want?' Why shouldn't the braying ones be regulated whilst others are not?


----------



## hatboy (Jan 15, 2004)

Any chance of bringing this conversation back to "Brixton" and away from geese and stock-brokers?


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 15, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Any chance of bringing this conversation back to "Brixton" and away from geese and stock-brokers?


Of course. I was just trying to reassure Mr BC that criticising Atlantic666 and their disgusting menu does not necessarily involve the suspension of _habias corpus_.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

"And the idea of the rich being cruel to animals strikes me as worse, in moral terms, than the poor doing it."

Mmmm.  Never seen moral relativism in class terms before.  I'm sure the poor old goose would take great comfort in only being eaten by the poor.


"BC -- what an incredibly dishonest post. The usual Lib Dem tactic of totally misprepresenting people and branding anyone who has the guts to stand up for something as evil Stalinists trying to take away everyone's rights."

And this isn't dishonest or misreprepresenting, I suppose?  It's prefectly clear, to any reasonable person, that I was not objecting to anyone campaigning against foie gras or whatever else they want to campaign about.   I was drawing attention to the fundamental intolerance of those who have argued that, in short, 'posh' people and their restaurants should be kept out of Brixton.  I couldn't give a monkey's cuss about foie gras myself but, as a liberal, can't object to someone who does, doing something about it, within the law.

If I'm being really honest, I think the obsession with some people on here of some how 'preserving' a Brixton golden age is laughable and not a little pathetic.  Brixton has been evolving for a century and a half.  Who's to say it should be preserved in aspic, circa. 1985?  People come and people go and, I hope, that will continue.  There's no way of stopping it even if you wanted to.  You might as well campaign against rain.  

And, for the record, I may be a liberal, I'm most certainly not a Liberal Democrat.

And I hardly think I'm sitting on the fence.

So, once again, bring on the abuse ... but this time the merest hint of an argument amongst the invective might raise the level of debate just a tad.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> My favourite bit:-
> 
> 
> What's the problem with applying _the most stringent_ regulations to the activities of stock-brokers? Not least because this would:
> ...



Given that the activity in question is attending a restaurant and choosing from the menu, I would have thought that was fairly obvious.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Brixton has been evolving for a century and a half


And long may it continue. But I hope that change won't be characterised only by an influx of bland, overpriced restaurants attempting to cover up their depressing mediocrity by flogging bits of tormented animals. 

Again, you are trying to misrepresent people. Neither I nor Jezza, AK or anyone else has argued that Brixton should be preserved in aspic. A hell of a lot of change is needed. But what is needed is genuine regeneration that benefits all, not just a load of bland, soulless, overpriced culinary and retail offerings. You absolutely refuse to see that, don't you? Yet you happily accuse other people of being intractable.





> So, once again, bring on the abuse...


 I hope you are not suggesting that I am the only person who has directed what you call ''abuse'' at you. Perhaps you have blotted it all out.

My 'sin', for what it's worth, is that I don't believe that nothing can be done to make Brixton a better place in the face of ''market forces'', and I refuse to accept that it should continue to be fobbed off with second/third/fourth rate housing, schools, services or anything else.  Gosh, what a dreadful old Spart/Daily Mail Nimby in disguise  I am!  

Things certainly won't get any better if everyone is cynical and resigned.


----------



## hendo (Jan 15, 2004)

To reply to the last post by BC, what's underlying the critical posts aimed at  Atlantic 66 is the general underlying sense that Brixton is changing in such a way as to exclude people who've been living here.

So inevitably mixed in with this is a hint of class envy and the kind of invective you get from people who feel they are being priced out of their homes and gathering spaces. Reading here, it becomes clear how the freedom of the market can result in other people feeling that their freedoms are being seriously eroded.

People have argued on this thread that A66 is no more than a restaurant, and some of us have wished it well; but in a place undergoing the kind of rapid change Brixton is, its hardly surprising that even this kind of straightforward development is greeted askance by others.

On these forums its even possible to find people arguing against the closure of the prison - a jail condemned even by the authorities that run it -  because it will further change and gentrify the area.

I agree with you that this change is unstoppable, but other people reckon that a degree of locally accountable intervention might help to preserve the character of the area.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> "And the idea of the rich being cruel to animals strikes me as worse, in moral terms, than the poor doing it."
> 
> Mmmm.  Never seen moral relativism in class terms before.


Go to any court in the land and you'll see it 1000 times a day. A judge compares act with intention and applies varying levels of blame accordingly.

And this isn't moral relativism. A Kantian, an existentialist or a utilitarian could apply the same test.


> So, once again, bring on the abuse ... but this time the merest hint of an argument amongst the invective might raise the level of debate just a tad.


Poeple have been very courteous and have provided lots of argument. No one's trying to get at you! Cheer up!


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

I agree with you that this change is unstoppable, but other people reckon that a degree of locally accountable intervention might help to preserve the character of the area.[/QUOTE]

And I wouldn't for a second disagree with them.  Unfettered markets are the road to nihilism.  

But the particular example with which we're dealing is a restaurant and what it has on its menu.  And at least some of the proposed 'solutions' to the problem you have identified could not, in any sense, be termed, 'locally accountable intervention'.  I look forward to urban75'ers contributing in their hundreds to the Urban Development Plan.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> I look forward to urban75'ers contributing in their hundreds to the Urban Development Plan.


I went to a UDP meeting last year and found almost a football team of u75 people there, including a moderator who, from the floor of the meeting, got a major bit of the UDP changed.

Do try and keep up.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> Go to any court in the land and you'll see it 1000 times a day. A judge compares act with intention and applies varying levels of blame accordingly.
> 
> And this isn't moral relativism. A Kantian, an existentialist or a utilitarian could apply the same test.
> 
> ...


----------



## lang rabbie (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC

Welcome -  




			
				Mr BC said:
			
		

> I look forward to urban75'ers contributing in their hundreds to the Urban Development Plan.



It's Unitary Development Plan.   And some of them already are - either directly, through the Brixton Forum or other local community groups.

Search for posts containing UDP in the Forum, and prepare to be bored to tears...


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> Mr BC
> 
> Welcome -
> 
> ...


----------



## hatboy (Jan 15, 2004)

IS said:

"A hell of a lot of change is needed. But what is needed is genuine regeneration that benefits all, not just a load of bland, soulless, overpriced culinary and retail offerings."

Spot on.   

PS sorry I've not been following this closely I was busy contributing to the Unitary Development Plan. (Really).


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Does not your own example - rich person eating goose's liver vs. poor person eating goose's liver and the degree of moral reprehensibility on each, entirely ignore intention?


   I'm quite sure AK has not argued anything of the sort.  You have inferred, absurdly, that AK is arguing that it is relatively all right for the poor to eat foie gras. A total fallacy and a straw man. It has got absolutely nothing to do with the poor eating foie gras! 

It would be like arguing that it is morally better for a weak man to beat his wife than for a strong man to beat his wife. In court, a judge might say to the strong man: "What you have done is even more reprehensible because you are strong." But s/he would never judge the weak man by saying "what you have done is bad but at least you are a weakling".


----------



## hatboy (Jan 15, 2004)

All these "straw men" are making it crowded in here. Time for a new metaphor maybe?


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 15, 2004)

Firstly, what a great thread - I've only been away from it for a few days and there's a riot going on! Thank you people. 

A66 is a sympton of Brixton's gentrification. 10 years ago there wouldn't have been a customer base to support it, but I guess there is now - hence they opened the place. It's a shame it's so bland looking - but there you go. A66 is catering more for what you might call the "new-Brixton" - by this I mean the wealthier people who have moved to Brixton in the past few years, bought houses etc etc. They have more money to spend - therefore the market responds by creating more businesses etc aimed at these people. The reason many of us are against this slow drift is that it squeezes many less-wealthy locals, pushes up property prices, rent prices, even shop prices, dilutes the diversity of the area etc etc - and all the other things we've talked about on this board previously. 

Someone asked how we can resist this "drift". A big driver of gentrification has got to be house prices - there's some decent property in a "hip and happening" area that people want to get their hands on and make some money out of. Now I'm no economist and I'm not sure of the exact details, but I've always wondered why we don't take on something like the French system. Someone may correct me if I'm wrong, but in France they have a tax on any profits made on the sale of a house - it's quite high, 33% I think , maybe even higher. Anyway, the effect of this is to keep house prices fairly stable. If this were the case, perhaps somewhere like Brixton might suffer less from the forces of gentrification?

Someone mentioned "freedom" to do what you want, eat where you want etc. Well yes of course - but freedom is often equated to the free market - and we know that the free market will never produce equality. The "free" market might eventually end up destroying the Brixton we know and love. So although A66 is only a restaurant, and although most of us (me included) have not eaten in the said goose morgue D) , I think a lot of the criticism on this thread is based upon what A66 symbolises, rather than what it actually is.

_Sorry if this is a bit rambling but I've just digested about 200 posts and trying to get my head round it all!   _


----------



## average joe (Jan 15, 2004)

"A hell of a lot of change is needed. But what is needed is genuine regeneration that benefits all, not just a load of bland, soulless, overpriced culinary and retail offerings."

Just out of interest (and not wanting to get my head ripped off!), what changes do you think these should be IntoStella? I can't think of anything that would benefit EVERYONE, thats why there are loads of shops etc that sell different things to different people. And restaurants are just another facet of this.

I'd be interested to hear your opinions on what you think Brixton needs that it doesn't have that would benefit everyone...


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 15, 2004)

Atlantic66: I've only heard good things about it by people who've been there. It's multi-ethnic: owned or managed by an Irishman and a Dane, the waiting staff are (at least in part) French. The design is uninspiring, but that's because they are interested in food, not interior design. Main course are around 10 pounds. Huff and puff all you like, but this is by no means the most expensive place to eat in Brixton.

The waiting staff were friendly and polite, the food was great and unpretentious, the prices were high-medium. (And there *is* seared foie gras on the menu, geesepeople.)

Gentrification: Check the Acorn on UpMyStreet.com. SW9 8 is already "Type 24: Partially Gentrified Multi-Ethnic Areas"

http://www.upmystreet.com/overview/?l1=sw9+8py


----------



## tarannau (Jan 15, 2004)

Nice post hatters (the beardy Brixton hatter that is)

I've been on this thread too long perhaps, but I still feel we're going round in circles.

The fact remains that I still think that A66 is being unfairly judged. Average Joe's got a point - what the hell would we consider to be a genuine 'working class' shop that could a) improve the neighbourhood, b) not cannibalise existing business and c)become successful

From what I've seen. A66 is reasonably enough priced (it looks cheaper than SW9 or the Brixtonian for example, both of which are far more yuppie if you ask me), the guy who's running it is apparently a long-term local who's always wanted his own restaurant here , it's replaced a vacant shop and it's tried to offer discounts and a spread of affordable food where possible. All fairly creditable if you ask me. 

I think the menu is over-ambitious and a little unattractive. And I think the design is a bland old dogs dinner of Ikea-light furnishings. But I think that's more likely to do with a safety first approach and lack of budget than any deliberate intention. It's much easier to be daring and individual when you've the money and confidence. 

I do feel as though some people have got on their favourite high horses at the mere mention of a new restaurant. Alhough, admittedly, they haven't helped their cause with Foie Gras, I'm still inclined to give any small business a try where possible. Rather them than another chain product.

I'm slightly uncomfortable about people judging what they consider to be an acceptable business in Brixton. Is that overpriced (but nice) Boca deli too much for example, what about SW9 and their ridiculously costly Bloody Marys, and should we really have Tim 'Tory-Boy' (fuck the little brewer) Wetherspoon's operation right on the high street? Who chooses?

And restaurants and eating out are not necessarily a sign of gentrification. Perhaps restuarants and eateries have just been under-represented in Brixton in the past, particularly given the strong food culture of many of its inhabitants. After all, Streatham has far more equivalently priced restaurants ... and I don't see that scrubby high street strip as anymore gentrified...


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

average joe said:
			
		

> Just out of interest (and not wanting to get my head ripped off!), what changes do you think these should be IntoStella? I can't think of anything that would benefit EVERYONE, thats why there are loads of shops etc that sell different things to different people. And restaurants are just another facet of this.


 As I actually said, I was referring to improved provision of schools, housing, healthcare and the like, not shops. There. Head still on?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> I do feel as though some people have got on their favourite high horses at the mere mention of a new restaurant.


As opposed to getting on their high horses about their poor old mum and dad being oppressed by the evil Sparts? 





> should we really have Tim 'Tory-Boy' (fuck the little brewer) Wetherspoon's operation right on the high street?


The beehive always has a large selection of ales produced by "little brewers'' and very good they are too. I'm sure these ''little brewer's" sales would suffer dramatically if they weren't being distributed by Wetherspoons up and down the land. It is also the cheapest, most truly ethnically mixed pub in Brixton.





> After all, Streatham has far more equivalently priced restaurants ... and I don't see that scrubby high street strip as anymore gentrified...


This is the absolute crux of the problem.

You are making the fundamental error of equating ''gentrified'' with ''nice". This is what I, AK, Jezza and others have been arguing ALL ALONG. *Gentrification does not turn places into Hampstead. It turns them into dreary, soulless shitholes like Streatham and Hammersmith. *


----------



## tarannau (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> As I actually said, I was referring to improved provision of schools, housing, healthcare and the like, not shops. There. Head still on?



Yep, but that's not really a fair comparison is it?

If Atlantic 66 shuts down tomorrow, it's not going to turn into a small hospital or school is it. And making it into a housing would further break up Atlantic Road and make it less of a commercial, bustling road. 

On the plus point, if Atlantic 66 succeeds, it could pump some money that could benefit local services. They could even be a good employer. Who knows?

Give it a chance eh. I'm going to bite my tongue about the shitty decor and step in there to eat one time.

I whole-hearted reserve the right to change my opinion on the place if they poison me...


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> It turns them into dreary, soulless shitholes like Streatham and Hammersmith. [/b]



Has Streatham been gentrified? They seemed to have made a hash of it if that is the case.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> I'm quite sure AK has not argued anything of the sort.  You have inferred, absurdly, that AK is arguing that it is relatively all right for the poor to eat foie gras. A total fallacy and a straw man. It has got absolutely nothing to do with the poor eating foie gras!"
> 
> 
> Erm, well what's this quotation then?  A straw man?  Erm no, I think it's Anna arguing precisely the point I was refuting.
> ...


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 15, 2004)

*Rousseau Lives!*




			
				tarannau said:
			
		

> I'm slightly uncomfortable about people judging what they consider to be an acceptable business in Brixton....  Who chooses?


I think that's the most interesting theme on this thread, and it clearly exercised Mr BC, Red Jezza and others.

The standard Conservative/New Labour/End of History answer is: 'the market chooses.' End of story. There's no such thing as society. Just individuals, families and wallets. And it's the wallets wot matter.

But who really, except for a few loopy Brixton businessmen, advocate Rule by Wallet? Even the UDP process is grounded on the idea that the market is not the only consideration when developing a built environment.

So people say: 'Yes we'll permit that development. But not that one.' Individuals and businesses get dictated to by the political process. They're told what to do. I think that's fine, given the alternative.

But what exactly is this 'political process' thingy, the main rival to Rule by Wallet? It's people organising themselves, with their friends and their neighbours - on bulletin boards like this, in neighbourhood groups, in political parties, at UDP meetings - and arguing their corner.

That's who chooses. It's a sort of local General Will. Rousseau Lives! And if you don't go through this process the wallets take over. It's that simple. But if you organise well you'll always beat the wallets. 

Economics is the servant of politics, not the other way round. If you lose you're simply not organising well enough so, in a sense, deserve to lose.

Here endeth the lesson.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 15, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> The standard Conservative/New Labour/End of History answer is: 'the market chooses.'


 Well A66 will handy for them. Just round the corner.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 15, 2004)

Here we go again Stella. More selective misquoting. Where did I ever say you were 'oppressing' my parents. Bollocks. 

On the other hand, I did question who you were to prescribe where my parents or I can eat. I'll stick by that. Particularly when you've never eaten in Atlantic 66 and seem to be basing your <stock issue> gentrification outrage based on one ill-judged menu item. 

I admire your commitment, and you know - from past experiece - that I'll fight away against gentrification where I think it's justified. This is my home too; has been for near 30 years, and I love the place.

But I can't agree with your hair-trigger reaction to a restaurant that's barely opened. Give it a fair go. It's like reverse snobbery: different thread, same song. 

Sorry...


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 15, 2004)

> _originally posted by Mr BC_
> Or suggest forcing said business to close down because they sell something (perfectly legal) the methods of production of which, they happen to disagree?


 The production of Foie Gras is ILLEGAL in this country. It's legal to eat it here though.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 15, 2004)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> The production of Foie Gras is ILLEGAL in this country. It's legal to eat it here though.


Sounds rather like the prostitution laws.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> IntoStella said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 15, 2004)

It's illegal to make prostitutes, but it's legal to eat them?


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 15, 2004)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> It's illegal to make prostitutes, but it's legal to eat them?


That's the one!


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Streatham -- yes, of course it has been gentrified. And that is what happens when market forces are allowed to run amok instead of socially responsible planning. You get a dungheap.


Shit - what was it like before? 
It doesn't seem like a typically gentrified place to me - not like Clapham or Bethnal Green - it's still got a pretty mixed social make-up. But I bow to your superior knowledge about what makes a gentrified neoghbourhood.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Yes, but you inferred, mistakenly, -- or otherwise set up a straw man -- that AK was saying the poor being cruel to animals (ie eating foie gras) was, therefore,  acceptable. That isn't at all what he was saying."
> 
> For fuck's sake.  That wasn't what I was saying at all.
> 
> ...


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Shit - what was it like before?
> It doesn't seem like a typically gentrified place to me - not like Clapham or Bethnal Green - it's still got a pretty mixed social make-up. But I bow to your superior knowledge about what makes a gentrified neoghbourhood.


 Don't be snide, OU.   No, all those restaurants, new pubs, cappuccino  bars, dreary chain stores and the like weren't always there.  You seem to be clinging to the idea that gentrification must mean making a place nice and therefore, if a place is turned to shit, what has happened to it isn't gentrification but something else. It's pointless arguing with you if you won't believe the evidence of your own eyes and can only make cheap digs instead. 

Bethnal Green is gentrified? My god! I haven't been there for years. It certainly wasn't gentrified when I lived in Whitechapel. It was a bit rough but had a character all its own.  I dread to think...


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 15, 2004)

I've just realised I probably know one of the blokes running this eatery and suspect he won't mind this thread at all. Good free publicity for his place, with even Le Rayner getting involved.

And he can't really moan with any credence about the goose-torturer accusations. As Mrs M pointed out he's offering for sale a prescribed substance.

I bet he's having a good old laugh...


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> For fuck's sake.  That wasn't what I was saying at all.
> ...I know paying attention to the subtletly of an argument is dull, but doing so makes intelligent discourse much more rewarding...
> Do you specialise it misrepresenting other people's views?


Calm down, for god's sake, and don't be so patronising. You were attempting to undermine AK's argument by fixating on the idea that the poor eating foie gras is more acceptable, when it is_ absolutely irrelevant_.  I made it very clear what I meant with a very clear analogy which I can only assume _you_ failed to grasp.

As for misrepresenting other people's views, I obviously have a good few lessons to learn from you as that is precisely what you have been doing to me, to AK and to others.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> I think that's the most interesting theme on this thread, and it clearly exercised Mr BC, Red Jezza and others.
> 
> The standard Conservative/New Labour/End of History answer is: 'the market chooses.' End of story. There's no such thing as society. Just individuals, families and wallets. And it's the wallets wot matter.
> 
> ...




I could not agree more ... and thank God Rousseau lives [now there's a phrase to conjure with].


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Calm down, for god's sake, and don't be so patronising. You were attempting to undermine AK's argument by fixating on the idea that the poor eating foie gras is more acceptable, when it is_ absolutely irrelevant_.  I made it very clear what I meant with a very clear analogy which I can only assume _you_ failed to grasp.
> 
> As for misrepresenting other people's views, I obviously have a good few lessons to learn from you as that is precisely what you have been doing to me, to AK and to others.



I have to say that I do feel that I have been striving, at very (probably too) considerable length, not to misrepresent other people's views. 

I was not 'fixating' upon one point of Anna's argument to refute the whole.  That would, indeed, be intellectually dishonest.  If you read what I said, you will see that I explained at length what my broad point was and, subsequently, entered into a separate debate about a particular moral theory presented by Anna in her poor vs. rich quotation.


----------



## hendo (Jan 15, 2004)

So....what are the key areas of disagreement involving geese, people of different incomes and Brixton? I only ask because I've completely lost track.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 15, 2004)

hendo said:
			
		

> So....what are the key areas of disagreement involving geese, people of different incomes and Brixton? I only ask because I've completely lost track.


 Until Atlantic66 post their wine list on line, no-one will know if they offer a fine Sauternes or Montbazillac to complement their seared foie gras. This is surely part of the problem.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

*Rofl :d*

Just had a look at their website in the hope that there might be a menu revealing how much Animaltorture666 charge for foie gras. But there is very little info on there apart from this absolutely priceless phrase: 





> a la carte dining and a la bar drinking.


 Not even the muppet Merrett would be _that_  pretentious. LOL 

I shall be trying this out tonight. "Where is Anna Key? He is à la bar. Comme bloody toujours!"


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

"a la carte dining and a la bar drinking."

Forget the foie gras, surely this is the real crime?

Clearly wankers and not worthy of all the (billable) hours I've wasted in their defence.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Don't be snide, OU.   No, all those restaurants, new pubs, cappuccino  bars, dreary chain stores and the like weren't always there.  You seem to be clinging to the idea that gentrification must mean making a place nice and therefore, if a place is turned to shit, what has happened to it isn't gentrification but something else. It's pointless arguing with you if you won't believe the evidence of your own eyes and can only make cheap digs instead.
> 
> Bethnal Green is gentrified? My god! I haven't been there for years. It certainly wasn't gentrified when I lived in Whitechapel. It was a bit rough but had a character all its own.  I dread to think...



I wasn't being snide - that was an honest statement - I don't know much about gentrification and am jhappy to be enlightened - I lived in Streatham for three years and the only evidence of what I saw to be gentrification I saw was the ridiculously named Waterfront wine bar. I must have got there after it happened. Mind you the chainstores looke like they had been there for years and I never saw any cappucino bars, just greasy spoons. Plenty of shitty pubs though.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> "a la carte dining and a la bar drinking."
> 
> Forget the foie gras, surely this is the real crime?
> 
> Clearly wankers and not worthy of all the (billable) hours I've wasted in their defence.


 You really don't have a sense of humour, do you?


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> You really don't have a sense of humour, do you?



Take a chill pill.

I was agreeing with you.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> I wasn't being snide


What, not even the ''I bow to your superior knowlege'' bit? 
 

I really shouldn't have to spell this out because it is so very obvious. Gentrification doesn't mean that absolutely everybody in an area becomes a Stepford yuppie clone. What it means is that poorer people in the area get a raw deal. There is absolutely nothing in it for them. If you're living on 50 quid a week then your quality of life is in no way improved by being able to walk past an expensive restaurant selling foie gras. And if it was previously a greasy spoon, for the sake of argument, then your quality of life is arguably diminished because it's one less place where you can afford to eat. 

For the record, there are now several cappuccino bars on Streatham High Road -- more than there are greasy spoons. And lots of estate agents.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Take a chill pill.
> 
> I was agreeing with you.


  Where is the "I'm being serious'' smiley?


----------



## lang rabbie (Jan 15, 2004)

*Help I'm having a mid-eighties moment.*




			
				Anna Key said:
			
		

> But what exactly is this 'political process' thingy, the main rival to Rule by Wallet? It's people organising themselves, with their friends and their neighbours - on bulletin boards like this, in neighbourhood groups, in political parties, at UDP meetings - and arguing their corner.
> 
> That's who chooses. *It's a sort of local General Will. Rousseau Lives!*
> ...
> Here endeth the lesson.



Up to a point, Anna

Oh my god - it all came horribly back to me after eighteen years.  Reading the Social Contract and then arguing whether the General Will was a totalitarian concept in a seminar room with libertarian Young Conservatives, interesting Trots, and brain-dead ULS types.  

I'd forgotten the wonderful footnote, which could be recycled by several regular posters in the Brixton Forum:

_"Attentive readers, do not, I pray, be in a hurry to charge me with contradicting myself. The terminology made it unavoidable, considering the poverty of the language; but wait and see."_


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> What, not even the ''I bow to your superior knowlege'' bit?


Yes, even that - it seems to be your (and Anna's) specialisation.



			
				IntoStella said:
			
		

> I really shouldn't have to spell this out because it is so very obvious.



Not so obvious to me. I have only just moved to an area where it seems beneficial to be interested in the goings-on and welfare of the community. Forgive me for not being as knowledgeable as you but there is sometimes not much incentive to learn when you are constantly being patronised and lectured at.


----------



## lang rabbie (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> *Gentrification does not turn places into Hampstead. It turns them into dreary, soulless shitholes like Streatham and Hammersmith. *



The economic forces which led to the current mix of shops, bars and restaurants in both locations has precious little to do with "gentrification" as understood by any sociologist or urban geographer and a lot more to do with the move to the dual-earner family/"decline of the housewife", increased car ownership, rise of supermarkets, and the establishment of outer london centres for comparison shopping.

And your name-calling in describing Streatham as a shit-hole is pathetic.   
All those I've met who are currently attempting to regenerate Streatham have recognised that they need to stress the symbiotic relationship of Streatham and Brixton in providing services for those living along the A23 corridor (including the "Brixton diapora"), rather than seeing a zero sum game.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Or suggest forcing said business to close down because they sell something (perfectly legal).






			
				tarannau said:
			
		

> I did question who you were to prescribe where my parents or I can eat.


 Sorry to backtrack but I just want to clear something up here. I have NEVER said this restaurant should be closed down and I have NEVER prescribed where anyone can eat. And yet you have both, Tarannau and Mr BC, accused _me_ of misrepresenting your arguments. 

The position I have taken is this:

Bland, mediocre-looking, expensive restaurant in still largely poor area selling extremely costly tortured animal product = shit. In my view. 

That is my opinion and you are entitled to it!   Seriously, don’t put words other people’s mouths and then be outraged if it happens to you.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> And your name-calling in describing Streatham as a shit-hole is pathetic.


Oh I'm oppressing Streatham now, am I? Dear _God_.   

The main drag IS a shithole, whether you like it or not. Christ, I'm not trying to alienate Streathamites and I'm sure most would agree with me. It is a dirty, depressing wind tunnel with a bad reputation for violent crime. Worse, I'd wager, than Brixton. There always seem to be incident boards up for particularly vicious assaults by multiple perpetrators.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 15, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Oh I'm oppressing Streatham now, am I? Dear _God_.
> 
> The main drag IS a shithole, whether you like it or not. Christ, I'm not trying to alienate Streathamites and I'm sure most would agree with me. It is a dirty, depressing wind tunnel with a bad reputation for violent crime. Worse, I'd wager, than Brixton. There always seem to be incident boards up for particularly vicious assaults by multiple perpetrators.




Streatham High Street was recently voted worst street in Britain by The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment.


----------



## moyeen (Jan 15, 2004)

This is a very interesting thread and I've enjoyed reading the excellent contributions. A few things have struck me about this:

i)  We all agree that Brixton is a very special place and its mixed community is fragile and wonderful thing;

ii)  A66 is a totemic issue - it represents something that some people are fighting against namely the "development" of the area without due regard to the "needs" of the "exisitng" residents - whatever each of the words in quotations might mean.  

iii)  Urban areas by definition are dynamic - there's a changing cast of characters and people.  Brixton in 10 years time will be very different to how it is now and how it was 10 years ago.  Whether that is a good or a bad thing is a relative value judgement.  But surely that's the genius of living in a city?  If you wanted things to always be the same wouldn't you go an live in the country or something? 

The real issue here is surely the one about regeneration in an inclusive sense?  It should not only be for the benefit of the midddle class property owners who have cashed in on the boom of the late 1990s (that would be me, by the way, and I won't apologise for being able to buy a house - and I'm a public sector worker before anyone accuses me of being a stockbroking, goose liver addicted baby-eater!)

Earlier in the thread there was the  evidence quoted from an academic (Tim Butler?) who said that the middle class fail to engage withtheir local surroundings and keep to themselves.  To be honest isn't that true of almost any group of people?  

The arrival of the middle classes should ideally force an  improvement in the local area  - better policing, better schools, better resources etc.  This will benefit everyone but the coucil have failed to deliver.  However, given the burden that the coucil are under already on already just where are they going to conjour a quality secondary school from?  

I really don't think that thre is asimple answer to any of this.  The renewal/gentrification/yuppie-isation of urban areas is an inevitable consequence of living in a city.  All we can do is try to make sure that the fall out isn't too bad and make sure that the benefits fo it are shared by as many as possible.  There will be some losers but that's the price we are seemingly happy to pay collectively as a society.


Moyeen


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 15, 2004)

Excellent post,  Moyeen.    

I would agree that the main problem is arguably the council's failure to deliver the necessary services and infrastructure and, I would add, to properly regulate planning. 

Orang -- I'd forgotten about CABE's verdict on Streatham.  The point is, to bring about regeneration it is -- obviously -- necessary to acknowledge that it is needed: and it certainly is on Streatham High Road. I'm baffled by Lang Rabbie's reaction, though I'm sure he will explain presently.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 15, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> IS said:
> 
> "A hell of a lot of change is needed. But what is needed is genuine regeneration that benefits all, not just a load of bland, soulless, overpriced culinary and retail offerings."
> 
> ...


any UDP that is meant for Brixton can, in my IMO, only be enhanced by your and other U75ers input! 
and that ain't brownnosing. i think the point Mr BC missed is that we NEED the involvement of those who believe the community's needs are more important than the arbitrary application of market forces.


----------



## Bob (Jan 15, 2004)

moyeen said:
			
		

> Earlier in the thread there was the  evidence quoted from an academic (Tim Butler?) who said that the middle class fail to engage withtheir local surroundings and keep to themselves.  To be honest isn't that true of almost any group of people?
> Moyeen



I think the evidence might be because what sometimes happens is that council tenants will, over a length of time either exercise right to buy and then move out of the area (the guys living in my flat before me did this and moved to the suburbs) or because the council stops providing housing in the borough in one way or another (as Westminster spectacularly did in the 1980s with their gerrymandering and Wandsworth are doing now by housing homeless families outside the borough). This means that families with kids leave the area and tend to be replaced by young professionals. Young people of any sort tend to be much less involved in community life than older people because a) they're so busy having a social life and b) if you're older you have much more of a long term stake in a community (for instance the state of the local school your kids go to is very important to you). Hence I think it's much more to do with the age structure of the community than anything else - and sometimes this means that young middle class people moving in does change the community. 

It doesn't strike me as obvious though that the middle class bits of my community are less active than the estates - just that they are active on different issues.

Happy new year to everyone, Bob.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 16, 2004)

Jezza said: "and that ain't brownnosing".  

Don't worry about it, I only do that type of thing with people I'm really close to.  

Thanks tho.


----------



## Ms T (Jan 16, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> I'm not sure what it's like now, but once upon a time Battersea Arts Centre offered all those things.  It was a cheap, accessible, run down space in a tatty old town hall where all sorts of initiatives had space to grow.  Now I read the artistic director is to become head honcho at the National Theatre.  I've no real idea what he's like, or what he's done, but they don't come much poncier than the National.  I'm sure _you_ see
> 
> 
> 
> > Not true.  Over the summer we went to see two things at the National for only a tenner, and when they did research into the initiative, they found that around fifty percent of people buying those tickets had never been to the National theatre before.  Surely that's a positive blow for widening access to the arts?


----------



## Ms T (Jan 16, 2004)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> ......or Salford.........swathes of empty property there, street upon street of 'bijou period properties with masses of potential'




And two brand new museums to boot.  There is evidence that the government is trying to encourage people out of London, but if people want to live here, who are we to stop them?  We live here, after all...


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 16, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> i think the point Mr BC missed is that we NEED the involvement of those who believe the community's needs are more important than the arbitrary application of market forces.


I thought he was slightly confused. On the one hand he railed against folks commenting on Atlantic666. On the other he welcomed active citizenship (to use the dreadful Blair language).

So I don'tunderstand where he's coming from. 

Is there really a problem? What's wrong with expressing concern about (a) gentrification and (b) animal cruelty in your own local area? 

As Mrs Magpie pointed out, the latter involves the sale of a product which is illegal to produce in this country due to animal cruelty concerns.

Are we all meant to sit at home and watch telly, leaving the gentrifiers and animal tormentors to get on with it?


----------



## Ms T (Jan 16, 2004)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> A big driver of gentrification has got to be house prices - there's some decent property in a "hip and happening" area that people want to get their hands on and make some money out of. Now I'm no economist and I'm not sure of the exact details, but I've always wondered why we don't take on something like the French system. Someone may correct me if I'm wrong, but in France they have a tax on any profits made on the sale of a house - it's quite high, 33% I think , maybe even higher. Anyway, the effect of this is to keep house prices fairly stable. If this were the case, perhaps somewhere like Brixton might suffer less from the forces of gentrification?
> 
> [/I]




I don't want to make money out of living in Brixton -- I just want to live here!  (And for what it's worth I'm not a stockbroker, I work in the public sector).  I don't think that speculating on the property market is particularly beneficial for anybody, because it leads to the spiralling prices we have experienced in recent years, but unfortunately the idea of home-ownership is so firmly entrenched in this country that any attempt to tax it heavily would inevitably meet with electoral defeat.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 16, 2004)

> Sorry to backtrack but I just want to clear something up here. I have NEVER said this restaurant should be closed down and I have NEVER prescribed where anyone can eat. And yet you have both, Tarannau and Mr BC, accused me of misrepresenting your arguments



Ah, so all those passionate anti-gentrification arguments and anti foie-gras rants were entirely unrelated to Atlantic 66. You clearly didn't stereotype what sort of place A66 might be, or to whom you thought the place would appeal to on this thread.  No sense of leading moral superiority or outrage about your posts at all. 

So sorry that many of us misrepresented your arguments. It must be a bummer to be so misunderstood; so much like Tony Blair. I'll make sure only to check on the nit-picking totality of your posts next time, not on the tone or mood.
 

So has anyone eaten at Atlantic 66 then? Was looking surprisingly busy when I went past last night. 

And I'm still waiting to find out why some folks regard this place as so expensive, despite the menu looking more than comparable with exisiting businesses. Or is just an easy target, attracting criticism through bland and unchallenging design? Does it look too middle class for ya?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> Ah, so all those passionate anti-gentrification arguments and anti foie-gras rants were entirely unrelated to Atlantic 66. You clearly didn''t stereotype what sort of place A66 might be, or who you thought the place would appeal to on this thread.  No sense of leading moral superiority or outrage about your posts at all.


 Why don't you read the thread properly, including the many posters who agree with me but whom you haven't singled out for your stream of vitriol and stop being a) Deliberately thick and b) nasty. You decided, for  your own personal  reasons,  to infer that I was trying to tell your parents where they could or couldn't eat. This is a ridiculous assumption. The debate has moved on. Move on with it. We all know you fancy yourself as a budding food critic from your previous unsolicited reviews of various restuarants, but don't single me out for abuse just because you want to show off to Jay Rayner.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 16, 2004)

_"The arrival of the middle classes should ideally force an improvement in the local area - better policing, better schools, better resources etc. This will benefit everyone but the coucil have failed to deliver. However, given the burden that the coucil are under already on already just where are they going to conjour a quality secondary school from? "_
Ideally, a local council would try to improve these services *regardless* of whether the middle classes "arrive" in a local area.


----------



## Pie 1 (Jan 16, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Calm down, for god's sake, and don't be so patronising


..............


----------



## average joe (Jan 16, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Why don't you read the thread properly, including the many posters who agree with me but whom you haven't singled out for your stream of vitriol and stop being a) Deliberately thick and b) nasty.
> 
> Um....IS. I think your reponse to this comment highlights that you yourself seem to respond to any form of criticism in the manner that you are asking posters not to do to you.
> 
> ...


----------



## hatboy (Jan 16, 2004)

I dunno, sometimes Tarranau your attitudes are so "reasonable" that you sound very new-Labour-spin.  Do you consider youself a middle-of-the-road person?

Now you respond with a well argued, reasonable reply that logically but politely points out the weakness of my comments.

See what I mean?      {And happy birthday you "reasonable" damn person, you! x }


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> ..............


Funny how every time intelligent people like Brixton Hatter and Moyeen come on and make valuable contributions, there is a flurry of snide personal attacks from the Save Our Foie Gras Brigade. If you haven't  got anything worth saying to contribute then _please_ go away.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 16, 2004)

So let me get this straight. The debate has moved on because it you decide it has has. And we should 'go away' if we've nothing that you consider worth discussing.

This from the 'sorry to backtrack' woman who just had to have the last word by selectively quoting me and dragging the discussion backwards.

Like you, I can't let that one lie. What incredible arrogance. And we're meant to disregard the obvious tone of disapproval and moral superiority in your posts - no wonder more than a few are calling you patronising!

I'm still waiting for some kind of justification for why you've singled out A66 as particularly expensive, when the evidence simply isn't there. I'm also still waiting for you, in any way, to back up your belief that A66 has impacted the 'provision of schools, housing, healthcare' or suggest what you'd have in its place.

I couldn't give a toss if Jay Rayner reads my posts or not. Frankly, I guess he won't bother to look back at this place. He's probably pissed off with your patronising rudeness, your tiresome moral posturing and the simple fact that this thread has gone off at a tangent to another standard issue circular gentrification argument. I wonder how many other potential posters are put off that way. 

Want to talk about the restaurant? Fine? But this reactionary guff against pretty much any development in Brixton, without the full facts (hell, it's easy to write off a place you haven't been to) is getting more than a little tiresome.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

average joe said:
			
		

> Um....IS. I think your reponse to this comment highlights that you yourself seem to respond to any form of criticism in the manner that you are asking posters not to do to you.


I would very much like this to be a reasoned and thoughtful discussion without underhand personal attacks _from anybody_. Is that unacceptable? 





> The only problem though is that you seem to adopt a viewpoint which is 'I don't like it, therefore it is wrong', which means that through your argument not only do you deny all the other posters the decency to validate their points and posts, but also deny them the courtesy of free will in an open forum.


This just isn't true. My opinion is that Atlantic66 is bland and expensive and that foie gras is barbaric. What on earth is wrong with me holding that view? I have not denied anyone else their right to speak. I have simply put forward my own convictions and anyone is free to argue with  them. If they do that by resorting to personal attacks because they haven't got a coherent counter-argument then I think that is pretty crap. 





> There is no answer, and there probably never will be - unless you are the person with the pen (who can sign the lease, cheque, receipt whatever it is), your opinions, and mine are exactly that - opinions.


No, I don't agree with this. You don't need to have your hand on the chequebook to make a difference. That is the point of democracy.





> So, please IS, just because it is something that you don't agree with, whether it be foie gras, housing, schools or anything, it doesn't automatically mean that you are right. It doesn't mean anyone else here is right either, but at least let people exercise their thoughts and opinions without trashing their points because they don't match yours.


 It may not be your kettle of fish but there is absolutely nothing wrong with having a political discussion. I have taken a huge amount of stick -- a lot of it personal -- for holding certain convictions, none of which are unusual or particularly extreme. I'm sick of posters being really crappy and then crying to mummy when they get picked up over it.  If I get stick I will give it back. If people want to have a reasonable discussion then that is infinitely  preferable.

And I'm sick of people putting words in my mouth -- ie because I said there are things about A66 that I think are shit, it certainly doesn't mean that I called for it to be closed down or for people to only eat where I say they can. 

Personally I would rather go to the Lounge, which is cheaper, much nicer and doesn't sell foie gras. That is my personal preference. If anyone thinks that means I am ordering them to follow suit then they are deluded.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> I'm still waiting for some kind of justification for why you've singled out A66 as particularly expensive,


Over 4 quid for scrambled eggs on toast. Unless the eggs came from the Golden Goose, perhaps. Assuming they didn't force feed it and rip its liver out. 





> I'm also still waiting for you, in any way, to back up your belief that A66 has impacted the 'provision of schools, housing, healthcare' or suggest what you'd have in its place.


Of course a single restaurant doesn't  have a quantifiable impact on these things, but it is part of a trend. You know that perfectly well. 





> I couldn't give a toss if Jay Rayner reads my posts or not. Frankly, I guess he won't bother to look back at this place. He's probably pissed off with your patronising rudeness, your tiresome moral posturing.. [blah blah]


In fact, he said he had thoroughly enjoyed himself and he invited me to dinner. is that what all this vitriol is about? jealous? 





> and the simple fact that this thread has gone off at a tangent to another standard issue circular gentrification argument.


 Gentrification was central to the discussion from the start. Don't be so dishonest.  The whole point was: what do people think about this place for hip and trendy discerning businessmen opening up on Altantic road?





> I wonder how many other potential posters are put off that way.


I wonder how many are put off by your torrents of spiteful abuse. 

Anyway, I can't be doing with this. I have better things to do than take streams of shit from you. YOU have derailed the thread and behaved like a total prick to boot.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 16, 2004)

I've had a disagreement with one poster on this thread, namely you.  I've outlined the reasons why I think we should return to discussing the specific restaurant (and the regeneration of this part of Atlantic Road) and stop trading in generalised and reactionary positions against gentrification.

On the other hand, you've been argumentative, often downright rude and by turns patronising to more posters on this thread than I can be bothered to go back and count.  

Yet you still consider me to be the disruptive one on this thread. Quite remarkable.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 16, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> I thought he [Mr BC] was slightly confused. On the one hand he railed against folks commenting on Atlantic666. On the other he welcomed active citizenship (to use the dreadful Blair language).
> 
> So I don'tunderstand where he's coming from.
> 
> ...



Beg to differ I am confused.  Will freely own up to not expressing myself as clearly as I might though!

I wasn't railing against people 'commenting' on Atlantic666, I was responding to some of the more extreme reactions to what was perceived to be the problem.  Might we call it the militant anti-gentrification argument?  My point was that the solutions suggested were worse than the problems, because of the erosion of freedom they necessarily involved.

I think you would have to accept Anna that it is a little disingenuous to say that I was objecting to people 'expressing concern'.  It was some of the practical steps being advocated I objected to.  

Nothing against free speech and peaceful campaigning (against foie gras, for example).  But also nothing against people selling foie gras, so long as its sale remains lawful.  

I do still have difficulties in seeing how one campaigns 'against' gentrification though without campaigning against some people who are now part of the community?  Despite IS's best efforts, I'm still confused as to what 'gentrification' is or how to spot a getrifier or even the gentrified [yeah, yeah, I know someone will suggest I look in the mirror].  The whole concept does seem a little intellectually loose.  I don't mean that insultingly, before soneone leaps down my throat.  I really am interested in understanding more about what some people think is the problem.    

As for 'active citzenship', although I, like you, abhor Blair-speak, that's precisely what I believe in.

[I hope this argument isn't turning into one of those ones one has when drunk - start off all guns blazing, gradually get drunker and drunker before concluding were in complete agreement all along.]


----------



## Pie 1 (Jan 16, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> If you haven't  got anything worth saying to contribute then _please_ go away.



Errr No.
Last time I checked this was a 
_public_ forum. I believe that I choose if I contribute, not you. And I'm choosing not to because of the patronising, swivel eyed, dismisals that you seem to think is your right to dole out to all who dare to oppose your opinions.
And please show me where I said  _anything_ to puseude you that I was Pro fois gras - apart from saying that Jay Rayner was OK? 
No I didn't did I. Please retract your assumption that I agree with fois gras.

<sits back and waits, with no aticipation, for the inevitable spray of condesending personal abuse   >


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> I've had a disagreement with one poster on this thread, namely you.  I've outlined the reasons why I think we should return to discussing the specific restaurant (and the regeneration of this part of Atlantic Road) and stop trading in generalised and reactionary positions against gentrification.


Well why don't you sodding well go and find out what it's like then?   

You are every bit as guilty of indulging in uninformed, circular arguments as anyone else. Also, you got discount vouchers, unlike residents of the less salubrious neighbouring streets, it seems (funny that  ), so at least you won't have to pay the full whack -- which certainly appears to be over-inflated from the menu.  

Is over 4 quid a reasonable price to pay for a bog standard plate of scrambled egg? I certainly don't think so. I and won't be ''A' la bar drinking" in there either.  

Your claim to be against gentrification (where YOU think appropriate) looks a bit hollow when you launch vicious personal attacks on people for daring to discuss the issue. As I said, it is a central issue surrounding this restaurant because of where it is, what it offers, what it charges and who it is aiming to get through its door and scoffing foie gras. Why do you blindly refuse to acknowledge that? I find your tone highly self-righteous and patronising too, as it goes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 16, 2004)

Can you please post evidence of these 'vicious personal attacks'? I can't recall any.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

Pie 1 said:
			
		

> And please show me where I said  _anything_ to puseude you that I was Pro fois gras - apart from saying that Jay Rayner was OK?
> No I didn't did I. Please retract your assumption that I agree with fois gras.


 If you put forward your position  honestly instead of popping in for the occasional snide little dig then there would be no misunderstandings, would there? What is your position on this? Do you have one?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Can you please post evidence of these 'vicious personal attacks'? I can't recall any.


 That's very convenient.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 16, 2004)

So I got discount vouchers. Big woo hoo - I guess they shovelled a few through nearby doors (I'm less than 10 doors away). Hardly exclusive - they were giving the same coupons outside the tube station for a few days. 

As for pricing. Why aren't you equally abrupt about the Brixtonian. Or come to think of it, next time I see you in the equally expensive SW9 I'll make a point of isolating more than a few over-priced items on their menu to make the same point. Yuppie gentrifier.

Daring to discuss the gentrification issue eh! Now there's a laugh - you believe there's some inherent courage in repeating the same same anti-gentrification generalisation on yet another thread. Do you believe I'll be attacked by renegade yuppies and property developers if I speak out. What next - the perils of repeatedly talking about the IWCA?!?

And you really think I don't care about the effect of a restaurant on the end of my road? What I'm simply asking is , that given it was just another derelict shop, what you think it should have been instead? No answers yet, although you seem to cling onto the dogmatic belief that it could be housing, medical or educational facilities - all of which seem unsuited to such a commercial site. Your argument seems to be that basically that you don't like the look of the restaurant - therefore it's evidence of unwanted gentrification for all of us. I believe there space for all - Brixton's got a great reputation for tolerating difference and variety. Shame you don't seem to share that in this case. 

I've seen no evidence of door policy at A66 as yet; in fact I've seen one of Brixton's grottiest characters in there on opening night. They're claiming to try and cater for the whole range of Brixton folks in their promotional bumph, not just the businessmen you've highlighted. Time will tell if that's the case, but I'm not willing to count a place out on hearsay and shoe-horned political principles.


----------



## moyeen (Jan 16, 2004)

Hmmmm, look like this is all getting a bit heated and personal!  You kiddies should learn how to play nicely with each other.  

One of the things I really like about living in Brixton is the mix of people.  I grew up in the suburbs of north London (please don't tell anyone!) .  Everyone had the same cars, same houses, washed the cars on Sunday and mowed the lawns on a Saturday - you know the drill!  It's a pretty typical upbringing which is familiar to more than a few of you, I suspect!

Imagine Brixton - loads of people, all different, the mad market with all kinds of stuff, the hustle and bustle etc.  To some it might be intimidating, to others invigorating.  The one thing it definitely is is  dynamic.  That's what we should treasure about it - walking around Brixton is like sensory overload!  It is inevitable that the area will change - we can't stop that and nor should we necessarily seek to - after all, do you really want to live in a museum?     But what we can do is seek to steer and influence change so that it benefits everyone.  

The issue of affordable housing won't go away.  The reason why they can probably get anway with punitative property taxes in france is the size of the country - is space as much of an issue there as it is here?  

But consider this - over the past 2-3 years, the UK consumer has taken the wealth effects that they have gained from the property market and used and spent a great deal of money which has kept the economy afloat.  Looking across to the Eurozone, the lack of domestic demand has been one of the primary factors in the sluggish growth in Europe and the resultant rise and persistence of high unemployment.  So while the booming property market has undoubtedly created real issues in terms of affordability for all, it has  kept us ticking over.  

 Moyeen


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> As for pricing. Why aren't you equally abrupt about the Brixtonian. Or come to think of it, next time I see you in the equally expensive SW9 I'll make a point of isolating more than a few over-priced items on their menu to make the same point. Yuppie gentrifier.


I've never eaten in SW9. I've ended up there for a late one a couple of times since the Queen closed. I'd rather have been in the Queen, believe me. And leave off the childish taunts 

Putting words in my mouth #1





> What I'm simply asking is , that given it was just another derelict shop, what you think it should have been instead? No answers yet, although you seem to cling onto the dogmatic belief that it could be housing, medical or educational facilities - all of which seem unsuited to such a commercial site.


I never said or in any way suggested anything of the sort.

Putting words in my mouth #2





> I've seen no evidence of door policy at A66 as yet; in fact I've seen one of Brixton's grottiest characters in there on opening night.


What on earth are you talking about? I have certainly never mentioned anything about a door policy. Has anyone else? Are you hallucinating?

I wonder who this person is who you deem to be so "grotty". And you so fair minded and inclusive.


----------



## zubaier (Jan 16, 2004)

jesus.. this threads descended into carnage..! 

well, i hate to admit it, i might get shot down in flames, but i ate there and it was damn good!  just my opinion of course (well my wife liked it too).. not overly expensive either...


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 16, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> [I hope this argument isn't turning into one of those ones one has when drunk - start off all guns blazing, gradually get drunker and drunker before concluding were in complete agreement all along.]




Hmmm.  Needn't have worried on that score.


----------



## christonabike (Jan 16, 2004)

"well, i hate to admit it, i might get shot down in flames, but i ate there and it was damn good! just my opinion of course (well my wife liked it too).. not overly expensive either..."

That's cos they have a good chef


----------



## average joe (Jan 16, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> That's very convenient.



I can't remember any either....

And I love the fact that because tarannau got vouchers delivered to his house you have managed to judge him as living in a saubrious area and also that he should go! Anyone can get vouchers, it doesn't mean you can be classed by them.

That made me smile more than anything else on this thread so far. And I having been smiling a _lot_


----------



## average joe (Jan 16, 2004)

posted by tarannau

"in fact I've seen one of Brixton's grottiest characters in there on opening night."

I.was.dressed.up.damn.you!


----------



## Bob (Jan 16, 2004)

average joe said:
			
		

> I can't remember any either....
> 
> And I love the fact that because tarannau got vouchers delivered to his house you have managed to judge him as living in a saubrious area and also that he should go! Anyone can get vouchers, it doesn't mean you can be classed by them.
> 
> That made me smile more than anything else on this thread so far. And I having been smiling a _lot_



I think we could establish a new estate agent description of an area: '2 bedroom semi detached, receives leaflets form Atlantic 66 and Pizza Hut'. My flat would be 'receives daily pizza and african witchdoctor leaflets' which I think is rather classy.


----------



## Rollem (Jan 16, 2004)

zubaier said:
			
		

> well, i hate to admit it, i might get shot down in flames, but i ate there and it was damn good!  just my opinion of course (well my wife liked it too).. not overly expensive either...


fuck that zubaier, why should you hate to admit it? why cant you make your own decision on where you choose to eat?

why is the brixton forum sometimes seems so "exclusive and judgemental" thats what i want to know - and that in a forum about an area which prides itself on being tolerant of diffences and variety. i'm not disputing there are reall issues about gentrification in brixton (as there are all over london, for gods sake!), but it seems that some have a very definate idea as to what they deem "suitable" for brixton, before even finding out what a place is about (judge a book by its cover?)

(yes this thread is 15 pages in before i've made a comment, but sometimes i cant just sit on my hands)

>awaits someone to tell me i'm missing the point<


----------



## tarannau (Jan 16, 2004)

It's not about direct quotations Stella, nor putting 'words in your mouth'

But reading your posts on this thread it's difficult not to conclude that you're implying:

1) That A66 is an over-expensive restaurant primarily designed to cater to Brixton's monied classes.
2) It's a sign of gentrification. Something more 'auhentically' working class would be preferable for the local community. Working class people will feel excluded from this operation.
3)  It's undesirable. 

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I'm guessing that what's a fair few people will have the same perception from the tone and content of your posts.  

I'm up for a more open-minded approach and (shock horror!) want to give the place a chance. Glad to see that some others are doing the same....


----------



## zubaier (Jan 16, 2004)

average joe said:
			
		

> That made me smile more than anything else on this thread so far. And I having been smiling a _lot_



ive just been catchin up on this thread..this is my fav bit so far tho, from intostella of all people:



> I find your tone highly self-righteous and patronising too, as it goes.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 16, 2004)

I had no intention of eating there but now I definately will! Anybody got some vouchers going spare?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

average joe said:
			
		

> And I love the fact that because tarannau got vouchers delivered to his house you have managed to judge him as living in a saubrious area and also that he should go! Anyone can get vouchers, it doesn't mean you can be classed by them.


 No, I said he live in a _more _salubrious street than other neighbouring streets, which _we have already established _did not have voucherrs delivered to them.  I am not classing him as_ anything _because he received vouchers. It was a matter of how the restaurant  decided where it was going to leaflet. I never suggested for a moment that they were trying to keep anyone out, but clearly there are areas whose residents they would rather have _in _than others. And, of course, a lot of people are kept out simply by dint of the fact that they can't afford the prices.

As for why tarannau should go to the fucking place, he lives nearest, he WANTS to go and he's got discount vouchers! OK, why don't YOU go?   I suspect its defenders on this thread are scared to go because they suspect it's crap and they don't want to end up with foie gras on their face. There would be no point in _me_ going, even if I wanted to in a billion years, would there?


----------



## LDR (Jan 16, 2004)

I must admit I sometimes think if the only experience of Brixton I had was this forum, I'd think it was the most isolated, exclusive place in London and I know it’s not.

This place is become nastier than P&P.  I think Rollem has it spot on when she talks about this forum being exclusive and judgemental.  How did it get like this or is my perception wrong?  Am I being oversensitive?


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 16, 2004)

Scott said:
			
		

> I'd think it was the most isolated, exclusive place in London and I know it’s not.



Yes it is. Especially no time for linedancing Kiwi's. Grrrrrr piss off.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 16, 2004)

> why is the brixton forum sometimes seems so "exclusive and judgemental" thats what i want to know - and that in a forum about an area which prides itself on being tolerant of diffences and variety. i'm not disputing there are reall issues about gentrification in brixton (as there are all over london, for gods sake!), but it seems that some have a very definate idea as to what they deem "suitable" for brixton, before even finding out what a place is about (judge a book by its cover?)



Exactly! 

I'm sorry that this thread has suffered as a result, but I was getting sick to the gills of every other thread descending into a judgemental and  intolerant 'we don't want it here' discussion, with almost comically stereotyped views. I couldn't let it lie any more - Brixton's better (and bigger) than that.

Let's have a bit of openness and give places a go. Some good may come of this...


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> 1) That A66 is an over-expensive restaurant primarily designed to cater to Brixton's monied classes.
> 2) It's a sign of gentrification. Something more 'auhentically' working class would be preferable for the local community. Working class people will feel excluded from this operation.
> 3)  It's undesirable.


1) Yes, I do pretty much think that.
2) Yes, I think it is. No, I never said or implied anything about anything to do with catering to the working class. I never mentioned the working class.  But I do think it is expensive and I do think that foie gras is barbaric.
3) It would be a lot more desirable if it looked more welcoming, didn't charge over 4 quid for scrambled egg and didn't sell barbarically-produced goose byproducts. 

You are doing exactly what you've accused me of doing, which is becoming enraged because I simply don't agree with you.  How about _you_ being more tolerant?


----------



## LDR (Jan 16, 2004)

Mr Retro said:
			
		

> Yes it is. Especially no time for linedancing Kiwi's. Grrrrrr piss off.



Believe me, that's not just Brixton it's everywhere. 

Except Chatham.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 16, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> It's not about direct quotations Stella, nor putting 'words in your mouth'
> 
> But reading your posts on this thread it's difficult not to conclude that you're implying:
> 
> ...



IntoStella wrote:

"It's a great shame 121 is no longer just up the road. If it had been, the animal-torture-promoters might well have experienced some impromptu exterior redecoration. But then the demise of 121 and the rise of Animaltorture 666 and its ilk are intimately causally linked."

Now, this might well have been a throw away comment, but I think, IS, you would have to admit that this is evidence of you taking rather an extreme attitude to a restaurant that, like (I'd guess) hundreds in the UK and thousands in the world, (legally) sells foie gras.

Now, call me a limp-wristed-beedin'-heart-no-good-liberal, but I just don't think it's either grown up or clever to advocate vandalism against any one or thing you don't like.

As for the 'initmate' causal relationship between the demise of 121 and this restaurant, I remain, in utter confusion. 

It's the sheer RAGE that this institution has aroused that I just don't get.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

Anyway, bollocks to it. I've been pushed into a corner for expressing exactly the same views as a number of other people. 

Tarannau: ""let's have more openness in Brixton and I'll be really _shitty _to anyone who doesn't agree with me.   ""


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 16, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Now, this might well have been a throw away comment, but I think, IS, you would have to admit that this is evidence of you taking rather an extreme attitude to a restaurant


Of course it was  a throwaway comment. Don't be so humourless. 





> It's the sheer RAGE that this institution has aroused that I just don't get.


More dishonesty. It hasn't, actually, provoked RAGE in myself or anyone else I can think of. What  upsets me is people like you and tarannau perniciously misrepresenting what I'm saying and hurling a lot of spiteful abuse. 

I have made it very clear, if you would only look, that I don't give a FUCK if you go to this restaurant. If you hadn't kept trying to misrepresent what I've said, and if you'd accept that I'm as entiteld to my opinion of the place as you are to yours, there would be little to argue about.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 16, 2004)

"Except Chatham." 

LMAO


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 16, 2004)

Why do you think people have been abusive IS?
I don't know what constitutes as abusive in your world, but if Tarrannee has been, it follows that you have been too.
You're only making yourself look foolish.


----------



## nick (Jan 16, 2004)

Scott said:
			
		

> I must admit I sometimes think if the only experience of Brixton I had was this forum, I'd think it was the most isolated, exclusive place in London and I know it’s not.
> 
> This place is become nastier than P&P.  I think Rollem has it spot on when she talks about this forum being exclusive and judgemental.  How did it get like this or is my perception wrong?  Am I being oversensitive?


What Scott said

Anyone fancy a u75 inspection / visit of Atlantic 66? - this thread has certainly made me curious to find out some facts about it and I'm all for supporting local businesses.


----------



## moyeen (Jan 16, 2004)

nick said:
			
		

> What Scott said
> 
> Anyone fancy a u75 inspection / visit of Atlantic 66? - this thread has certainly made me curious to find out some facts about it and I'm all for supporting local businesses.



I think me and the missus will try and pop in on Saturday.  She's a vegetarian and I don't like goose so hopefully, we'll avoid the foie gras!  

Moyeen


----------



## average joe (Jan 16, 2004)

As for why tarannau should go to the fucking place, he lives nearest, he WANTS to go and he's got discount vouchers! OK, why don't YOU go?   I suspect its defenders on this thread are scared to go because they suspect it's crap and they don't want to end up with foie gras on their face. There would be no point in _me_ going, even if I wanted to in a billion years, would there?  [/QUOTE]

Ok. I probably will. Just depends when I want to go. I'm not scared of going and I'll give any place a chance - there are shit expensive restaurants as well as shit cheap ones. The best restaurants will survive which is how it should be.

Amyway, I didn't get a voucher so I don't no if this means that I live in a one of the street that they don't want to target beacuse its less salubrious, or if I'm in the wrong class  - I'm soooo confused!!!

Keep it coming IS, I think this a super dooper thread - best thread eva imho, and I'll read everything when I have PC access on Monday.

Keep fighting the good/bad/classist/gentrifist/foie grasist fight everyone!!


----------



## Bob (Jan 16, 2004)

average joe said:
			
		

> Keep it coming IS, I think this a super dooper thread - best thread eva imho, and I'll read everything when I have PC access on Monday.
> 
> Keep fighting the good/bad/classist/gentrifist/foie grasist fight everyone!!



Time for a foie gras poll. Is it best:
a) In your face
b) On your face
c) Off your face, or
d) Out of your face?


----------



## average joe (Jan 16, 2004)

Bob said:
			
		

> Time for a foie gras poll. Is it best:
> a) In your face
> b) On your face
> c) Off your face, or
> d) Out of your face?



In the spirit of everything associated with fioe gras I prefer mine dabbed on my genitalia to be licked off by a young catamite whilst tooting a fine line and sipping port!

only kidding!

p.s - haven't gone home yet hence PC overactivity!


----------



## Ms T (Jan 17, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> No, I said he live in a _more _salubrious street than other neighbouring streets, which _we have already established _did not have voucherrs delivered to them.  I am not classing him as_ anything _because he received vouchers. It was a matter of how the restaurant  decided where it was going to leaflet. QUOTE]
> 
> 
> I'm not sure this was a deliberate policy -- they just leafleted the streets that were nearest, probably.  Cock-up, rather than conspiracy.  We didn't get a leaflet, despite living pretty nearby.  And we, arguably, live in Brixton's most gentrified part (although it has yet to be established conclusively if Poet's is in fact officially Herne Hill).
> ...


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 17, 2004)

ain't that the truth..................




<edited to add>
I must admit with shamefacedness that for ages I had mentally spliced Jay Rayner and Rayner Hirsch into one individual and it is only recently that I have realised that they're two different people....  
I thought Jay Rayner Hirsch was a journalist, restaurant critic, musician and comedian with many a string to his bow...............


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 17, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Oh I'm oppressing Streatham now, am I? Dear _God_.
> 
> The main drag IS a shithole, whether you like it or not. Christ, I'm not trying to alienate Streathamites and I'm sure most would agree with me. It is a dirty, depressing wind tunnel with a bad reputation for violent crime. Worse, I'd wager, than Brixton. There always seem to be incident boards up for particularly vicious assaults by multiple perpetrators.



   The Radio 4 Today programme ran a poll for the worst road in the UK.Streatham came top.I used to live their years ago.It is a soulless commuter belt.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 17, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Of course it was  a throwaway comment. Don't be so humourless. More dishonesty. It hasn't, actually, provoked RAGE in myself or anyone else I can think of. What  upsets me is people like you and tarannau perniciously misrepresenting what I'm saying and hurling a lot of spiteful abuse.
> 
> I have made it very clear, if you would only look, that I don't give a FUCK if you go to this restaurant. If you hadn't kept trying to misrepresent what I've said, and if you'd accept that I'm as entiteld to my opinion of the place as you are to yours, there would be little to argue about.




You know you really are the limit.  I have gone to exceptional lengths not to be either insulting (despite the temptation) or to misrepresent you.  Remember YOU wrote that you thought the place should be vandalised.  Don't get upset when others remind you of it.  How can qutoing you direct be to misrepresent you?????  Who has ever said you're not entitled to express your view.  If you bother to read my posts you'll see I've argued the very opposite of that, more than once.

Watching you trade insults with others has certainly been amusing, but anyone who takes the time to read what you've actually written, from the very start, will see the most meandering, incoherent, back-tracking 'argument'.  You just lurch from one moan and rant to the next, with a heavy dose of self pitying whining about being picked on thrown in for good measure.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 17, 2004)

Can't you all take a couple of steps back and a few deep breaths? 

IS - although I support many of your opinions, perhaps, and I mean this compassionately, you should take a bit of a break from some threads - let it go. I'm not trying to moderate you, I'm saying this as a mate.

I mean, I've had to think sometimes; I've said my bit, they don't agree or don't get it, leave it. No point going round and round forever. And you can probably make more difference out in the real Brixton.  

Still rather have you than the foie gras eaters, but take it easy girl! x


----------



## hendo (Jan 17, 2004)

Can we all chill out a bit? There's nothing worse than watching people you know and are fond of, either in 'real' life or simply as U75 posters, kick each other around in this way. 
It's not good for the argument and its not good for the board, IMHO.  
I see the need for passion but I don't see the need for abuse.


----------



## hendo (Jan 17, 2004)

Oh I see hb has beaten me to it. Well, seconded then.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 18, 2004)

Read through nearly all of this thread.From what I remember their was another thread on this 66 before it opened when they put a sign up on the hoarding outside saying that it was basically an upmarket bar/restaurent.Cant remember the exact wording.Probably why their were doubts about it when it opened.

   I do agree with Newbie that the more popular a place becomes the more danger their is of Gentrification.U only have to look at Hoxton.This was only a few years back a genuine hive of cultural activity.Brit Artists and the Lux.Whats happened?The Lux has folded due to lack of funds.Every shop that closes is turned into another "style bar/restaurent".This process has been rapid.If ten years(or even 5)someone had told me that was going to happen I would not have believed them.Their are danger that the same could happen in Brixton with this new "Cultural and Creative Industries" initiative or "Destination Brixton".

  Covent Garden is another example-though its taken longer their.

  Their has been a lot of bad tempered argument on this thread but that is in a way a good sign.I dont think their was a lot of resistance in Hoxton.In Covent Gdn their was(is) though a losing reargaurd battle is now being fought.For example the famous dance school is finally being pushed out of the Garden by developers to the old town hall in Roseberry Ave-tragic that a dance school cant stay in Theatreland.

  What Im saying is that the issue of "gentrification" is London wide political problem.The three major parties and dissappointingly Ken are not dealing with it.And as Anna,Intostella and Red Jezza have implied its down to political choices that "gentrification" continues apace.Its not the inevitable action of the "free market".

  I agree with Anna I wish the "City" could be put out of London.Perhaps then London could revert somewhere like Berlin was in the Cold War.A place could find a space to live their lives as they want.From what I have heard Berlin was full of places like Bonnington Sq.

  Not trying to wind people up but some of these posts do read a bit like their is space for all in Brixton.This is unfortunately not true.Brixton is not one big happy family.Their will be winners and losers.


----------



## newbie (Jan 18, 2004)

Move the City?  How can it be in the best interests of Londoners for billions of pounds to be taken out of the London economy?

There are aspects of gentrification which tend to act against the short-term interests of some people- particularly the elderly poor and other rather non-adaptable groups.  But London is (currently) prosperous, and whilst there are losers in that the vast majority are winners.  



Covent Garden is being *re*gentrified.  When did the market move out... late 70s?  Before that it was all old warehouses and a bizzare nighttime economy (I worked as a night porter there a few times) a bit like Borough market still is, together with widespread blight induced by the massive redevelopment proposals. After the market moved to Nine Elms, and the area was 'saved' by the Community Association the area was colonised by a wave of incomers with very different ideas to the locals.  They had combined to stop the developers, but the old, manual work community lost its focus, and has been replaced by fancy cafes and top label shoe shops.  Places like Neals Yard and Pineapple Dance were the first wave of gentrification.  Funky maybe, and I don't think at the time many people recognised it for what it was, but those places had nothing at all to do with the third generation market traders who lived in the area.   However, as their traditional source of employment withered and died, the colonising gentrifiers brought a new economic prosperity.

The Brixton experience doesn't quite parallel CG, because there's never really been a major source of employment here, but there is a sense in both areas by which a group with very shallow roots opposes 'gentrification' despite being part of, or benefitting from, a previous wave of the same phenomena.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 18, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> The Brixton experience doesn't quite parallel CG, because there's never really been a major source of employment here.


I'd disagree with that newbie. In the Glory Days there were something like 13 theatres and dance-halls (with real musicians and plenty of 'em) within half a mile of Central Brixton, and a lot of theatre people had digs here and basically the entertainment industry (from stage carpenters to wealthy stars like Dan Leno) and all the peripheral stuff like the Theatre Bar (now the Noodle House on CHL) made the money and made Brixton what it is now.

<edited to add>
My paternal family were theatre people for generations..they sent my great grandfather and his brother to school here in Brixton.......


----------



## newbie (Jan 19, 2004)

...and I'll bet when them theatre people moved in with their fancy ways, there were locals muttering about posh incomers not really being part of the community and all the pretentious eels & mash places forcing out the old turnip gruel shops. 



interesting though, I didn't know any of that.


----------



## moyeen (Jan 19, 2004)

Well me and the missus popped in to A66 for lunch on Saturday.  First impressions?  Very light and airy - we were sat right by the windows so they must have thought we looked hip and happening enough to attract others!!  

I had a grilled steak sandwich and the missus had a grilled chesse one plus two drinks (soft) and a bowl of chips - the total damage came to £15.  Food was OK but I think little things did bother me.  Overall finish to the place looked a bit rushed - cracked plasterboard, marked windows etc.  Service was OK but at one stage the guy running the show (whom otherwise was really nice) just came over to our table while we were eating and just leans over and grabs the sugar without even apologising  :confused

More interestingly, as my missus pointed out, given the diversity of Brixton's community it was very suprising that, on a busy Saturday afternoon not 20 yards from the market, I was the only non-white person in there.  Probably a coincidence but it does make you wonder about what kind of messages the new "hip places" unwittingly (I am sure) send out?   


Moyeen


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 19, 2004)

Hatboy, Hendo, I fully accept what you say, which is why I haven't bothered with it over the weekend.    

This thread has demonstrated very clearly why Lambeth is run by a Lib Dem/Tory coalition and I'm not going to bother to argue here with the people maintaining that situation, like Mr BC, who simply use a pack of porkies to attack their opponents. 

I would not be even a tiny bit surprised if in six to 12 months from now, Atlantic 66 has got itself a late bar and ents licence and is keeping its neighbours awake till 3 or 4am. We'll see, won't we? 

And if those neighbours find themselves in a prolonged battle via the council to stop A66 getting a late licence, (as Neon's neighbours have), I assume they won't be asking the frightful nimby sparts for any assistance.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jan 19, 2004)

*wrong wrong wrong!*




			
				Mr BC said:
			
		

> Remember YOU wrote that you thought the place should be vandalised.



Intostella did NOT say she thought the place SHOULD be vandalised. She said that, if 121 still existed, it probably WOULD be vandalised. Not the same thing IMO.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 19, 2004)

moyeen said:
			
		

> I was the only non-white person in there.  Probably a coincidence but it does make you wonder about what kind of messages the new "hip places" unwittingly (I am sure) send out?
> 
> Moyeen


I find that a lot in Brixton though. Lots of (most?) eating and drinking places are predominantly white or non-white. Few seem to have the same mixture as in the streets outside -- and I think that's a shame. 

I don't know what causes it; I don't think it's just affordability. Just compare the crowds at the (pricy) Z Bar and the (cheapo) Trinity Arms any evening.


----------



## Ms T (Jan 19, 2004)

Ol Nick said:
			
		

> I find that a lot in Brixton though. Lots of (most?) eating and drinking places are predominantly white or non-white. Few seem to have the same mixture as in the streets outside -- and I think that's a shame.
> 
> I don't know what causes it; I don't think it's just affordability. Just compare the crowds at the (pricy) Z Bar and the (cheapo) Trinity Arms any evening.




Apart from the Lounge, which is a haven of multi-cultural loveliness.  I don't know how Brixton functioned without it.  IntoStella goes there so it must be OK!


----------



## Dubversion (Jan 19, 2004)

Scott said:
			
		

> I must admit I sometimes think if the only experience of Brixton I had was this forum, I'd think it was the most isolated, exclusive place in London and I know it’s not.
> 
> This place is become nastier than P&P.  I think Rollem has it spot on when she talks about this forum being exclusive and judgemental.  How did it get like this or is my perception wrong?  Am I being oversensitive?



word.

of course the gentrification of anywhere, especially brixton, can be depressing, vicious, divisive and destructive. but the mood in this forum is so fucking knee-jerk and stereotypical. gets on my tits.

i don't like a lot of the people that a lot of the new stuff in Brixton is supposed to attract. i wish things were fairer, cheaper, more inclusive. that's not the same as throwing a fucking hissy fit just because a new restaurant opens.

i've lived in or around brixton for about 14 years now. when i moved here, it was fun but it was a state as well... when i bought a flat, years ago, i railed at the gentrification process. but then i had to be honest with myself. was i from brixton? no. did i have a well-paid media job and own my own house? yes...

turns out (if i'd been less of a grubby squat party type) that i was exactly the sort of person Brixton was getting tarted up for.

doesn't make it alright, and i'm all for resisting things where appropriate. but paroxsysms of proletarian ire just because there's a new fucking restaurant is just ridiculous.

just out of interest - how many of the Brixton Workers Federation arguing the toss so fucking vehemently on this thread are FROM brixton?


edited to add: foie gras is appalling. but that's not the same argument and to try and conflate them is disingenuous. go and tell the working classes of rural France not to eat it and see how your class battle goes then


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 20, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Now, this might well have been a throw away comment, but I think, IS, you would have to admit that this is evidence of you taking rather an extreme attitude to a restaurant that, like (I'd guess) hundreds in the UK and thousands in the world, (legally) sells foie gras.
> 
> Now, call me a limp-wristed-beedin'-heart-no-good-liberal, but I just don't think it's either grown up or clever to advocate vandalism against any one or thing you don't like.
> 
> It's the sheer RAGE that this institution has aroused that I just don't get.


where's the "rage"? I've said, I won't visit whilst they serve foie gras-and I am somewhat saddened by brixton being designer-desouled. But neither IntoStella nor I are showing rage here. if others wanna go-your choice.
and-as vic said-IS did NOT advocate vandalism. Straw man there!


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 20, 2004)

Ms T said:
			
		

> Apart from the Lounge, which is a haven of multi-cultural loveliness.  I don't know how Brixton functioned without it.  IntoStella goes there so it must be OK!


 Oh yeah. There are definitely some good places too. But there should be more.

More good things; fewer bad things. That's my old family motto.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 20, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> I've said, I won't visit whilst they serve foie gras


 I understand the rest of your argument, but not this bit. Why won't you visit while they serve foie gras?


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 20, 2004)

Ol Nick said:
			
		

> I understand the rest of your argument, but not this bit. Why won't you visit while they serve foie gras?


because I am truly appalled and disgusted by the barbaric-in fact downright evil-way in which this stuff is made.
This isn't extremist of me. I'm a foodie, and I have no qualms about animals dying for my gastronomic pleasure. But to me there are limits, and there are certain obligations which should be placed on humankind concerning our treatment of our comrades in other species. 
Foxhunting is one (sheer sadism, IMO): and virtually slow-strangulating the goose, and slowly cramming its' stomach with maize until that stomach explodes - and other things which cumulatively add up to sheer, cold torture - is another (not a huge fan of the fur trade either   ). By serving the stuff A66 fund this vicious practice. So I won't fund A66 till it is removed from the menu. When/if they do, who knows?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 20, 2004)

I would love to try A66's Boudin which is one of my favourite foods (Blood Sausage) but until the foie gras goes I wouldn't eat there either. I come from an Anglo-French family and I think it's delicious but it would stick in my throat because it's wrong. Mind you most British people who don't seem to give a flying fuck about foie gras would be picketing the place if it served Horsemeat.


----------



## newbie (Jan 20, 2004)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> word.
> 
> turns out (if i'd been less of a grubby squat party type) that i was exactly the sort of person Brixton was getting tarted up for.
> 
> doesn't make it alright



TBH I think it's alright whether you're into scruffy squat parties or dinner parties with napkins.  You have a choice and you choose where to live.  That's alright, I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be.

What's not alright is failing to recognise the interests of local people who have fewer choices.  That's issues of public policy, which individually we have little control over, but collectively can influence.  

What's also not alright is moving into the area specifically to move out again a year or two later taking property profits with you.  That's speculation based on house ownership as investment not as home. Personally I detest that, but in an area of increasing popularity there's an inevitability about people doing it.

What's also not alright is finding paradise then pulling up the drawbridge behind you because later arrivals cause pollution.  

All IMO


----------



## editor (Jan 20, 2004)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> just out of interest - how many of the Brixton Workers Federation arguing the toss so fucking vehemently on this thread are FROM brixton?


I'm not sure that's relevant: I'm not 'from' Brixton, but I've liver here 11 years, care passionately about the place and feel I've got just as much right to express an opinion about the place as anyone else.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 20, 2004)

Scott and Dub - Well I still enjoy this forum sometimes. I like the posts of people like Aurora Green, Reubeness (where's she gone), Mrs M, CK1977, lots of people. Some of whom are poor/indigenous Londoners/non-white/delete as applicable.  

Also some of them (and others here) have not been able to buy flats nor do they have jobs in the media. I don't have either of those things myself. And I am a permanent long-term resident of Brixton, engaged with many in the local community. As it happens u75 Brixton forum is my most superficial engagement with this area. Other stuff is face to face.

Many Londoners were not born here, I wasn't as I've often said.  While I realise kids that grew up in London will have an extra perspective on the old place that I don't have, having been in S.London since 1985 and Brixton since 88 I qualify as "from Brixton" thanks.  

It's great you've had all these choices Dub, buying a flat and all that. Maybe if you hadn't or you were close to more people in this area with fewer choices you might get angrier about injustice locally?

Having said that, PLEASE EVERYONE be careful that this all doesn't get too Citizen Smith in here.  It can seem a bit cliquey and I've seen people come that I'd really like to stay and then leave again, partly cos of atmosphere here. Probably tho because interesting people have better things to do! 

That reminds me I must...............


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 20, 2004)

Ms T said:
			
		

> IntoStella goes there so it must be OK!


 Watch it you!     

Their official IntoStella Seal of Approval window sticker is in the post.  




			
				Ms T said:
			
		

> Apart from the Lounge, which is a haven of multi-cultural loveliness.


 So, arguably, is the Beehive, just so long as you don't mind the enervating aroma of old men's trousers.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 20, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> I'm not 'from' Brixton, but I've *liver* here 11 years


mmmm great Freudian slip...Easy on the Stella there, fella!


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 20, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> I've seen people come that I'd really like to stay and then leave again, partly cos of atmosphere here.


What, you mean Justin?     People come and go for a variety of reasons. 

I honestly think that if you want it to be a friendlier place -- nothing wrong with that -- then it would be a very good idea to lead by example and that means being friendly and fair to everyone as long as they don't break the posting rules -- even if they personally annoy you. That's only your subjective feeling, after all. 

I have to say I am still doubtful that people really go "Oh no! Politics! Run away!" There has always been a wide variety of topics in the forum and that is how it should be, of course.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 20, 2004)

"I honestly think that if you want it to be a friendlier place -- nothing wrong with that -- then it would be a very good idea to lead by example and that means being friendly and fair to everyone as long as they don't break the posting rules -- even if they personally annoy you. That's only your subjective feeling, after all."

LOL - you can talk!  I'll try. But I'll probably still have a go at people who I see as stuck-up or clueless about the neighbourhood, or dreary, petty moaners. Tough titties I'm afraid.   x


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 20, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> LOL - you can talk!


I'm not the forum  moderator.  


> I'll try. But I'll probably still have a go at people who I see as stuck-up or clueless about the neighbourhood, or dreary, petty moaners. Tough titties I'm afraid.  x


 I thought you'd say that!


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 20, 2004)

Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> Mind you most British people who don't seem to give a flying fuck about foie gras would be picketing the place if it served Horsemeat.


Or dog. Imagine an authentic Korean restaurant in Brixton selling pooch! Herne Hill ladies would join forces with local hippie chicks to close it down  double quick pronto.

I like this forum too and think some people are being a bit precious. There's nothing wrong with a bit of a row. It's only a bulletin board. It's only ones and zeros.

Also I notice it changes very quickly. For example there's been an influx of liberals (big/small L) in recent months (Bob, lang rabbie, Mr BC etc). Which is great. It makes me laugh when Lang Rabbie quotes John Stewart Mill and Mr BC defends my civil liberties.

Maybe in a few weeks the libs will pack up and leave and a load of Trots will arrive. Fine. What's wrong with that?

So when people say 'the Brixton Forum is boring' they're saying more about themselves than anything else.

Oh, and the 'Old Fart' agument: "I've lived in Brixton for X years so am entitled/am not entitled to say X, Y & Z." 

Surely folks can say what they want wherever they lay their heads?


----------



## hatboy (Jan 20, 2004)

"Surely folks can say what they want wherever they lay their heads?"

Sure, but do they know anything about it?  I'd always defer to those with more knowledge of the area than me. But I'm also aware of how many "hip and happening" (ahem) people in Brixton just skim it for a few years and then move on and how little they know of it really.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 20, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Sure, but do they know anything about it?


Sure. For example the Robson/Butler report.* As far as I know neither lives in Brixton. But both have interesting/useful/surprising things to say about the area.

It's a fallacy that to comment usefully on a subject you must have experienced it directly. No one's been to Mars or seen an atom with their own eyes. Yet people comment on Mars and atoms all the time.

I've never seen a lynching in the Deep South. Yet I don't approve of them. There are countless examples of having no direct experience of something yet having a strong and legitimate view about it.

*Quoted on several gentrification threads, and saying nice things about the Brixton middle-class 'pioneer' incomers.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 20, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> TBH I think it's alright whether you're into scruffy squat parties or dinner parties with napkins.  You have a choice and you choose where to live.  That's alright, I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be.
> 
> What's not alright is failing to recognise the interests of local people who have fewer choices.  That's issues of public policy, which individually we have little control over, but collectively can influence...<snip>
> 
> What's also not alright is moving into the area specifically to move out again a year or two later taking property profits with you.



Great post newbie - amen to that. Although I'd say that not everyone has a choice of where to live, as you suggest - part of the argument on this thread has been about the gentrification of the area, and hence the spiralling property prices that can prevent some poorer local people from being able to afford to live in their own area.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 20, 2004)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> of course the gentrification of anywhere, especially brixton, can be depressing, vicious, divisive and destructive. but the mood in this forum is so fucking knee-jerk and stereotypical. gets on my tits.


I'd say there's a subtle distinction between being defensive (of Brixton from being gentrified) and being "fucking knee-jerk" - as I said earlier on the thread, I think the reason people have been upset about A66 is because of what it represents/symbolises. They've not done themselves any favours by putting foie gras on the menu and by looking like an Ikea store, but I think the main objection has been to what A66 represents - which has been a long running theme in this forum.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 20, 2004)

AK said:

"It's a fallacy that to comment usefully on a subject you must have experienced it directly."

Yes, you can have opinions on anything, but nothing substitutes first hand experience.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 20, 2004)

One reason I like the mood in this forum is because of two important anti-gentrification battles won in recent months, largely because of discussion/co-ordination/solidarity here:-

- Brixton Cycles building on CHL - Merrett nightclub given the boot
- 14-20 Tulse Hill - gated security estate stopped

Hatboy's done extraordinary stuff on the UDP - my jaw fell open at one meeting where he, effectively, got the next generation of chain stores excluded from Brixton. Yet to see the final draft but it was agreed at the meeting.

So I don't care what people think of this forum, and I don't care how many liberals post, how many Brixton-shaven-headed-pop-music-people whinge, how many trots rant and how many housewives.... do whatever they do. It's doing a great job.

Oh and I don't give a toss about a cruel restaurant getting a hard time in cyberspace. I think Atlantic 666 got off quite lightly on this thread.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 20, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> because I am truly appalled and disgusted by the barbaric-in fact downright evil-way in which this stuff is made.
> This isn't extremist of me. I'm a foodie, and I have no qualms about animals dying for my gastronomic pleasure. But to me there are limits, and there are certain obligations which should be placed on humankind concerning our treatment of our comrades in other species.
> Foxhunting is one (sheer sadism, IMO): and virtually slow-strangulating the goose, and slowly cramming its' stomach with maize until that stomach explodes - and other things which cumulatively add up to sheer, cold torture - is another (not a huge fan of the fur trade either   ). By serving the stuff A66 fund this vicious practice. So I won't fund A66 till it is removed from the menu. When/if they do, who knows?






			
				Mrs Magpie said:
			
		

> I would love to try A66's Boudin which is one of my favourite foods (Blood Sausage) but until the foie gras goes I wouldn't eat there either. I come from an Anglo-French family and I think it's delicious but it would stick in my throat because it's wrong. Mind you most British people who don't seem to give a flying fuck about foie gras would be picketing the place if it served Horsemeat.



The stomach doesn't explode, the liver distends. It's an ability that geese and ducks have evolved to enable long-distance migration.

But I agree it's not very nice. My point is that it's a hell of a lot nicer to be a duck growing up in a farm in the Sotuh West of France that is force fed for the last month or two of its life than it is to be a battery hen in a hangar in Oxfordshire. Yet a double standard operates by which people boycott the foie gras and let people get on with selling the eggs of tortured hens. By the bloody millions.

I don't know if it's xenophobia or lack of reflection. Not good old British hypocrisy, surely.


----------



## newbie (Jan 20, 2004)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> part of the argument on this thread has been about the gentrification of the area, and hence the spiralling property prices that can prevent some poorer local people from being able to afford to live in their own area.



Indeed, but it seems to me that the only way to protect their interests is to somehow pickle Brixton in the state of impoverishment it used to be in.  Many of the people on here moved in, and a lot of us subsequently bought our homes, at a time when Brixton property was much less expensive than it is now.  People who rent now, or who grew up here as children, probably have to go elsewhere when they start buying, because Brixton is too expensive for first time buyers, or for people on ordinary incomes.   

How to make it affordable for less well off people to buy a home around here?  I don't konw, the only way I can think of is to make it _relatively_ less popular than elsewhere (please note the word _relatively_, it's important and and ignoring it has diverted previous threads where I've said similar stuff).   And that is unlikely because Brixton is a naturally well appointed dormitary.

It's sad for those affected, but I see it as unlikely that first time buyers will form a large proportion of Brixton homeowners again, not in the forseeable future anyway.

What is important is to protect the position of local people who are not homeowners, by eg. not transferring their homes lockstock to the private sector, and by enabling choice for them to transfer within the area.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 20, 2004)

*housing*

Yes, I agree that the solution is a very difficult one. And you're right in that social housing should not be lost to the private sector - in fact, we need more of it. And we need to put pressure on the council etc to consider whether available land (eg the prison etc) might better serve the interests of the community that the interests of private developers.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 20, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> So I don't care what people think of this forum, and I don't care how many liberals post, how many Brixton-shaven-headed-pop-music-people whinge, how many trots rant


OI!!!! ARE YOU CALLING ME A FACKIN' TROT??!


----------



## hatboy (Jan 20, 2004)

It's nice of you to say that stuff about me and the UDP AK, but I suspect it will come out different after everything said by members of the public at meetings has been crossed out.      We live in hope!

It's easy for people like Dub, slagging off this forum, to forget that the two campaigns you mention were partly co-ordinated thru here. But then again he wasn't involved in either was he?

And if the area had the social housing it so desperately needs, the issue of affording to buy would matter less. You'd think of the lovely HA flat coming your way, not that you want to buy but cannot.  (What most of my friends want, if they don't have it, is a council or HA flat in fact).


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 20, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> It's nice of you to say that stuff about me and the UDP AK, but I suspect it will come out different after everything said by members of the public at meetings has been crossed out.


Cripes! You're not getting disillusioned with the BAF, are you, HB??  I was just beginning to feel slightly better disposed towards it (or should that read ''Its propaganda campaign was just starting to soften me up"? )


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 20, 2004)

Brixton Hatter said:
			
		

> And we need to put pressure on the council etc to consider whether available land (eg the prison etc) might better serve the interests of the community that the interests of private developers.


On the jail point I've had an email from the Mayor saying he can't intervene on the prison yet: it's all down to Lambeth Council.

Which in practice boils down to the (at present) 7 voting members on Lambeth planning committee - 3 Labour, 3 Libs, 1 Tory - so locals have a huge amount of power on what happens with the jail. 

It all depends on whether locals want to use that power or not. If they don't the Yuppies will let rip.

Ol Nick: why not start off with Fois Gras and move on to chickens? It makes political sense: more people get wound up over geese livers compared to chickens' bottoms.

Maybe they shouldn't - given the relative levels of torture involved - but they do. I suspect it's a class thing. The idea of the rich stuffing their faces with expensive cruel food winds people up more than someone on benefits buying cheap eggs in Iceland.

Who was it who described politics as the 'art of the possible?' Pooka?


----------



## tarannau (Jan 20, 2004)

Victoria Wood's programme on Friday threw up an unexpectedly interesting, almost relevant, titbit.

Doctors working with obese children in the US have apparently  found a high incidence of very obese children with a liver condition that previously only tended to affect one animal.

...That's right: these very fat children have livers that ostensibly mimic those of Perigord geese, albeit only those Perigord geese that have been overfed to make foie gras.

No need to force-feed defenceless geese is there? Not when there's a willingly super-obese American around.

Fat yank kid foie gras anyone?


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 20, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> How to make it affordable for less well off people to buy a home around here?  I don't konw


How about extracting manifesto commitments from the three main parties - there are local elections in about 18 months I believe - that there'll be a ban - a moratorium - on the sale of social housing and land in the borough, with obvious specified exceptions, e.g. RTB etc?

You then probably need a dedicated local agency to (a) audit the entire Lambeth stock (it's vast) (b) work out, i.e. _plan_, how it can best be put to social use and then (c) campaign politically around the plan.

At present the stock is being frittered away in the most scandalous fashion. Precious housing and land which will never return to the public sector is being sold at auction nearly every week, snapped up by property developers for onward transmisson to (predominantly white) yuppies.

And if the council is hung again after the next election then the Lib/Conservative coalition agreement needs to be made public. I've never seen a copy of the present one and suspect it's a secret document - itself an anti-democratic scandal.

There's lots else which could be done to limit Yuppie incursions but to ring-fence Lambeth's (our) vast housing and land holdings would be an important start.

This isn't about pickling Brixton like a beetroot. It's the community defending itself and its future.

I, for one, have had a marvelous time in my cheap social housing in Brixton and would like, in time, to hand it on to someone else. There's about a 5% shift a year in Lambeth's mainstream stock (c. 35,000 units). And not to some white yuppie with a fat bank account. They can fend for themselves in the big private housing market.

And I think the race factor is important and often brushed under the carpet. If you gentrify Brixton you drive the non-whtes out. For the obvious reason that the white middle class in Britain is so much larger than the non-white.

So gentrification in Brixton _is a fundamentally racist activity._


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 20, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> So gentrification in Brixton _is a fundamentally racist activity._


 I'm glad you said that and not me.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 20, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> I'm glad you said that and not me.


Nah. I suspect people will be more interested in tarannau's idea of eating pbman.


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 20, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> Doctors working with obese children in the US have apparently  found a high incidence of very obese children with a liver condition that previously only tended to affect one animal.
> 
> ...That's right: these very fat children have livers that ostensibly mimic those of Perigord geese, albeit only those Perigord geese that have been overfed to make foie gras.


Interesting. This shows that animals will voluntarily do this to their livers. I guess it's not cruel after all. It's more to do with imposing an involuntary lifestyle choice on the geese. 

I like that phrase.

(BTW I hope it's still OK to talk about food on this new gentrification thread.)


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 20, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> Who was it who described politics as the 'art of the possible?' Pooka?


Pooka is Bismarck?


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 20, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Pooka is Bismarck?


Who said that? Disraeli?


----------



## Ms T (Jan 20, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> ...That's right: these very fat children have livers that ostensibly mimic those of Perigord geese, albeit only those Perigord geese that have been overfed to make foie gras.
> 
> No need to force-feed defenceless geese is there? Not when there's a willingly super-obese American around.
> 
> Fat yank kid foie gras anyone?




 

Only if it's seared and served on brioche....


----------



## tarannau (Jan 20, 2004)

The irony is that French farmers go to great lengths to force-feed their geese copious amounts of corn, thus achieving that particular foie gras flavour.

Meanwhile American kids will willingly slosh huge amounts of corn syrup down on a frequent and all too regular basis. With horrifyingly predictable results.

Coke-fed geese. It's the way forward....


----------



## newbie (Jan 20, 2004)

AK did you quote the wrong part of what I posted?  no matter...

What you've said about ringfencing social housing and land is right- I'd like to see Lambeth (& HAs) buy housing, rather than sell it, particularly in those parts of the borough where there are streets which are almost 100% owner occupier.


----------



## Dubversion (Jan 20, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Also some of them (and others here) have not been able to buy flats nor do they have jobs in the media.




Nor do i any more, but that wasn't really my point.

Hatboy said: "It's great you've had all these choices Dub, buying a flat and all that. Maybe if you hadn't or you were close to more people in this area with fewer choices you might get angrier about injustice locally?"

It was great that i had those choices, yes, although at the time moving here was a very cheap option (which was part, but not all of the appeal). 

I don't like your presumption that i'm 'not close to more people in this area.. etc' as if you're privy to my social circle. i live in a council flat, most of my mates live in council blocks, social housing or squats and some of them have been on the receiving end of Lambeth's behaviour, around Rushcroft Rd, for example, or in the squat clampdown of recent years.

And i do get VERY angry about local injustice, the Merrett clan, Lambeth's callous disregard for its locals while sticking up signs for the Bug Bar. 

My issue is with an attempt to embody all this in one fucking restaurant. 

Like it or not (ultimately it makes no difference) brixton is changing, in lots of ways and perhaps mostly but not entirely, for the worse. 

My point about myself moving here (and i'd have ended up here anyway regardless of my job etc because most of my mates were here) is that surely all of us who aren't local, if we're truthful, are at some point a part of the process which happens to any area, not just in London but in any big city. it's a bit glib but isn't it something along the lines of: 

*poverty/low rents/students, squatters, young folk/nightlift and artists/trendies/facilities for trendies/ blah blah blah/soaring property prices.*


It's happened pretty much everywhere in London and it's going to keep happening and most of it is sickening. and i don't know what can be done about it, but i do know that making A66 some kind of voodoo doll to stick pins in to attack the process is pointless. 

I have no truck with this 'trendy lefties telling the locals what they want' jibe that's been levelled at some people on this thread - it's fucking great that people like Anna Key etc are so active and have achieved so much, but i don't think A66 is a worthwhile battleground...

Another point, and i may be wrong - and this is more a question, i'm just thinking out loud i guess:

Let's take it as a given that the sort of people that are the class enemy of this thread  are here, and are probably staying. does A66 make matters worse by giving them somewhere to eat their fucking foie gras, or does it - by at least keeping some business in the area, perhaps providing some work, maybe even buying produce from brixton market etc etc etc - stop Tarquin and Lucy going for a meal in Clapham instead? 

Surely the enemy is callous and corrupt Merrett style business and Lambeth's social and housing policy, not the owners of A66, however dreadful they may be?


----------



## Dubversion (Jan 20, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> It's easy for people like Dub, slagging off this forum, to forget that the two campaigns you mention were partly co-ordinated thru here. But then again he wasn't involved in either was he?



I don't recall mentioning those campaigns, and i have utmost respect for anyone involved (and no, i wasn't). i wasn't slagging off the positive aspects of this forum, i was slagging off the way that people who don't fit a certain cookie cutter idea of what a Brixton Urbanite should be get so much shit - and the way tarannau has been treated in parts of this thread is a mighty testament to that.


----------



## editor (Jan 20, 2004)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> ... the way tarannau has been treated in parts of this thread is a mighty testament to that...


I believe the half-Welsh young man would have no problem standing up for himself here, Mr Dubbers - and I've certainly heard no complaint from the stella-quaffing chap.

But while it's true to say that there are some people here who would find a discarded tin can on Coldharbour Lane a portent of the demise of the working class brought up by capitalist market forces, I have no problem with such political debate here. After all, what's happening in Brixton is political.

But it can get very tiresome when a simple request by a new poster about the opening hours of a new restaurant can be met with a five page tirade about yuppification, so it's all about balance.

To some people Brixton, is a vital battleground where important decisions that will shape the future of social housing are being made. To others, it's simply a great place to get out of their noggins and dance the night away.

I'd be happy if these boards accommodated both ends of that spectrum.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 20, 2004)

*For the record*

Err, what Aitch's original post said was 






			
				Aitch said:
			
		

> I was down Atlantic Rd last night and noticed that restaurant bar place Atlantics was having its opening night.  It was packed with you guessed it young hip and trendy people.  Maybe we should organise an Urban visit and ruff the place up a bit
> 
> I'm afraid to say that with this added place to Atlantic Road it is one step nearer to becoming Claphamited  We shall see


 Which set the tone, you could say. 

No request for opening hours and, more to the point, no subsequent hijacking, IMO. It was about ''Claphamisation'' from post 1. Is  it possible to hijack a thread while staying on topic?  

And it wasn't myself, AK, Jezza or others talking about gentrification who first mentioned the working class. It was other people taking the piss.  We don't go ''working class blah blah working class blah" on every single thread, regardless of relevance, as I'm sure you are aware.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 20, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> The irony is that French farmers go to great lengths to force-feed their geese copious amounts of corn, thus achieving that particular foie gras flavour.
> 
> Meanwhile American kids will willingly slosh huge amounts of corn syrup down on a frequent and all too regular basis. With horrifyingly predictable results.
> 
> Coke-fed geese. It's the way forward....


cheers, bro'. uggh!


----------



## hatboy (Jan 20, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> Cripes! You're not getting disillusioned with the BAF, are you, HB??  I was just beginning to feel slightly better disposed towards it (or should that read ''Its propaganda campaign was just starting to soften me up"? )



No I haven't lost interest in BAF, I've been able to influence a couple of things for the better recently I hope thru BAF. Perhaps you should have noticed (and included in your quote of me) the two smilies; eek and rolleyes. Exclamation and sarcasm.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 21, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> Perhaps you should have noticed (and included in your quote of me) the two smilies; eek and rolleyes. Exclamation and sarcasm.


 And this -->  <-- means I was obviously joking.


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 21, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> This thread has demonstrated very clearly why Lambeth is run by a Lib Dem/Tory coalition and I'm not going to bother to argue here with the people maintaining that situation, like Mr BC, who simply use a pack of porkies to attack their opponents.
> 
> I



Don't really follow this, but I don't want to re-open the whole thing, escpecially since the thread has moved on in my absence.

I would hate though for IS to view me as an 'opponent'.  Fellow debater surely?


----------



## Bob (Jan 21, 2004)

IS - you'll be glad to hear I'm moving to Brixton soon (a move almost certainly upmarket given where I live now) and was looking at a place on Coldharbour lane - diagonally across from the barrier block. I got chatting to the next door neighbour and mentioned my Lib Dem involvement to which his reply was 'I don't want a bloody communist next door'!


----------



## pooka (Jan 22, 2004)

Hard to bring oneself to contribute to this thread, which is going over the same territory as so many others. On the gentrification/regeneration issue, the positions of regular posters are pretty well established and sadly these threads so easily descend into invective.

So, just to offer this from Urban 75 Bookgroup's February book, Moorcock's _Mother London_, first published in 1988.



> "This afternoon I think we'll stroll around Battersea to observe the migrated young of Chelsea who have crossed the river; the interloping tribe which has now claimed the entire border country, the wave of conquest familiar in history. And they are still spreading. I have even seen a pocket or two in my native Brixton"
> 
> Josef Kiss leads them from the St Clement's Arms twoards Mile End Tube Station, declaiming:
> 
> ...


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 22, 2004)

>Applause<


----------



## newbie (Jan 22, 2004)

Battersea seemed to me to go more or less straight from industrial working class to Chelsea overspill without much of the intervening funky colonisation phase as in Brixton (or Covent Garden).  I think it started somewhat before 1988 though, as I remember distinctly middle class friends being well settled in 4 or 5 years earlier, and they were by no means pioneers.  But then, Battersea was never blighted by giant scheme planners, so it didn't become as deprived, or as bleak, as Brixton.  The radically Tory council of the 80s probably had a big effect as well.  We're years behind.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 22, 2004)

pooka said:
			
		

> sadly these threads so easily descend into invective


Sad? How about 'funny,' 'hilarious' and 'side-splitting?'

Invective on a bulletin board is like yeast in a loaf of bread. Nothing rises without it. You're left with a shapeless mass of flacid dough.

Surely you're not arguing that people should be polite to Jay Rayner?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 22, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> The radically Tory council of the 80s probably had a big effect as well.  We're years behind.


    

They're coming out of the woodwork!


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 22, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> They're coming out of the woodwork!



Next we'll be letting those bastard tories have a vote and everything.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 22, 2004)

..just so long as we don't let 'em form a government.
ohh, no chance of that....


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 22, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> ..just so long as we don't let 'em form a government.
> ohh, no chance of that....


I'm told that whenever Howard speaks in the House of Commons no bird can be seen overflying the place. Fishes shoal protectively by the South bank of the Thames. And wealthy widows, occupying £5m property in Lord North Street, must comfort their shrieking Pekinese.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 22, 2004)

lol@ Anna Key
wonder if anyone's scientifically proved he casts a shadow yet...


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 22, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> wonder if anyone's scientifically proved he casts a shadow yet...


Impossible to prove. He emerges only at dusk. But whenever a Blairite mutters "Stakeholder!" he visibly shudders.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 22, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> You're left with a shapeless mass of flacid dough.


 You would know, darling    

Did you see this photo of Michael Howard in the papers today?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 22, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> Next we'll be letting those bastard tories have a vote and everything.


 I wish I'd seen what that said before you edited it.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 22, 2004)

Red Jezza said:
			
		

> lol@ Anna Key
> wonder if anyone's scientifically proved he casts a shadow yet...




Of course they haven't!

Thought you'd have figured it out by now Jezza. All that anti-gentrification tosh is just a front to stop builders and developers disturbing Anna K's secret store of coffins.

Take that pre-opening incident at Atlantic 66 for example. Anna claimed it was the river Effra springing upwards that disrupted the construction. Of course not: the poor builders were unfortunate enough to disturb a section of Anna's undead army, lurking below ground.

A few weeks later and the place is open with disarming efficiency. Not a coincidence that it's serving Foie Gras either. You wait till next week, when Atlantic 66's menu will consist solely of black pudding, steak tartare and other tasty red treats....


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 22, 2004)

IntoStella said:
			
		

> I wish I'd seen what that said before you edited it.



I missed out the word 'we'.  A simple typo I'm afraid.  Nothing even remotely sinister. S  o to you too!


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 22, 2004)

Mr BC said:
			
		

> I missed out the word 'we'.  A simple typo I'm afraid.  Nothing even remotely sinister. S  o to you too!


Nonsense. It said:

"Next we'll be letting that bastard Howard have a toke and everything!"


----------



## Mr BC (Jan 22, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> Nonsense. It said:
> 
> "Next we'll be letting that bastard Howard have a toke and everything!"


 
Fuck! You saw it.


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 22, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> All that anti-gentrification tosh is just a front to stop builders and developers disturbing Anna K's secret store of coffins.


 They were talking about _Michael Howard_, not Anna Key. Do keep up.  

Besides, even AK is nowhere near as eldritch as NosferaTory.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 22, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> a simple request by a new poster about the opening hours of a new restaurant can be met with a five page tirade about yuppification


Indeed - now I am scared to start a thread asking why there isn't an Oddbins in Brixton.


Incidentally, why isn't there a decent wineseller in Brixton?


----------



## lang rabbie (Jan 22, 2004)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Indeed - now I am scared to start a thread asking why there isn't an Oddbins in Brixton.
> 
> Incidentally, why isn't there a decent wineseller in Brixton?



Is there one (a decent wineseller) anywhere on the A23 corridor between the Kennington and Croydon branches of Oddbins? 

One of the staff of the late lamented Wizard Wine Warehouse at Streatham Hill implied that some of the local "characters" with drug habits used to steal to order rather than just putting a fourpack under their coats - were they   paying their dealers in Burgundy?


----------



## miss minnie (Jan 22, 2004)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Indeed - now I am scared to start a thread asking why there isn't an Oddbins in Brixton.
> Incidentally, why isn't there a decent wineseller in Brixton?


i can answer that.  i used to work for oddbins - i.t. dept at their headquarters.  one day i walked into the property department to hack a windows machine for the stupid bint who'd forgotten her password and asked 'why isn't there an oddbins in brixton' to which i got the reply 'not our kind of people'!!! ffs.  the branch staff were mostly great people, but the head office staff were pricks.

btw, oddbins is very second rate now.  it got sold off and they know longer do the 'odd bins'.  tesco, majestic and any of the bigger wine warehouses do better discounts and variety, imo.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 22, 2004)

"Incidentally, why isn't there a decent wineseller in Brixton?"

A decent wineseller, maybe there is one? Why no Oddbins? Because they only have branches in posher areas. There's an off licence on every corner here but it's not respectable to drink apparently.


----------



## Ms T (Jan 23, 2004)

There is no decent wineseller in Brixton.  I know.  I've tried them all.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 23, 2004)

Im getting tired of the implication that lefty posters on this site are putting others off.Ive had my deal of slagging off by other posters at times and Ive just dealt with it.Their has been an influx of more middle of the road(politically)posters recently.Ive got no problem with that-Im all for debate.But their middle of the road opinions never get slagged off for being boring.

  The reason I persist posting here is the high quality of debate-as compared with say the Councils Brixton Forum.Also the Bikeshop campaign could not have been down without this site.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 23, 2004)

Aitch said:
			
		

> I was down Atlantic Rd last night and noticed that restaurant bar place Atlantics was having its opening night.  It was packed with you guessed it young hip and trendy people.  Maybe we should organise an Urban visit and ruff the place up a bit
> 
> I'm afraid to say that with this added place to Atlantic Road it is one step nearer to becoming Claphamited  We shall see



   This was how this thread started.It seems to me most of the posts here have stuck to the subject.

  I dont make an issue of it but Ive been in Brixton for 23 years.How long Dubversion do I have to be here before I can make an opinion about Brixton?Or, Newbie, am I just someone who should move aside in face of the "irresistable" forces of change?

   I dispute Newbies distinction between 2 waves of Gentrifiers.The first being naive old hippies change an area which then is taken over by the second wave pushing up property prices.This is a complete distortion of what has happened in areas like Brixton,Hoxton,Covent Garden etc.

   The "first wave"(and i almost qualify for this)had a completely different vision of housing and communities.This was lost in the "Greed is Good" Thatcher years.

  As for Annas suggestion to get rid of the "City"-which I agree with.This may be utopian but its not daft.So what if it means jobs are lost?The argument for the Arms industry is that if it was stopped people would lose jobs.The City is their because of Britians former Empire.Britain got to be a financial centre through the oppression of other peoples.The City of London is one of the centres of Globalised Capitailsm.Which IMO is an obscene centre for the newer Neo Imperialism of Multinationals(supported by the likes of Bush).

  Therefore if its got rid of and London became a quiet backwater I would prefer that.


----------



## moyeen (Jan 23, 2004)

The City of London and the associated financial services industry generates billions of pounds every year for this country.  That money pays for any number of things - hospitals,schools, benefits etc. Don't forget the number of jobs, both direct and indirect, that it supports.  "So what if some jobs are lost?"  So, if some middle ranking office worker at a bank loses his/her job that's OK?  What are they supposed to do?  Get on their bike?  

You might not like it but you'd sure as hell miss it if it went away and don't kid yourself that you wouldn't.  Yes, it might be a legacy of our imperial past and in part a historical accident but to ignore the benefits that accrue to London and the country as whole from its presence is very short sighted.


Moyeen


----------



## hatboy (Jan 23, 2004)

Gramsci said:
			
		

> Im getting tired of the implication that lefty posters on this site are putting others off.Ive had my deal of slagging off by other posters at times and Ive just dealt with it.Their has been an influx of more middle of the road(politically)posters recently.Ive got no problem with that-Im all for debate.But their middle of the road opinions never get slagged off for being boring.
> 
> The reason I persist posting here is the high quality of debate-as compared with say the Councils Brixton Forum.Also the Bikeshop campaign could not have been down without this site.




Fair enough. I don't like it if it's gets too lefty "Albert" if you know what I mean (not having a go this time and of course I am a lefty basically) or too middle-of-the-road: So watch it Bob and BC (and some other girls)! Grrrr.


----------



## newbie (Jan 23, 2004)

I'm sorry if I've upset you G, it certainly wasn't intentional.  Of course I don't think you or anyone else should 'move aside', I'm merely musing on what I see happening.  I do think the processes are fairly inevitable, but that doesn't mean I personally welcome the changes, or actively seek to replace all the stuff I've always liked about Brixton with a bunch of flash places that are of no interest to me at all.  I preferred the first wave too: cynically, hip capitalism was a lot nicer than naked greed capitalism, but there was also a helluva lot of real attempts to build a completely different world.  The ethos of the incomers was far more communal, lefty political, socially committed than today, in line with the spirit of the times.  


Those attempts largely foundered, for sure, although their legacy is part of what makes Brixton special. But I do think it's worth asking how strong the links really were between the longterm residents of Brixton and the incomers (at the time).  Seen from the point of view of the people who'd been there all their lives, was the food co-op linked to Bangladesh any more relevant than the watering hole the building has recently turned into? Aren't both of them symbols of gentrification?  Or can both be seen as attempting to bind together a part of the community, and thus different from A66?  To my mind a bike co-op is more valuable than a nail shop, but I can understand that to a lot of people a good eatery is more useful than either.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 23, 2004)

Yes, but Newbs, A66 and it's ilk are "upmarket".  That snobby exclusivity, cash exclusivity, surely wasn't there in any of the other things you mention?

Whether born here or blow-in. If you care about parity and fairness, these places coming now are mostly shit. And they are bland. Let's see character, colour and personality.

Bland. bland. bland. Grrr.     

Wall to wall Starbucks. NO. No I say.........bla, bladi, bla........ power to the people!


----------



## newbie (Jan 23, 2004)

No it wasn't, but times have changed.  When was the last time you came across a lefty badge making co-op, or a community printshop, or heard of a new housing co-op.  Like it or not, and I don't much, post Thatcher England is coin operated, and Brixton is no different.


----------



## pooka (Jan 24, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> Sad? How about 'funny,' 'hilarious' and 'side-splitting?'
> 
> Invective on a bulletin board is like yeast in a loaf of bread. Nothing rises without it. You're left with a shapeless mass of flacid dough.
> 
> Surely you're not arguing that people should be polite to Jay Rayner?



Main Entry: 1in·vec·tive
Pronunciation: in-'vek-tiv
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English invectif, from Middle French, from Latin invectivus, from invectus, past participle of invehere
Date: 15th century
: of, relating to, or characterized by insult or abuse
- in·vec·tive·ly adverb
- in·vec·tive·ness noun 


Or

invective \in-VEK-tiv\, noun:
1. An insulting or abusive expression or speech.
2. Insulting or abusive language. 

adjective:
Of, relating to, or characterized by insulting or abusive language. 

Like yeast in a loaf of bread? Only if you're baking sour-dough.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 24, 2004)

Fuck you and your fucking invective fucking fuck.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 24, 2004)

moyeen said:
			
		

> The City of London and the associated financial services industry generates billions of pounds every year for this country.  That money pays for any number of things - hospitals,schools, benefits etc. Don't forget the number of jobs, both direct and indirect, that it supports.  "So what if some jobs are lost?"  So, if some middle ranking office worker at a bank loses his/her job that's OK?  What are they supposed to do?  Get on their bike?
> 
> You might not like it but you'd sure as hell miss it if it went away and don't kid yourself that you wouldn't.  Yes, it might be a legacy of our imperial past and in part a historical accident but to ignore the benefits that accrue to London and the country as whole from its presence is very short sighted.
> 
> ...



   Does it really generate billions for ordinary people in this Country?Most financial transactions in the City are profits on worldwide transactions.Thats why some argue for a Tobin Tax on them.These transactions have little to do with actually producing anything or bringing money into the Country.

   IMO my argument still stands.Do u support the Arms industry because it brings money into the country and provides jobs?The Arms industry and the City are on the same level.

  I hardly think the City is an historical accident.The City and Arms industry have distorted the UK economy.Also it still gives this Country delusions of grandeur about its role in the world.

  I dont see it as giving me any benefit.I remember the 80s when the City Stockbrokers were heroes of Thatcherism.I dont see what benefit I got out of that.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 24, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> No it wasn't, but times have changed.  When was the last time you came across a lefty badge making co-op, or a community printshop, or heard of a new housing co-op.  Like it or not, and I don't much, post Thatcher England is coin operated, and Brixton is no different.



  I agree with Hatboy on this.I agree with you on post Thatcher England but I think you are being to pessimistic.Their is resistance to detrimental change.Their are also an influx of younger people in Brixton(ie Annas APT lot)who dont seem to me to have any desire to be part of coin operated society.

 As it happens ive no problem with the Lounge-i dont see that as a symbol of gentrification.The original "Grain Barn" cannot be seen in the same light either.I agree times have changed but their is more than one alternative.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 24, 2004)

The Lounge is neither exclusive or unwelcoming, nor bland to look at.


----------



## editor (Jan 24, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> The Lounge is neither exclusive or unwelcoming, nor bland to look at.


Indeed. And my hope is to be well enough to visit it for a juice tomorrow!


----------



## tarannau (Jan 25, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> Indeed. And my hope is to be well enough to visit it for a juice tomorrow!



Sorry to hear you're still suffering mate. Drop me a line if you make it down. Juices on me...


----------



## Dubversion (Jan 25, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> Juices on me...



euww.. pervert.


----------



## newbie (Jan 25, 2004)

exclusive...

no, why should it be, it's in business.

Few commercial ventures will see themselves as specifically exclusive, but there are different business models, ranging from cheap, high throughput & tiny margins (McD) to quality treat with lower throughput but higher margins. 

A tiny selection of the wide range of Brixton cafes includes:

Lounge
Market cafe
Satay
McDonalds
Phoenix
Pizza Hut
Jacaranda Garden
Speedy Noodle

The only one of those I remember being in is the Satay bar, so all I know is what I see from the street walking past (ie, I have no particular allegiances).  I see each of them as having a particular clientelle, most of whom might feel a little out of place in some or maybe all of the other places. That's cultural as much as economic, but in economic terms I'd suggest the Lounge is out of the price range for  a large chunk of the Brixton population.  

Prosciutto, parmesan & fig on focaccia: £4.20  

So is A66 (I've never seen anyone in there so I've no idea what their punters are like, I only know what I've read here). What's the difference?

As I look up and down my street, I see a few people who would probably feel comfortable in the Lounge, but far more who probably wouldn't .  

The point about gentrification is that the changes tend to exclude the longterm, poor, residents as the environment shifts towards incomers with more disposable income.  The Lounge clearly caters for the latter, as does A66.


Whilst the disgusting things done with goose innards at A66 influence the nature of the discussion, let's  not lose sight of the many, many different communities and cultures that co-exist in Brixton.  There's nothing wrong with the Lounge, nor with Satay, so I'm pushed to see why A66 is different.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 25, 2004)

Where is The Market Cafe? Is it Ergens? Can't remember. 

Yeah, Lounge. OK lets be totally honest. It has got a slight feeling of "behave yourself" in there (when my friend was talking about getting stubble burn on his arse that turned heads). I've warmed to it but I don't feel as comfortable there as in the Pheonix. And it's not the cheapest, but I did have a fry-up there that was only about £1.30 more than the Pheonix so it's nice for a change.

"so I'm pushed to see why A66 is different."

Re-read the thread.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 25, 2004)

The more hip an' cool posters here may disapprove but Beehive food is excellent at the moment. I think there's a new chef. Breakfast, served even on a Sunday from 10am, is cheap and delicious (about £2.50 I think so less than the Phoenix) and the Sunday lunch is fantastic: about £5.50 with a beer thown in - from a range of good strong ales from independent breweries.

And you're free to discuss stubble-burn as much as you want. No one gives a damn.


----------



## Pie 1 (Jan 25, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> Beehive food is excellent at the moment



The fucking smell that drifts up to our flat from their kitchens isn't.


----------



## newbie (Jan 25, 2004)

Isn't the one in Granville called Market cafe?  That's the one I meant anyway.


----------



## moyeen (Jan 26, 2004)

A "Tobin Tax" is a tax on foreign exchange transactions which is designed to deter short-term speculative flows that could otherwise be destabilising to an open market economy.  The theory is that if the tax level was set at a rate which was revenue neutral (i.e. it took in as much as a speculator would make) then it would deter the act of speculation.  So I'm not sure how this would apply to all financial transactions. Would you apply taxes to all transactions - they already pay capital gains.  

Let's just look at the numbers - in 2001-02, the banking, financial and insurance sector paid £7.9 billion in corporation tax aone.  The sector  contributes 5.3% of GDP (approx £53 billion) and employs around 300,000 people in Greater London and around 1 million people in the UK.  Overall, the sector contributed £17.8 billion to net UK exports in 2002.  So what is that in equivalent terms?  Total social security benefits in 2002-03 were £105.6 billion, so you can think of the net contribution of financial serives as paying around 16% of all social security benefits.  And how much do people employed in the sector pay in income tax?  As I said - you'd sure feel a lot poorer without it.

My problem with the arms industry is not the industry per se, it's the millions they get off the government in explicit subsidies.  If the industry is so important and efficient why can't it stand on its own two feet?  

Moyeen


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 26, 2004)

editor said:
			
		

> Indeed. And my hope is to be well enough to visit it for a juice tomorrow!


I wasn't online much at the w/e and hadn't realised you hadn't been well enough to make your flight. Mega bummer with knobs on!


----------



## tarannau (Jan 26, 2004)

Anna Key said:
			
		

> The more hip an' cool posters here may disapprove but Beehive food is excellent at the moment. I think there's a new chef. Breakfast, served even on a Sunday from 10am, is cheap and delicious (about £2.50 I think so less than the Phoenix) and the Sunday lunch is fantastic: about £5.50 with a beer thown in - from a range of good strong ales from independent breweries.



Much as i like the sweet artificiality of Wetherspoons food, it's a bit difficult to honestly compare the two. Buy a tasty pie in the Phoenix and you'll get a slab of near-home cooked goodness, served by a friendly long term employee. Buy a pie from the Beehive and the low paid 'chef' will cut a frozen tray into portions, lop a defrosting chunk into a bowl and place a flat pastry disc on top. Whack the assembly into a convection oven and set the recipe instructions card: to set the convection oven to 3 minutes precisely. And through a Willy Wonkaesque miracle, the flat disc rises into a whapping puff pastry topping.  The cook shouts and a harrassed bar staff member on a shitty minimum wage contract will run out the meal while you scramble around to pick up cutlery and various awkward-to-open plastic sachets of sauce.

it's not difficult, with all that chain's buying power, to see why the Beehive can dosh out food at such low prices. Especially when meals are often used a loss leader promotions to entice customers when local competition is deemed problematic. Unsurprisingly enough the food is (or was) sourced and delivered by Holroyd Meek , suppliers of KFC, Burger King and many other high street chains. Frozen meals, packed full of interesting flavour conconctions and cheaply sourced meat from dubious sources. 

Fairplay to Wetherspoons for the cheap pricing and admirable brand positioning, but i can't really support their sourcing practices.  Truth be told, the food doesn't taste too bad either - gawd knows I used to live on the stuff. But it's difficult to compare the shrink-wrapped portions and macdonalds-style cooking processes as a genuine alternative to the tougher work of a restaurant serving freshly prepared food.  I'm happy for them to distract money from MacDonalds, but if it's at the price of replacing local restaurants with near identically kitted out Wetherspoons operations I'm very much opposed.


----------



## hendo (Jan 26, 2004)

Another Top Post from Tarannau


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 26, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> but i can't really support their sourcing practices.


 Unlike Atlantic66?


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 26, 2004)

tarannau said:
			
		

> Beehive...


Everything you say is, of course, right and Tim Martin, the great mulleted one (who, for some reason, I always want to call Tony Martin) is a dirty capitalist.

The problem is that the Beehive, despite all the things you mention, serves up utterly delicious beer, made lovingly in tiny micro-breweries by hippies with massive beards and little round spectacles made from twigs, to a highly mixed central Brixton crowd.

Especially now the Queen on Ferndale Road has been replaced by the Queen Bah, the Beehive is quite precious.

The attraction of the Beehive is its complete lack of pretentiousness, taste or style. Making it one of the few genuinely 'cool' pubs in Brixton. And no bloody pop music!

But all your criticisms are correct. It's a paradox.


Pie1: you should complain about that foul air problem. Why should you have to breath in my lunch? Insist that the Great Mulleted One installs an efficient  air handling system.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 26, 2004)

The Queens has totally lost it now. Apparently you have to pay for your drinks and leave at closing time. Shit! 

By the way, does anybody even go there now?

True Tarranau. Other good things at the Beehive but the food! All sticky and monosodium-glutimatey. Ick.


----------



## Anna Key (Jan 26, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> By the way, does anybody even go there now?


I went about 6 weeks ago just to check it out. It was bloody awful. It was a Saturday night and so few people were there they didn't even open the saloon bar (sorry, saloon bah).

Never in the history of the Queen under Shaun would both bars not be open (unless police forensics were dusting the furniture).


----------



## hatboy (Jan 27, 2004)

I've been asked to point out that the floor in Atlantic66 is not "laminate", but is in fact "high quality".

Don't take it personally O****.     Paul xx


----------



## newbie (Jan 27, 2004)

Does 'high quality' mean non-sustainable hardwood?


----------



## IntoStella (Jan 27, 2004)

newbie said:
			
		

> Does 'high quality' mean non-sustainable hardwood?


 LOL  

What _is_ the best quality flooring IKEA does?


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 27, 2004)

"Especially now the Queen on Ferndale Road has been replaced by the Queen Bah, the Beehive is quite precious."


Thanks for clearing that up, I thpought they'd replaced itith an empty hall that stores mis-matched furniture. 

The Queen II had no chance from day one with their high prices. I went in there about 3 or 4 times when it first opened and not since. When you get atmosphere, proper beer and a round for practically half price just 100 yards down the road, Queen II is not much of a draw.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jan 27, 2004)

hatboy said:
			
		

> The Queens has totally lost it now. Apparently you have to pay for your drinks and leave at closing time. Shit!
> 
> By the way, does anybody even go there now?



Haven't been in since the changeover. The notion of going in during "normal" pub hours seems more than a touch weird.


----------



## hatboy (Jan 27, 2004)

Listen, I'm withdrawing from this little debate. Just to clarify, I'm sticking to my opinion that Atlantic66 looks bland and sort of snooty (maybe they can dress it up a bit, I wish they would) but I've just found out that a couple of people I think are OK and are kind to me are involved.

I stick by all my opinions on this thread. I do dislike the "upmarket" style, I think it's shit. However, perhaps some of mine and others thoughts can be used constructively to improve the place's image. I'm not saying any more, except that personal mutual respect means a great deal to me and unless someone is a right cunt I can't be unkind to people who are kind to me.

Over and out.


----------



## Dubversion (Jan 28, 2004)

but - and i promise this isn't any kind of slight or dig, hatboy, i respect where you're coming from and i'm no A66 apologist - isn't it almost inevitable that similar 'they're all right, really' arguments could be made for most of these places?

doesn't make you wrong or them right. just goes to show how complicated these things can be...


----------



## lang rabbie (Feb 3, 2004)

*Atlantic 66 in the Evening Standard*

Apparently it's reviewed in the Evening Standard  (subscription only page on the website)   Anyone likely to see a stray copy with all the gory details?




			
				Evening Standard said:
			
		

> *Bright hope for Brixton*
> 
> The gentrification of Brixton's former frontline continues with bar/cafè/restaurant Atlantic 66. Avoid lingering too long on the decoration and instead concentrate on the modern European food. Rahul Verma predicts great things for Brixton's food and drink scene...


 
[lights blue touch paper and stands back....]


----------



## IntoStella (Feb 3, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> Apparently it's reviewed in the Evening Standard


 What more needs to be said?


----------



## Gramsci (Feb 3, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> Apparently it's reviewed in the Evening Standard  (subscription only page on the website)   Anyone likely to see a stray copy with all the gory details?
> 
> 
> 
> [lights blue touch paper and stands back....]



  That Evening Standard site is so annoying u would have thought they could have let u read the whole article without "subscribing".Apparently some papers think they are losing money putting so much on the net for free.


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 3, 2004)

It's in _Metro_ too. guess how that one starts. "The gentrification of Brixton's former frontline..."  
same writer


----------



## Ms T (Feb 4, 2004)

Well I bought the ES yesterday specifically to read the review, but it wasn't there.  Feel cheated out of my 40p (oh alright, it was Mr T's 40p but what's his is mine, yes?)!


----------



## hendo (Feb 4, 2004)

Apparently  
Seriously would like to see this review.
Maximum points to anyone who finds it and manages to post it.


----------



## hatboy (Feb 4, 2004)

It doesn't sound very interesting.


----------



## lang rabbie (Feb 4, 2004)

Ms T said:
			
		

> Well I bought the ES yesterday specifically to read the review, but it wasn't there.  Feel cheated out of my 40p (oh alright, it was Mr T's 40p but what's his is mine, yes?)!



Probably means that it was in Monday's paper - the This is London website sometimes gets updated overnight.   Sorry to have forced you to part with the money


----------



## IntoStella (Feb 4, 2004)

lang rabbie said:
			
		

> Sorry to have forced you to part with the money


....And for the Evilly Substandard as well.


----------



## tarannau (Feb 4, 2004)

Apparently the same review appeared in the Metro yesterday. And I missed that too.

Someone paraphrased the review as something like:

... Railton Road.... standard lazy-journo guff about the riots and area...blah.....food very good ....friendly service.... but it feels like eating in Ikea. Close your eyes and you'll be impressed..

Which, if correct, tends to echo the opinions of the place on this thread. Guess the quality of that (not) laminate flooring isn't really shining through..


Incidentally, trade in A66 seems to be picking up, with healthy crowds spotted in there most nights on my way home. Still don't like the look of the place, but the people in there look happy enough. And the food being served doesn't look bad on the plate either. 

Still tempted to go in there, but I've be got to be in the right mood. And there's no way I'm going to sit anywhere near that 'bollock' posters...


----------



## Gramsci (Feb 6, 2004)

Went by their last Sunday about 12 30 at it was buzy --unlike Neon which was empty-so it must be doing something right.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2012)

What's this place called now? Brixton Bar and Grill? Yet another place I've never set foot in.


----------



## Winot (Mar 8, 2012)

Ah, a restaurant opens in Brixton and Urban75 produces an 18 page thread on gentrification and racism.  Those were the days.


----------



## clandestino (Mar 8, 2012)

If you take a look at the posters on this thread that have been banned, that's gentrification in action! Cocktails all round!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Mar 8, 2012)

Huge bump 

What a blast from the past


----------



## T & P (Mar 9, 2012)

Winot said:


> Ah, a restaurant opens in Brixton and Urban75 produces an 18 page thread on gentrification and racism. Those were the days.


I don't think it's _any_ different today tbh


----------



## el-ahrairah (Aug 21, 2012)

Ol Nick said:


> *Neon (and Jay Rayner)*
> 
> His views on Neon, http://travel.guardian.co.uk/restaurants/story/0,13739,1010524,00.html.
> 
> ...


 
ah, how prescient.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Aug 21, 2012)

So the gentrification had started by 2003 then? Anyone moved to Brixton in the last nine years got anything to confess?


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 21, 2012)

Winot said:


> Ah, a restaurant opens in Brixton and Urban75 produces an 18 page thread on gentrification and racism. Those were the days.


 



el-ahrairah said:


> ah, how prescient.


 
Anyone remember the rumour that Jamie Oliver was seen sniffing around Brady's with a putative view to "pimping it up" for the gents? It might actually be on this thread, come to mention it.


----------



## snowy_again (Aug 21, 2012)

He's going down the obvious route and is opening a place on Ladbroke Grove doing a cooking training / lesson / restaurant place in the old Woolies I think.


----------



## the button (Aug 21, 2012)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> So the gentrification had started by 2003 then? Anyone moved to Brixton in the last nine years got anything to confess?


I moved out in 2002. Beginning of the end, tbh


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 21, 2012)

I moved in in 2002 I think


----------



## Chilavert (Aug 21, 2012)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> So the gentrification had started by 2003 then? Anyone moved to Brixton in the last nine years got anything to confess?


I was still living with Mummy and Daddy in 2002. Left St Andrews Uni in 2000 and then spent two years travelling in Asia and Australia so obviously nothing to do with me.


----------



## nagapie (Aug 21, 2012)

I arrived in 2003, you can all blame me.


----------



## el-ahrairah (Aug 21, 2012)

2005, so it's basically my fault.


----------



## fortyplus (Aug 21, 2012)

I'd like to say I started it in 1989, but I was already jumping on a bandwagon then.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Aug 21, 2012)

isvicthere? said:


> Anyone remember the rumour that Jamie Oliver was seen sniffing around Brady's with a putative view to "pimping it up" for the gents? It might actually be on this thread, come to mention it.


 
Maybe this post?

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/the-brixton-bar.4780/page-9#post-240618


----------



## editor (Aug 21, 2012)

T & P said:


> I don't think it's _any_ different today tbh


I'm still doing my bit!


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Aug 21, 2012)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> So the gentrification had started by 2003 then? Anyone moved to Brixton in the last nine years got anything to confess?


People were saying it started in 1994 when the Atlantic became the Dogstar....


----------



## fortyplus (Aug 21, 2012)

Seriously, I think it actually started in the late 80s property boom when many Windrush-generation Jamaicans sold up (or out).  The people who bought their houses were first-wave gentrifiers, the people for whom the Dogstar  and its ilk was created. (We bought ours from a property speculator who had bought it from a Jamaican man who went back, but we saw lots of places with belongings packed up ready to go). That I have always fucking hated the Dogstar doesn't let me off the hook of being partly responsible for some of the changing demographic of Brixton.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Aug 21, 2012)

Maybe it started when they built the new flats at the top of Railton Road after the original houses were burnt down in 1981...!!!


----------



## Boudicca (Aug 21, 2012)

Brixton Hatter said:


> People were saying it started in 1994 when the Atlantic became the Dogstar....


 
Oh bugger, I remember that, have I been here that long?  I must have been a gentrification pioneer then.


----------



## editor (Aug 23, 2012)

I remember the Atlantic. I drank there a couple of times, but it wasn't exactly what you'd call welcoming to all comers.


----------



## newbie (Aug 23, 2012)

fortyplus said:


> Seriously, I think it actually started in the late 80s property boom when many Windrush-generation Jamaicans sold up (or out).


that sellup gathered pace in the years after 1981, though there weren't many buyers until after the great GLC hard to let giveaway prompted the years of the skips.  That was the kickstart that began to change the innercity into somewhere desirable to live.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2012)

newbie said:


> that sellup gathered pace in the years after 1981, though there weren't many buyers until after the great GLC hard to let giveaway prompted the years of the skips.  That was the kickstart that began to change the innercity into somewhere desirable to live.


It's strange how you date it to the 1980s when the trend had been discerned as long ago as the 1960s


----------



## TruXta (Aug 23, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> It's strange how you date it to the 1980s when the trend had been discerned as long ago as the 1960s


 
Specifically for Brixton you mean?


----------



## newbie (Aug 23, 2012)

which trend?  discernible how?


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Sep 4, 2012)

editor said:


> I remember the Atlantic. I drank there a couple of times, but it wasn't exactly what you'd call welcoming to all comers.


That's the impression i got the one time I went there.


----------



## editor (Sep 4, 2012)

wemakeyousoundb said:


> That's the impression i got the one time I went there.


Truth was that it was a pretty awful pub - and you could expect a dodgy attitude from some of its punters if your skin was the wrong colour.


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Sep 4, 2012)

editor said:


> Truth was that it was a pretty awful pub - and you could expect a dodgy attitude from some of its punters if your skin was the wrong colour.


Well only went the once but it went like this:
4 of us get in, order our pints and sit down at a table, one guy comes and stands next to our table, as the first one of us finishes his pint and puts it down on the table he picks it up brings it to the bar and comes back to stand there, it continued like this so we took our custom elsewhere; maybe the spiky coloured hair was not to their liking?


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 5, 2012)

editor said:


> I remember the Atlantic. I drank there a couple of times, but it wasn't exactly what you'd call welcoming to all comers.


Quite....you could buy drugs, guns, women.....(allegedly!)


----------



## passivejoe (Jan 20, 2014)

Aitch said:


> I was down Atlantic Rd last night and noticed that restaurant bar place Atlantics was having its opening night.  It was packed with you guessed it young hip and trendy people.  Maybe we should organise an Urban visit and ruff the place up a bit
> 
> I'm afraid to say that with this added place to Atlantic Road it is one step nearer to becoming Claphamited  We shall see



11 years of worry about being 'Claphamited'.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 20, 2014)

I like the way virtually every poster on the first page was later banned


----------



## Winot (Jan 20, 2014)

Belushi said:


> I like the way virtually every poster on the first page was later banned



Wouldn't happen these days - gentrification threads have been gentrified.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jan 21, 2014)

Winot said:


> Wouldn't happen these days - gentrification threads have been gentrified.



Yes. This thread is now an ethically-sourced, artisan-produced destination.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jan 21, 2014)

Anna Key and Intostella were banned?


----------



## Ol Nick (Jan 21, 2014)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Anna Key and Intostella were banned?


Anna Key3 and Intostella3 are now well-respected members of the U75 community. fanta3 is employed to bait them.


----------



## Onket (Jan 21, 2014)

Belushi said:


> l like the way virtually every poster on the first page was later banned


Big respect to Aitch. She's lovely.


----------



## Aitch (Jan 22, 2014)

Bloody hell, 10 years ago!


----------



## Aitch (Jan 22, 2014)

Oh and thanks Onket  x


----------



## TopCat (Jan 22, 2014)

editor said:


> Truth was that it was a pretty awful pub - and you could expect a dodgy attitude from some of its punters if your skin was the wrong colour.


I loved that pub, I used to roll up pissed, buy some weed and listed to good tunes smoking my spliff inside and got no hassle from no one. The dogawful are hardly welcoming now. Do they require a DNA swab to get in now?


----------



## el-ahrairah (Jan 22, 2014)

TopCat said:


> I loved that pub, I used to roll up pissed, buy some weed and listed to good tunes smoking my spliff inside and got no hassle from no one. The dogawful are hardly welcoming now. Do they require a DNA swab to get in now?


 

and samples of your blood and sperm.  oh, and a jar of piss, but that's to top up the beer supply.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 22, 2014)

Belushi said:


> I like the way virtually every poster on the first page was later banned


lol

**polishes halo**


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 22, 2014)

Belushi said:


> I like the way virtually every poster on the first page was later banned



Not that much later iirc.


----------

