Peckham?s black hair salons - Channel 4 News

[Earl Aelfheah]

I think there is a lot in what you say Seabag. I certainly don't think there is some sort of conspiracy going on. the more I think about it.. and reading that FT article linked to above, it actually sounds like these salons are being offered a pretty good deal. There are plenty of other businesses who are just thrown out of their premises without the kind of mitigation being offered in this case.

[????]

I remember when the rookeries were knocked down to make way for Trafalgar Square and Seven Dials used to be a cut throats paradise look at it now...etc, etc, etc ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[titch juicy]

Seabag Wrote:

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

> I'm slightly cautious that the predominantly white

> middle classes are rubbing there chins about this,

> because it suits their arms length 'P.C' agenda.

> But be honest, most people really don't give a

> toss. It's about money and not some darker

> motive.

>

> In some way those salons make Peckham feel more

> exotic/edgy, I wonder if it's partly that that

> drives the 'concern' over the move. I'm also

> cautious about emotive words like 'cleansing',

> because in reality it'll not lessen the mix of the

> community.

>

> There's another hair shop in E.D that's moving

> because of development, but not a dickie bird of

> interest from people.

> The owners is Irish, his rent will be increased,

> but who cares, it's just business, no?

Yes it's about money- and that's part of the reason why it's so disgusting. Let's be completely honest about this, the kind of clientele they're trying to attract to the area won't just not use the hair salons, they'd be put off coming to the area because of them.

I've overheard people on the overground, with well-to-do accents saying, "Ya Franks is amaaaaaaaazing, but peckham is such a shit hole".

Peckham is NOT a shit-hole. Peckham is amazing and it's amazing because of Franks, because of Bar Storey, because of Khans, because of the Bussey Building, because of the grocers (the grocers are incredible!), because of Peckham Refreshment Rooms, because of the butchers and churches and hair salons. Basically because all of this stuff co-exists happily and harmoniuously. The area is almost a metaphor for London and the UK as a whole and anyone that wants it all smartened up and homogenised is utterly mad in my opinion.

Peckham would lose SO much if on a Sunday morning you couldn't hear the joyous singing coming from congregations above the shops and the ladies in all their finery going to church and the amazing array of exotic fruit and veg in the open shop fronts and the gathering of communities in the hair salons with the kids all playing together.

[titch juicy]

Seabag Wrote:

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

> I'm slightly cautious that the predominantly white

> middle classes are rubbing there chins about this,

> because it suits their arms length 'P.C' agenda.

> But be honest, most people really don't give a

> toss. It's about money and not some darker

> motive.

>

> In some way those salons make Peckham feel more

> exotic/edgy, I wonder if it's partly that that

> drives the 'concern' over the move. I'm also

> cautious about emotive words like 'cleansing',

> because in reality it'll not lessen the mix of the

> community.

>

> There's another hair shop in E.D that's moving

> because of development, but not a dickie bird of

> interest from people.

> The owners is Irish, his rent will be increased,

> but who cares, it's just business, no?

I think there's a fair bit if guessing going on this post.

It might not be deliberate cleansing on a basis of colour/ethnicity, but the result is the same. It will definitely dilute the mix in the community. This is the whole point. The community has built itself around those businesses and others in the area for decades.

Do people use the barbers in ED as community gathering place? Is it Sean's you're talking about? If so, I thought he didn't have to move.

"Hopefully this post will put an end to rude ignorant people barging into my shop demanding that i tell them what is going on with the units on Barry Parade, while I'm working.

All the shops on Barry Parade are owned by one Landlord. Yes.. He was approached by Sainsburys and they were going to redevelope but that fell through. He is now going to redevelope the Parade himself but not for a year or two. He has to get plans drawn up and planning etc. etc.

Nobody was asked to leave...Everyone left on their own accord for different reasons.

The shops are not been relet as they are in a bad state of repair.

Workmen are taking down the parapet walls at the moment because the Landlord was worried they would fall because they are leaning forward.They are then putting up a nice hoarding to make the Parade look decent till he decides what to do.

So at the moment 3 successful bussiness remain trading on Barry Parade.... The Neighbour Hood Vets.. Roy Brooks estate agents and Barry Road Barbers

Thanking you Sean... Barry Road Barbers"

[Earl Aelfheah]

I agree Titch, but actually reading about the plans for Peckham Palms and also the extremely precarious position of most of the salon workers currently - weighing this also against the opportunity to improve the station entrance etc - It's clear there has been genuine thought given to how one might balance these things. The article Siduhe linked to above is quite interesting.

[titch juicy]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> I agree Titch, but actually reading about the

> plans for Peckham Palms and also the extremely

> precarious position of most of the salon workers

> currently - weighing this also against the

> opportunity to improve the station entrance etc -

> It's clear there has been genuine thought given to

> how one might balance these things. The article

> Siduhe linked to above is quite interesting.

I admit, I haven't read it. Will do now.

[titch juicy]

titch juicy Wrote:

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

> rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I agree Titch, but actually reading about the

> > plans for Peckham Palms and also the extremely

> > precarious position of most of the salon

> workers

> > currently - weighing this also against the

> > opportunity to improve the station entrance etc

> -

> > It's clear there has been genuine thought given

> to

> > how one might balance these things. The article

> > Siduhe linked to above is quite interesting.

>

>

> I admit, I haven't read it. Will do now.

Have now read it and it just reinforces what i'm saying.

The one word that leapt off the screen was 'segregation'. That's exactly what it is. Move them out of sight and out of mind.

?Peckham is one of our key town centres,? says Labour councillor Mark Williams, Southwark?s cabinet member for regeneration and new homes. ?There?s a number of projects we?re delivering to improve the area for residents. To enable that work, we need to move the existing businesses, which are predominantly Afro-Caribbean beauty businesses, so we?ll be building [Peckham Palms] for them.?

For which residents? The residents that might want to use the posh new coffee shops, boutiques and restaurants and the kind of residents that you're trying to attract to the area that won't want to see black hair salons at work in their new posh quarter.

Not for the residents that rely on the money being made in the hair salons; because business will definitely suffer from being tucked away out of sight. Footfall is a huge thing; the developers know this. If it wasn't they'd turn Bournemouth Close into a set of units where they could have housed Honest Burger and Peckham Refreshment Rooms etc.

[nxjen]

titch juicy Wrote:

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

>

>

> Not for the residents that rely on the money being

> made in the hair salons; because business will

> definitely suffer from being tucked away out of

> sight. Footfall is a huge thing; the developers

> know this. If it wasn't they'd turn Bournemouth

> Close into a set of units where they could have

> housed Honest Burger and Peckham Refreshment Rooms

> etc.

I agree with much of what you say but this is where I disagree. Women have a more committed**, ongoing relationship with their hair than where to have a bite to eat and will seek out familiar and good salons. Indeed it could become a specialist centre that attracts Afro Caribbean women from all over London.

**This sentiment may sufffer from being either weird or pretentious

[titch juicy]

nxjen Wrote:

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

> titch juicy Wrote:

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

> -----

> >

> >

> > Not for the residents that rely on the money

> being

> > made in the hair salons; because business will

> > definitely suffer from being tucked away out of

> > sight. Footfall is a huge thing; the developers

> > know this. If it wasn't they'd turn Bournemouth

> > Close into a set of units where they could have

> > housed Honest Burger and Peckham Refreshment

> Rooms

> > etc.

>

> I agree with much of what you say but this is

> where I disagree. Women have a more committed**,

> ongoing relationship with their hair than where to

> have a bite to eat and will seek out familiar and

> good salons. Indeed it could become a specialist

> centre that attracts Afro Caribbean women from all

> over London.

>

> **This sentiment may sufffer from being either

> weird or pretentious

I hope you're right, but if they also rely a lot on footfall, as suggested by at least some in that FT piece, then surely they will suffer.

I wonder if it will end with the hair salons or whether the rest of Rye Lane will slowly become more homogenised. it's inevitable surely. It creeps outwards.

Also, i'd love to know how the residents form the estate behind those Bournemouth Close garages will put up with late night parties in the salons.

[Seabag]

Thank you rahrahrah

My point is that people want it to be about 'the community' that might have to move, whereas it's as much about money and opportunities as anything. You can't rebuild, whilst people are inside, so you'd have to vacate.

London is being rebuilt, that includes Peckham. Something's give, some things go, ever it will be.

I like Peckham, it's a nice place to see the world. But it going to change, can't stop that.

[Jah Lush]

Similar things are happening with the businesses in the railway arches in Brixton and Herne Hill. Those businesses are being pushed out due to very high rent increases.

[titch juicy]

Jah Lush Wrote:

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

> Similar things are happening with the businesses

> in the railway arches in Brixton and Herne Hill.

> Those businesses are being pushed out due to very

> high rent increases.

The stuff in Brixton is even worse than Peckham.

London is becoming less and less interesting and attractive.

[Seabag]

Jah Lush Wrote:

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

> Similar things are happening with the businesses

> in the railway arches in Brixton and Herne Hill.

> Those businesses are being pushed out due to very

> high rent increases.

Exactly.

I have a yard in an arch, in the 'once' arse end of nowhere Deptford.

Now its changing, I suppose we were part of the change, but it was early days and we took a punt. My arch looks and operates much as others do/did. But changes are happening, we're not sure how the future will pan out as Deptford revives.

However, when the rents change, the values go up, what do we do? We stay, pay and realise we had it good for a long while. It's much why shops set up in cheap places, its how we as businesses make the best of what's there. It's part of the transaction arena we thrive in.

Streets are trails of history, ask people like Lou and Foxy and others. They'll tell you of many things about change.

[Earl Aelfheah]

It's a difficult one. Areas change. Peckham's changed many times and previous businesses made way for what's there now. I accept that these hair salons have an important role, beyond just providing hair styling. But many businesses get pushed out when areas are redeveloped and they're not often provided with alternative, custom built premises as is happening in this case. To say it's segregation is a bit much. What's being proposed mirrors what currently exists - namely a hub / cluster of similar establishments which brings it's own benefits. The question of whether they will suffer from the reduced footfall is significant (if indeed they do rely primarily on passing trade rather than a loyal customer base), but it sounds as though that is something which is being thought of. What is significant is that many of those operating in the current units are only hiring a chair and pay a significant amount of their earnings to do so. It sounds like under the new arrangement, they'll have far more control than they do currently. Fundamentally though, it sounds to me, as though genuine thought has been given to how the impact of the changes might be mitigated, at least to some degree.

[titch juicy]

I agree that some thought has gone into it, but perhaps i'm too cynical because it feels to me that the thought has gone into trying to make it look less like segregation, when it (to me anyway) clearly seems to be.

There's no doubt in my mind that the racial profile of the area is being altered to make it more attractive to the (primarily) white middle classes. Because that's who will bring more money in. Of course no-one would ever admit to this, but the creeping cleansing of the area is in full and glorious swing.

It didn't start like this- it started accidentally with art students from Goldsmiths and Camberwell moving into the area due to cheap rents and cheap studio space and in turn making it interesting. Interesting to the demographic that is now being deliberately targeted because there's money to be made.

If i'm wrong and someone convinces me so i'll gladly admit it. And I know I've oversimplified it and perhaps missed key points. I'm happy to be educated, but this is my current understanding.

[Nigello]

Titch - I agree that Peckham is not a shit-hole but (small) parts of it are, and bits of Rye Lane are included in that sector.

To claim that it adds "edginess" or "vibrancy" is patronising and condescending: one person's "coolness" is another person's banal (eg. shops selling yams or gallon-bottles of Vimto; West African hair salons and barber shops are just workaday venues for the people that use them often and out of necessity, not a colourful backdrop and warm glow-giver to Instagramming bien-pensants).

Roll on the rail station's revamp, Iceland's bridge (yes, really), Khan's reinstallation of the art-deco atrium/roof and the continued opening of small shops, bars and cafes etc. Down with rotting fruit and veg, bird-trapping tumble weave and post-pissup vomit ponds!

[Seabag]

Money, last time I looked didn't have a skin tone. ALL of it is about opportunities, like when this 'accidental' wave of students took up residence. It was cheap, they moved in = transaction related to opportunity and income.

Stop with the 'cleansing' language please, its sounding like some kind of conspiracy theory cark. It doesn't do anyone any good and it's patronising.

Sadly, most of the money that goes in is 'by investment' from people who see very little of the place they invest in, they do it as a punt, to see the best return. Not to clean up an area and drive people (whatever colour) out.

[titch juicy]

Oh come now you know I was speaking generally about money. And you know if you showed money relative to demographic then there'd be a lot more of it lining white pockets than black in this country.

And regarding cleansing- it absolutely is. Sanitising an area to make it more palatable to a certain demographic. Do you disagree that this is happening?

And to Nigello- that's so patronising. As equally as it might be banal to some it will be essential and a joy to others. Even those that use them regularly. To be able to find certain goods in London that you'd usually find at home and perhaps can't get in Sainsbury's or Tesco. It's things like that that build communities.

And so what if it makes for good Instagram pics for others? I don't use Instagram. Isn't it good that people find joy in other cultures?

I don't think it's edgy. If anything the developements at the Bussey Building are more edgy (such a naff word). Yes I think it's vibrant and interesting (more than anything).

As I mentioned before I think what I like most about Peckham in it's current format is the fact you have a few different communities living so well alongside each other. It works so well. It's not broken. But someone still wants to fix it, because-money. That's it.

[Seabag]

Be honest, phrasing development with words such as 'sanitising' and 'cleansing' are emotive and used to suit your agenda.

But time to get real! nothing stays the same here in the vibrant/interesting city we live in. What you want sounds like a petting zoo of sorts, with all the little areas there in their place, frozen in time to suit a nice little diversity vision.

No thanks to that.

[titch juicy]

I get that things don't stand still but progress isn't always a good thing. Trump as leader of the free world, economies in trillions of debt and Brexit and the March of the far right across large swathes of Europe testify to that.

If things carry on unchecked then most won't be able to afford to live in London to enjoy it. It's all wrapped up in the same crazy march of progress in London.

Perhaps we'll end up with something like Geneva. Lovely and clean where everything works and the few that can afford to live there can afford to pay ?10 for a latte. But soul stealingly dull.

You're welcome to that.

[nxjen]

London "where everything works". Nah, that will never happen.

[edhistory]

Here is an example of Southwark Council propaganda for the black business ghetto.

[Seabag]

edhistory Wrote:

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

> Here is an example of Southwark Council propaganda

> for the black business ghetto.

It seems it's either 'Geneva' or the 'Projects' for Peckham

[titch juicy]

This book sounds like a good read. Be very interesting to see what parallels there are with London. Plenty I imagine.

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/the-hidden-systems-at-work-behind-gentrification?utm_source=vicefbuk&utm_campaign=global