Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Local historian and author Brian Green, of Dulwich Village, will be giving a fascinating insight into the transformations of East Dulwich and Dulwich Village in the Victorian period at an illustrated talk at Dulwich Picture Gallery ? this Sunday, 22 November in aid of Dulwich Helpline. See more information at: http://dulwichonview.org.uk/2009/11/17/victorian-dulwich/ Anyone willing to go and give us a report back?

James Wrote:

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

> Dulwich Village = The Daily Telegraph

> East Dulwich = The Observer



DV = NIMBYist Tories

ED = We'll be liberals until we sell this poky mid-terrace and move to Clapham like we've always dreamed of

I think you folks are missing the point of this thread. If I may refer you to the opening post, ?Local historian and author Brian Green, of Dulwich Village, will be giving a fascinating insight into the transformations of East Dulwich and Dulwich Village in the Victorian period?


It isn?t really to do with our employers not paying us enough to afford Georgian piles.

???? Wrote:

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

> I have no intention of moving to Clapham...I would

> move to Dulwich Village if I had the moolah



So would you become slowly Tory in DV? (presuming you aren't currently)


Criminals have no-one else to blame for their behaviour, etc?

er, you like defining social attitudes/political views etc by entirely by postcodes? oh well


Nope, If a couple of million dropped my way I'd like a bigger house than the biggest in SE22 but would like to stay local as I've been round here for 25 years, so I'd look at Dulwich Village with it's wall to wall hangers and floggers....


Quite happy with SE22 and all its beardy lefties and guardian readers. Is that the SE22 Characteristic on your postcode socialmap thingy?

???? Wrote:

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

> Quite happy with SE22 and all its beardy lefties

> and guardian readers. Is that the SE22

> Characteristic on your postcode socialmap thingy?



Sit in The Greyhound for 20 mins and look around you.

Brendan Wrote:

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

> I think you folks are missing the point of this

> thread. If I may refer you to the opening post,

> ?Local historian and author Brian Green, of

> Dulwich Village, will be giving a fascinating

> insight into the transformations of East Dulwich

> and Dulwich Village in the Victorian period?

> It isn?t really to do with our employers not

> paying us enough to afford Georgian piles.


well spotted Brendan


This is some of the blurb just a click away...


Brian Green writes ?East Dulwich was transformed from a pleasant rural area of farmland and hedgerows, studded here and there by Georgian mansions each with attractive gardens and winding paths, into a maze of small streets made up of similar but not identical Victorian terraced villas ? and it all happened within the space of 25 years.

In and around Dulwich Village, the pace of change was slower. A handful of farms still supplied milk to local houses into the 20th Century and the area retained much of its open land, transformed from hay fields into playing fields. A wealthy elite built grandly on its surrounding hills, looked after by an army of domestic servants.

Separating these two diverse communities was the commercial thoroughfare of Lordship Lane with its early chain stores and providing the transport links which daily transported many of the new population by tram, or train to their offices in London?.

Brian Green, who has written and lectured extensively on Dulwich?s history for many years, will explain the causes and effects of this urbanisation.

Ted Max Wrote:

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

> Local historian and author Brian Green, of Dulwich

> Village> BUT HE'LL BE BIASED!


No more than any other historian knowledgable about their home territory? :-

Brian Green, who has written and lectured extensively on Dulwich?s history for many years, will explain the causes and effects of this urbanisation.

Ted Max Wrote:

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

> 'twas just a rubbish joke, Eileen.


Didn't seem rubbish - easily, given this Forum's psyche, it could have been a heart felt comment! The ? indicates a ... question anyway abt if he is or isn't biased... Maybe I am lacking in humour though I do laugh a lot on reading EDF posts.

???? Wrote:

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

> So tell me about SE5, I used to live there. What

> were my politics and social attitues over that

> way, I'm buggered if I can remeber...or do I have

> to go and sit the Hermits Cave? Not a bad idea

> actually.



I think you were too busy sitting in traffic on the Walworth Road to think about politics.


But you'd come home knowing the Hermits Cave did a nice cheap pint of Guiness and was one of the better pubs in South London, I'd imagine,

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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