In due time, could the East End ever become as important as the West End (London, UK)

[Qubert]

I know that as recently as the 1980s the very notion would have been laughable, but when one sees the amount of gentrification in Spitalfields, Shoreditch, Bow etc coupled with the Elizabeth Line opening I can see it being possible. If you take the area roughly bracketed by The City, Stratford and Canary Wharf could one day this become a second premiere entertainment/cultural hub as much as say Soho/Mayfair is?

[iheartthed]

The "East End" area as you defined it seems too broad to me to compare with the West End. Maybe Shoreditch-Spitalfields-City though.

[Minato Ku]

No I don't think so.
The East End doesn't have the dense urban layout as the West End. There are some spokes of dense activities but it's not a big contiguous zone of activity.
As said before this are is too broadly defined and too big. Are Stratford and Canary Wharf part of the East End ?
The East End, as defined here, is still largely residential areas with some hubs inbetween.

The issue in London is that the "West End" is a wrong terminology. West End isn't an "end" and can't be compared with the East End. West End is central, infact it's the dead center of today London while the East End is the periphery of Central London.

The eastern equivalent of the West End is the City of London while the western equivalent of the East End are the areas west of Hide Park (Chealsea, Kensington, Shepherd's Bush, Hammersmith, Notting Hill...)

Railway terminus are built around the West End (and the City of London) and it's the main focus of underground routes under it.
It's different for the East End where lines are there because it's in the way to serve the City. Elizabeth line doesn't change anything about because it is thought with the same ideas, how to improve the commute to West End and City of London. White Chapel is just sole station in the core section of Elizabeth line that is primarily located in the East End, the rest are located in branches.

[muppet]

The East End has an issue with its urban fabric that can never replicate the West End, in the form of built density (not population), and mix of usage.
Although there's no zoning in London (instead every new development is independently judged on character and impact), there is more self-segregation of residentials,
and due to being the poorer half, fewer offices:

At the best and busiest, it's still a shadow of the West End -plenty of shops and restaurants, just not wall-to-wall no matter how many highrises you put up:


www.webbaviation.co.uk


Below is the best connected site in the country, where two tube lines, two light rail lines, two heavy rail lines, an international HSR, two fast cross-city lines, and a normal cross-city line meet.
Plus a big bus terminus and interchange. It has an olympic stadium and park, and is opening 3 major cultural institutions, but still quite the cultural desert, whose main draw remains the Westfield
megamall. If this was central, it's still devoid of genuine street life (that funnels into the mall), and still dominated by residentials.








Even commercial districts are a step away from Courbousien tower-in-the-park residentials, just as full of nimbys. And most areas are irreversibly residential, albeit peppered with shops and haunted by tribal, feral hipsters.
-There are a few pockets of dense, historical fabric, but much of it was bombed away in the war:





The best you can hope for is of course Canary Wharf/ Wood Wharf/ Limehouse but even then shops are buried in a Canadian style underground mall, and little life on the streets (though that's slowly changing).
Beneath the towers it's calm, pretty and liveable -but no crowds or shops, who are relegated to a luxury, windowless existence below-decks.

[muppet]

Compare that with the West End which is a wonderful, chaotic mess of everything, all at once; there's just no replicating of what makes a city great. Bars, restaurants, shops and nightlife at bottom, office/apartments above, streets packed day and night. Mined with detail and interest:


https://c7.alamy.com/comp/E8E1BB/aer...k-looking-west

https://c8.alamy.com/comp/DBW112/aer...rrounding-area



Even its skyscraper business districts sprout from dense urban history:






www.webbaviation.co.uk



And there's something to be said for street after street of palatial buildings - cachet, which the East End can't lure away:







In short the West End (and The City) is London's centre -commercial, entertainment, tourist, business and political, while the East End isn't. The latter is more the halfway house between residential and ex-industrial, with pockets of office towers. That fabric will be hard to completely change, given the resident's rights and local councils dedicated to catering to their needs.

[Docere]

The West End is London's equivalent of Midtown Manhattan.

[MonkeyRonin]

What's happening in London is basically what's being repeated in big, expensive cities the world-over: the cultural zeitgeist has been priced out of the prime urban districts. And so the cultural gravity shifts, but without the urban heft to back it up; so we get a bunch of interesting quasi-urban, often semi-industrial but ultimately somewhat aesthetically unsatisfying areas; and then we have the areas of first-rate urban fabric with their legacy institutions and some remaining vestiges of cultural relevance, but that have become culturally or demographically less interesting.

Essentially, there's more "interesting" stuff spread out over a larger area of lesser urbanity, but less of an extreme concentration of very interesting stuff in the best urban neighbourhoods. Not sure whether that ultimately makes for a better city or not, but it's just how things have gone.

[kool maudit]

I stayed in that triangular, neo-Deco hotel in the centre of the picture a few years back. I have never before or since had this reaction to a house or building, but I swear it was haunted.

Also nearly got in a fight with some guys circling around on bikes near the upper church. A day later, they were bugging some guy coming out of Pret and he took a swing at them. Big commotion. Bad vibes in the pandemic-era city.

[big T]

Muppet, thanks for these posts. I'm just back from London, and while I've been a couple times for work I can't pretend to know the city. Your commentary and illustrations shine a different light on what I saw there.

[muppet]

Thanks man, its nice of you to say -what line of work brings you to the Big Smoke? Next you're about buzz me!

[muppet]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

I stayed in that triangular, neo-Deco hotel in the centre of the picture a few years back. I have never before or since had this reaction to a house or building, but I swear it was haunted.

Also nearly got in a fight with some guys circling around on bikes near the upper church. A day later, they were bugging some guy coming out of Pret and he took a swing at them. Big commotion. Bad vibes in the pandemic-era city.

The haunted hotel (by Norman Foster, on the site of an old theatre) - TELL ME EVERYTHING

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by muppet

The haunted hotel (by Norman Foster, on the site of an old theatre) - TELL ME EVERYTHING

Do you have more info of this theatre site?

[muppet]

It was the Gaiety Theatre before being bombed in WWII



Replaced by an art deco office




Then the neo deco Silken Hotel in 2013





More info:

https://www.drawingdesign.co.uk/proj.../silken-hotel/


http://www.arthurlloyd.co.uk/GaietyT...ThenAndNow.htm

[muppet]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

What's happening in London is basically what's being repeated in big, expensive cities the world-over: the cultural zeitgeist has been priced out of the prime urban districts. And so the cultural gravity shifts, but without the urban heft to back it up; so we get a bunch of interesting quasi-urban, often semi-industrial but ultimately somewhat aesthetically unsatisfying areas; and then we have the areas of first-rate urban fabric with their legacy institutions and some remaining vestiges of cultural relevance, but that have become culturally or demographically less interesting.

Essentially, there's more "interesting" stuff spread out over a larger area of lesser urbanity, but less of an extreme concentration of very interesting stuff in the best urban neighbourhoods. Not sure whether that ultimately makes for a better city or not, but it's just how things have gone.

That's spot on. The West End is now very moneyed and affluent, and utterly unaffordable in rents -both residential and business -full of chains and luxury boutiques (and adversely American candy stores that double for money laundering). Very pretty now, but gone are the world's largest entertainment districts (thank you Gen Z and your inability to afford $15 pints), many of the street markets, clubs, independent stores and every cafe, restaurant and bakery that could afford to be calm. It's still buzzing and crowded, but lost its edge to flower baskets.

Overall the West End is indeed very beautiful with pizzazz for the visitor, less so for locals. Thankfully they've managed to save some iconic communities such as Chinatown and Edgeware Rd (little Arabia) or Denmark St (for music), Neal's Yard (wellbeing), St James' (bespoke goods), Savile Row (suit makers) etc but they now largely serve out-of-towners. The Italian community is gone, Covent Garden no longer sells market produce and flowers, and the gay village is down to one main strip.

The crowded, popular parts of the East End are now seeing the same thing happen, made over by multinationals and kicking out the genuine locals, creatives, nightlife districts, working and middle classes to even further east or south of the river. The 'centre' of the city is constantly expanding, and gaining more built complexity, however losing its cultural one.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by muppet

The crowded, popular parts of the East End are now seeing the same thing happen, made over by multinationals and kicking out the genuine locals, creatives, nightlife districts, working and middle classes to even further east or south of the river. The 'centre' of the city is constantly expanding, but as you mentioned, it's losing its complexity.

Am I correct in the perception that the hypergentrification energy is spreading east in London much more strongly than south? A decade or more ago, you heard a lot of murmurs of gentrification in places like Brixton, but it doesn't seem anything like the transformation in Shoreditch. Did the trajectory of gentrification change because of all the money that was pumped into east London for the Olympics?

[muppet]

It's actually more in South London now - the East End was historically industrial, and thus bombed flat in the war. And there's only so far a discerning moneymaker will decamp to when faced with concrete estates to live it up in, or sterile condos without streetlife.

South London, although working class with plenty of the same postwar housing to endure, retains many, many more old buildings. Also urban fabric, synonymous with 'Village London' and its high street areas that are the remains of swallowed up towns and villages from Victorian times. Also better connected and closer to the centre, with a solid base of rich, affluent suburbs unlike the East End.

In my area you get these usual wonders of London architecture:



But right behind them streets of mansion blocks facing the city's best park, which is something you just don't see in the East End:



Places like Brixton and Peckham are 'hold outs' due to becoming new nightlife centres, and thus having an edge -despite the new developments, stupid rents, Michelin stars and chichi markets pioneering through the chaff, there are still huge amounts of poor living in dodgy estates. Saying that, poor districts such as Clapham, Bermondsey, Barnes, Putney and even Wandsworth are now synonymous with money, joining traditionally posh areas such as Blackheath, Bromley, Sheen, Richmond and Greenwich, the last one a Royal Borough and UNESCO Heritage site.

Much of South London is seeing an influx of the middle class due to the astronomical rents elsewhere -back in the day I was maybe one of a handful of my workmates who lived south of the river, my base for 25 years -a decade later and almost all of them join me.

[muppet]

Where I live is a terrific example -an ugly, postwar housing estate in Clapham Junction, not to be confused with Clapham miles away (they preferred to rename our local station, as 'Battersea Junction' was too redolent of the city's poor). It's actually a rare gated development having been converted in the 80s, before legislation, but the epitome of a mix of working and middle class, where most of the residents are rich but also many (like me), poor.

They're some of the ugliest buildings in the city -and most prominent for being next to one of the busiest train stations in the world. Some new highrises are planned to block us out, and a near $2 billion development behind that will triple the units in the estates behind to 2,440, while converting 70% social rent into private. The station and immediate area is exceedingly ugly:





However jump the wall and the grounds are lush and manicured (fountains, koi ponds, wisteria-covered walkways etc), plus indoor pool, spa, gym.





Our local 'High Street' 5 minutes away (a term denoting one of 600 local centres in the city -London's pretty much a '15 minute city') is typical of South London now.

I will only eat, drink and shop in the more working class/ lower middle class area in the first 5 mins that's fast disappearing.

• Video Link

^After the crossing into Northcote Street, it becomes an upper middle class hangout, where I rarely go and can't afford even the charity shops, that only accept designer donations. This is South London rn, a subtle transition of territories between the have-nots and haves, but at the moment it is a nice mix. However, how much longer can it last?

[iheartthed]

^I saw a Blank Street Coffee in the first few mins of the video. Say no more lol.

[shadyunltd]

As a Londoner myself, Muppet is 100% on the money.

However, re: Wandsworth, in particular the area between Wandsworth and Clapham Commons (i.e., two public parks/lawns in South London), i.e., just South of Clapham Junction station, is one of the postcodes with the highest household income in the entire Greater London Area.

Young affluent professionals/families (e.g., lawyers, bankers, etc.) have been moving there for the past decades as they have been priced out of the West End or desirable areas nearby such as St. John's Wood / Notting Hill / Chelsea / South Kensington, i.e., neighborhoods with good transport links and great schools.

The result is that the area has been gentrified to hell and back, and any "decent" townhouse there will set you back in excess of £1.5m, if not £2m.

That said, you do get more for your money versus in comparable areas in North London (i.e., Camden, Islington). There's something of a tax North of the Thames.

[kool maudit]

Originally Posted by muppet

The haunted hotel (by Norman Foster, on the site of an old theatre) - TELL ME EVERYTHING

I knew it had replaced the Gaiety but did not know it was by Foster. It is a strange hotel, was placed there for work, very sort of white leather, purple LEDs. The last place in London where you would expect to think of this sort of thing.

But I did think of it. I had a big suite, but it was very hard to relax and sleep because it felt strongly like you were being watched. I even went to check whether one of the windows perhaps had a view into another room. Overpowering. Items were moved, and although you can consider that housekeeping has entry, this didn't happen alongside cleaning. I was studying for a certification, so had a lot of papers and such, and these were shifted around.

The strangest, though, was the sleep. I could hardly do it. I would sleep in chopped-up little bursts despite being exhausted. Very strange for me.

On the first night, I had a dream in which I was having a long discussion about death and dying with someone I knew 20 years ago. As we spoke, I could hear a door opening and rushed to close it but couldn't find it.

The next night, the same. Another dream in which for some reason I was being told things about death and dying, this time from a family member. Again, a door kept creaking open, but this time I could see it, and in the dream I became very angry and shouted "No!" while slamming the door.

The next night, it was all gone. Perhaps it was just stress from the test, which I passed, and so I was relaxed. I like reading about things like this, but never had any real sense that I had experienced anything. But that place made me wonder.