Environmental
Dissertation
In the wake of the chaos created by both hurricane Katrina in the American state of New Orleans and the 7/7 Underground bombings in London, the international media has recreated the awareness of segregation is most of the world’s largest urban cities.
However segregation has been around from the early days of tribes in Africa continuing on to modern times, yet the media and society have labelled it with a negative conation when it is a natural human behaviour. Rather then looking at segregation in terms of differences like ethnicity, social class, and religion we should be focusing on the contrasts between physical and mental environments and their subconscious effects on their community. It is instinctive to build a community based around similar people and ideas however it is those individuals outside and sometimes inside whom develop the community that ultimately affect its outcome over generations. Thinking of it this way we have a better understanding of why segregation naturally occurs even in some of the worlds most sophisticated societies.
According to the theory of evolutionary biology from the creation of mankind all humans have been scientifically created equally only environment creates difference. In 1859 Charles Darwin redefined the way humans think about evolution with The Origin of Species. Darwin stated that we are all from ape-like ancestors and ultimately share a single common ancestor with all living species on earth. In addition to this theory two key processes of evolution are necessary: heredity and mutation. Heredity is simply attributes passed down to offspring thru their parents’ genes and is responsible for things like hair colour or body type. However mutation is when two genes mix and create a new gene unknown to the offspring’s parents. However most mutations are not beneficial to their recipients and are commonly called birth defects in the human species. Yet thru evolution some mutations can be beneficial and even increase their recipients’ chances of survival or reproduction over their own parents. Because beneficial mutations can help species survive or reproduce better they end up spreading faster and lasting longer then their unbeneficial counterparts.
The mixture of these mutations along with each species environment is the makings of natural selection. For example if two of the same species are hunted by a predator and ones of those two species eyes have mutated to be crisper and have an increased focal length it is quite obvious which one will escape and thus spread it beneficial genes on to future offspring. However it is important to remember that with out the presents of the predator in this species environment the beneficial mutation of better eyes may not have been so beneficial after all. Evolutionary biology explains why plants, animals and even humans have certain physical appearances and why certain species are extinct. However plants and animals lack one element that makes humans vastly more superior, the mind and more importantly its ability to evolve and reason.
One of the most powerful theories of the mind is cognitive psychology and when combined with evolutionary biology creates the two basic theories of evolutionary psychology, one of the most absolute scientific accounts of human nature. Cognitive psychology is based on the premises of two ideas, actions are caused by mental processes and the mind is a computer.1 Looking at these two ideas in detail makes it possible to understand human behaviour in a factual method rather then presuppositions. The idea that actions are caused by mental processes is quite obvious; everything is done for a reason and before an action is taken thought goes into it. The most basic example of this is getting dressed in the morning, if a glance out the window shows rain clouds emanate chances are you will wear a raincoat and dress warmly. The second part of cognitive psychology states that the mind is a computer and runs a sort of software that is always being programmed. The British mathematician Alan Turing who developed this theory said that the physical machine of the computer or the brain could be designed differently yet the software of the computer or the mind would run identically on any computer.
After more research into the mind people including the American philosopher and psychologist Jerry Fodor began to realise that the mind was not a simple general software program but a far more complex system of case specific modules. These modules include most of our sense like taste, sound, vision, touch and smell. However where Fodor thought there were 7 distinct modules including a central processor two American psychologists, John Tooby and Leda Cosmides questioned the number of modules. They argued that in fact there where in the hundreds and maybe thousands of specific modules that make up the mind. In addition to this Tooby and Cosmides disputed the idea of a central processor and claimed that there was no such thing as a general problem only specific ones.2 These specific problems are the result of environmental challenges, going back to the example of getting dressed in the morning a specific module would tell your mind that it looks like it is going to rain and be cold, thus the appropriate action would be to wear a rain coat and dress warmly. These specific environmental problems are called adaptations because organisms need to adapt in order to continue existing. Just as in evolutionary biology adapting and learning from the environment around you is the only way to evolve specific mental modules. However it was only after then human lineage split from the chimpanzee that we began to develop unique human modules. What makes human evolution so much more important and different then that of plants and animals is not our physical environments that we often share but our unique ability to have a vastly complex social environment.
Social environments can range from anything from a group of a few individuals all the way to the billions of people who make up this world and it is these groups acting in similar ways that makes up society. Margaret Thatcher notoriously doubted the existence of society and said there were only individual men and women and families.3 This maybe true on first glance but a stronger look will reveal groups of people acting in a very ordered way. Thinking back to cognitive psychology it makes sense that if all individuals are given the same hardware and if society and upbringing program their software similarly they will act and react in similar ways. This is why Mrs. Thatcher’s theory is so flawed because in fact it is she and her government that enforce the rules society has created and are in charge of keeping it organized. This is why a ruling power or some sort of structured government is quintessential in a prosperous and successful society. Thus this is also why complete individual freewill in a society is not entirely possible. Society unfortunately runs on oppressing individual groups of people for the greater good of the rest of society. However the days of earlier civilization where kings and queens would repress the middle and lower class openly have gone due to equality and we are now in a time of covert oppression not mainly by the ruling party or government but by corporate interest.
In this days an ages of multi-million and sometime billion pound rebuilds and updates of neighbourhoods the money must come from somewhere. Unfortunately more often then not it comes from the private commercial interest that have their corporation’s wellbeing above that of the community it is rebuilding. In affect if every individual in a society is created equally and evolutionary physiology states environmental adaptations affects ones outcome we are giving free reign to corporations to influence, change and mould generations upon generations of society.
Sociologist Ruth Glass coined the term gentrification as a way of describing the process of renovating a working class or inner city neighbourhood into an affluent middle class or even upper class community by remodelling buildings and landscape. However these remodels or regenerations of neighbourhoods often end up changing not only the physical but social, economic and cultural environments for the better of the corporate interest and new residents but do not benefit the original residents. As renovation occurs property value increases and the original residents are unable to afford to live in their own homes and are thus replaced by more affluent residence while the same holds true to commercial retail space. Almost more interesting then the process of gentrification is where it takes place and who always funds and plans these processes. It does not occur in upper class or affluent middle class societies it can only hope to create that and isn’t funded or planed by the people it is indented to help. It is left up to the merger of several commercial partners whose main objective is to expand profits to submit a few nice sketches for the public to pick out.
When Mrs. Glass first used the word gentrification in 1964 she was using London as an example and said, “One by one, many of the working class quarters of London have been invaded by the middle-classes – upper and lower. Once this process of gentrification starts in a district it goes on rapidly until all or most of the original working-class occupiers are displaced and the whole social character of the district is changed.” 4 Looking at London 40 years down the line Mrs. Glass’s theory looks like a scary foreshadow to an area and even road I now call home, Elephant and Castle and Walworth Road.
By the year 2014 both Elephant and Castle and Walworth Road will have undergone regeneration worth a total of £1.5 billion. Knowing that Elephant and Castle’s environment will never physically look the same and thus lose it’s social, economic and cultural influence I intend to juxtapose this lower class soon to be affluent middle class with one that has always been in the upper classes. By examining the current physical and social environments of both Walworth Road in Elephant and Castle and Kings Road in Chelsea I hope to gather evidence and reasons of why one has and will stay on top forever and the other is doomed to a cycle of lower and middle class regeneration schemes.
To understand how these boroughs have developed in today’s society we must look back at their history and examine critical times of change to see how each community and council dealt with the it. Through constant change from individuals, and later business the development of these two communities went down two opposite economic and social paths. Chelsea’s rich history includes the likes of royalty and visionaries and thrived in its river location. In contrast Elephant and Castle history begins a bit later then Chelsea’s and is reliant more on industrial and transport income but as Greater London has expanded thru the centuries it’s commercial value has grown. As it took shape, as a middle class community its name was taken from a local public house and it’s now iconic elephant with a castle on top was derived from a then very important economic contributor, the Royal African Company whom dealt in slave trading. Yet with growth and evolution both communities have remained reliant on the same social classes over the generations and history sheds light on how economic and cultural growth still effect and exploit each community.
Chelsea’s story starts off as a modest village suburb of London dependent on fishing for its main income and becomes one of London’s richest boroughs dependent on materialism and existing wealth for it’s revenue. The first of Chelsea’s many famous residents was that of Sir Thomas More, influential author, philosopher and statesmen. In 1515 his most famous and controversial book Utopia explained for the first time the ideas of communal living and contentment with bare essentials. It describes an island nation where private property doesn’t exist and religious tolerance is practiced.5 In an effort to get out of the busy city for peace and fresh air More moved into a comfortable but modest house in Chelsea with his Utopia ideals.
As King Henry VIII grew fond of More’s wit and integrity their friendship grew stronger something that may have proved pivotal in changing Chelsea’s history. Naturally Henry VIII would make frequent visit to his friend More’s spacious yet simple household in Chelsea and obviously took a liking to it as he took possession of it after More’s controversial execution. In addition to this he exchanged an estate of his in Hampshire for the entire manor of Chelsea from Lord Sandys whom had little say in the exchange.6 Soon thereafter his fondness for Chelsea was still fresh and after presenting More’s home as a gift he built a red brick palace for himself and family just a quarter mile away. Just like that one of Chelsea’s most educated and socially minded residence was replaced by England’s most powerful and richest.
In 1537 as Henry’s children prince Edward and princess Elizabeth both lived in the just built Chelsea Palace a new and now permanent sense of royalty was instilled into the community. As both children where raised in the Palace they became use to a life of riches and excess as their father notoriously complained that his children were not suitably dressed for his high station.7 As the type of residence changed in Chelsea it is fair to say the style and taste did as well.
However it was not until late into the reign of Queen Elizabeth I that a proclamation was publish effectively banning building new homes within three miles of the city that Chelsea’s first major industry thrived in. Inadvertently this proclamation caused a decline in agriculture and horticulture in the city as most of the fertile land was now exclusively private deer hunting for royalty.8 Luckily for Chelsea it was just out side of the three-mile zone, which expanded from modern day Hyde Park to Regents Park and as a result the community thrived on market gardens. As the demand for agriculture grew and supply fell in the city it was only natural that the supply flourished in Chelsea. Soon people where travelling from outside the city to come to the markets of Chelsea but more importantly it was the first time average individuals could profit and brought money to borough that was not royal.
At the start of the seventeenth century the residents of Chelsea had been exposed to literary genius, royal wealth beyond limits, and now individual economic stability via agriculture. Chelsea homes soon transformed with the addition of many spacious and luxurious gardens built now for both profit and enjoyment. As more people then ever before came from the city to Chelsea and surrounding boroughs to escape the chaos and buy fresh fruit and vegetables the aesthetic value of each garden became more important then ever.9 In a sense this is the first commercial competition Chelsea saw and quickly grew to understand it’s value. People where keen to pick up books like Thomas Hill’s Profitable Art of Gardening the first manuscript on how to grow a successful and profitable garden.
As gardens became more into the mainstream they became, much like any new thing objects of prestige but it was not until Sir John Danvers introduced a garden of Italian manner in Chelsea that would soon change the idea of gardens. Sir John had expensive taste and was know for overspending uncontrollably, accordingly his Italian garden was filled with statues, fountains, sundials and arbours along with roses and clematis with large hedges to create something unique to Chelsea. Sir John was able to take the industry and commercial value out of gardens and replace it with recreation and beauty, which would ultimately lead to his hopeless but enjoyable debt. By the way of the residents reactions and change to gardens soon after many scholars hold Sir John Danvers responsible for Chelsea’s long and continuous history of elegant and beautiful gardens.10 It was also Sir John whom leased a site of his established garden to the Society of Apothecaries in 1673 that would later become the world famous Chelsea Physic Gardens.
As gardens grew in style and elegance amongst individuals it was not until Lord Ranelagh death in 1712 and eventual auction in 1733 of his property that would once again redefine Chelsea’s and also London’s idea of a public garden. At the time public pleasure and tea gardens where quite fashionable and neighbouring Vauxhall was the top spot for nightlife but in 1742 Ranelagh Gardens challenged that. At first visitors had mixed emotions about the Gardens compared to Vauxhall but its rococo rotunda centrepiece at 120 feet in diameter demanded attention. In 1765 that is just what it got with the likes of a nine year old Mozart performing in the colossal fireplace of the rotunda. As musical performances where moved from the early morning to the early evening an assortment of entertainment was created for the guests including the likes of masque balls, firework displays, puppet shows and performances of dance.
Ranelagh Gardens might not have had the full impact on visitors their first time but eventually won over the hearts of Londoners including Horace Walpole. On his first visit to Ranelagh he gave a modest view of it and said, “I was there last night but did not find the joy of it. Vauxhall a little better for the garden is pleasanter and one goes by water.” However only two year later he had changed his mind giving quite a different view of Ranelagh saying, “Every night constantly I go to Ranelagh, which has totally beat Vauxhall. Nobody goes anywhere else – everyone goes there.” Lastly Walpole shines some light on how busy Ranelagh got by 1748 writing, “Ranelagh is so crowded that in going there t’other night in a string of coaches, we had a stop of six and thirty minutes.” Ranelagh was the place to be for high society and nobility from it’s opening in 1742 to its closing and eventual demolition in 1803.11
Chelsea’s high society had now grown accustom to royalty, personal wealth, and intellect they now used their gardens as leisure areas and places to demonstrate their power and wealth. Intrinsic to human behaviour is competition which can cause the downfall or making of a person. As more and more personal home gardens for leisure were built the wealthy residents of Chelsea inherently competed with neighbours for attention. As excessive wealth naturally breeds materialism, it also promotes extravagant elegance, as the money for the finest of assets is readily available. In addition as gardens were in the public eye the need for excess and maintenance was critical, as a deteriorating garden would be seen as a sign of economic struggle. However the even richer, like Sir John Danvers took these ideas and pressure and built considerable larger and even more elegant gardens that were inevitably the downfall of him. As those who could afford their pleasures thrived with the attention, those who could not became buried by it.
As wealth rained supreme a mentality of exclusiveness formed out of it that was unlike that of royalty, as it affect normal people. Long where the days of the small Chelsea fishing village and its ordinary people its reputation was now one of luxury and place of extraordinary characters. Now more then ever before commercial venues and shops pushed Chelsea’s residences into the beginnings of materialism and supremacy. One example of this is The Chelsea Bun with its piping hot buns and long queues that became high fashion for many years. However in 1793 its popularity almost toppled it when a riot broke out over the much-wanted buns and it’s neighbours complained of annoyance.12 It was this style of materialism and the introduction of porcelain to Chelsea that fused the need for artistic creation with essential object. As the residents demanded the finest of porcelain creations the Chelsea Factory was opened in 1742 and provided a newer elegant way of dinning. However Chelsea’s most famous of porcelain craftsman was named Josiah Wedgwood whom developed some of his best borders in Chelsea after moving out of London.13 The birth of porcelain sparked an artistic importance on personal objects that ultimately helped pave the way for future artists that would soon call Chelsea home.
Artist naturally thrive on an exciting and constantly changing society for a constant flow of ideas and visuals as well as demand for commercial work, two things Chelsea had an abundance of. By 1834 Thomas Carlyle influenced Chelsea and the world with his writings that appealed to many Victorians who struggled with scientific and political change at the time.14 The King’s Road at this time began to grown and Carlyle soon took note. Originally built for Charles II as a private passage from Hampton Court to Westminster it soon urbanized with Chelsea’s growth.15 It emerged as the main retail road filled with shops, nursery gardens and new homes built next to the mansion of last century. By 1855 Chelsea’s growth was developing so steadily that Carlyle constructed a silent study with no windows to avoid the noisy bustle of the nearby King’s Road. He wrote, “London is the nosiest Babylon that ever raged and fumed on the face of the planet.”16 The noise of the Kings Road may have helped lead Carlyle to his eventual mental illness and insomnia however he remained there writing until his death in 1881.
For half of the 19th century William Turner lived on near by Cheyne Walk in anonymity. He was talented from a young age and flourished in his early twenties and lived not only at his home on Cheyne Walk but also on Queen Anne Street. After his father death however he lived exclusively at his Cheyne Walk cottage where he perfected his skies from his roof. Turner later influenced other artists like John Martin to Chelsea with its beauty and said during his visit looking out his bedroom window, “Here you see my study: sky and water. Are they not glorious? Here I have my lesson, night and day.”17 As intellectual writers like Carlyle and Leigh Hunt laid the foundation for Chelsea’s famous writers, painters like Turner paved the way for the legends of Dante Gabriel Rossetti and James McNeill Whistler.
The inspirational natural beauty of Chelsea helped to attract artists with its, “look of age which contrasted agreeably with the spick-and-span newness of neighbouring districts.”18 As noted by Hall Caine on visit to the young artist Dante Gabriel Rossetti home on Chyeyne Walk. Rossetti joined forces with other young artists at the time and formed Fine Art Workmen in Painting, Carving, Furniture and the Metals changing the commercial landscape of art in London.
As new commercial benefits grew from Chelsea’s heart its natural landscape more precisely the river Thames attracted the attention of a promising painter named James McNeill Whistler.19 The old Battersea Bridge was inspiration for part of his series Nocturne in Blue and Gold that gained him controversy and more notoriety. As his eccentric taste was reason for more attention he introduced a wealth of Japanese objects to Chelsea’s high society via his home interior. This was an immediate change to the ornate and intricate design of home interiors of the last two centuries and showed residents a new form of design with importance on simplicity and colour. Whistler’s new interior pushed this idea of supremacy via materialism to a new and unseen level. He shifted the importance off retail pressure and on to individuals looking for a way to be different then each other via materials. This is why artists thrived in Chelsea during this time, a formula of desire and wealth mixed with a unique and inspirational environment to create a feeling and mentality that exists to this day.
As this explosive environment took shape in Chelsea another young eccentric writer named Oscar Wilde was attracted by it’s lifestyle. Wilde consequently moved only three houses down from Whistler on Tite Street and as they became friends their individualism lead to constant jealousy and competition. Seeing that both men where highly educated, creative, free thinkers and among the same social groups they only had their dress to out wit another. It was a constant competition to out do the other and became so passionate that Whistler wrote Wilde a note telling him to “restore those things to Nathan’s: and never again let me find you masquerading the streets of my Chelsea in the combined costumes of Kossuth and Mr Mantalini.”20 The clashing of unconventional and fancy dress between the two gave the residents of Chelsea yet another thing to push materialism forward in the form of individual fashion. Just as when a unique and maintained garden reflected ones personal economic stature and taste, the individual personal dress and presentation took this idea with one into the public society more so then before.
However by the mid 19th century Prince Albert had gone to The Paris Exhibition and returned with grand plans for a sharpening of London for its Exhibition in 1851. As The Crystal Place in Hyde Park was the main attraction of the Exhibition its £186,000 profit helped fund new additions in areas of Chelsea and Kensington that would later help change the community for better or worse.21 The construction of The Victoria & Albert Museum along with The Royal Albert Hall, Natural History & Science Museum, Imperial Institute along with a few other building were underway changing the physical environment for generations to come. Furthermore some areas of Chelsea thrived with aristocrats and artists but some areas had become abandoned, rundown and decrepit over the years. With Industrialization demolition was seen as a favourable and cheaper option over restoration and the new modern version of Chelsea soon began to appear. Blocks of similar large flats with sufficient and comfortable room for families with servants defined this new style but it noticeably lacked the charm and uniqueness of the Georgian and Victorian architecture.
A bit after the turn of the century the first of the World Wars threatened the stability of the world as well as the borough of Chelsea. At it’s artistic height many of Chelsea’s residence including artists where called to service to fight for their country. Upon return it was apparent Chelsea was globalizing via transportation and communication with inventions like the motorcar, radio and movies. In addition the restoration of historical buildings was favoured over demolition in attempt to retain the charm and elegance of centuries ago.22 The inevitability of World War II threatened people like nothing before and its eventually impact on the world and London may never be fully known. Chelsea’s close location to Westminster and proximity to two major power stations made it a heavily bombed borough. As the bombs fell so did the population going from a strong 63,000 in 1921 to a mere 16,000 during the heaviest of air raids. Only two years after the end of the war in 1945 the population climbed back to a comfortable 50,000 and the job of rebuilding was in the forefront.23 While again the residents of Chelsea opted for restoration of heavily bombed historical sites like the Old Chelsea Church and The Royal Hospital demolition and construction of personal homes identical to the previous was easier. One side effect of this however in conjunction with other factors including Prince Albert’s past additions was the natural gentrification of Chelsea artists and thus its inspiration to constantly welcome change.
When the artists returned home they saw their property value skyrocket to a point where some of the visionaries who helped define Chelsea’s art scene could no longer even afford to live there. James Whistler was forced to sell his home that was originally valued for a mere £2,700 but was now worth an astonishing £50,000 and moved westward like many others.24 Artistic space began to make way for retail space and the face of Chelsea, more so the Kings Road was about to change drastically.
As the war was over a new generation in Great Britain was born and growing up with independent wealth like none before. An ample amount of jobs helped eighty percent of teenagers leave school at age fifteen and earn high wages. As the sixties came to an end most still lived at home and they had an estimated £900,000,000 in excess to spend on personal belongings and entertainment. Being that they represented one quarter of the entire countries consumer spending on goods a new industry, advertising was perfected to sell products and create tastes for young people.25 Advertising merged with fashion to create a boutique lined Kings Road similar to today’s but with different names. Many boutiques where branches from Carnaby Street or other locations in London and when one would fail another would be quick to take it. As properties swapped hands and values grew rapidly the east end of the Kings Road by Sloane Square naturally immerged as top property.
Yet as value increased another type of retail gentrification occurred and the residents of Chelsea soon saw their old butchers, bakers, grocers, wine-merchants and similar family business drowning in the economic flood. They would soon get used to names like Sainsbury and Boots for their basic needs. Perhaps that process would teach them the value of mixing private business and commercial land with residential areas as the residents limited the commercial growth to the Kings Road strictly. This provides a very balanced system for the residents, as they know the area or street to go when they need commercial services or goods. However from a general business point of view a mixture of retail and residential space results in more opportunity for spending thus more profit.26
In the 1970’s while retail values soared and changed on the Kings Road something new was about to challenge the residents in a fresh and rebellious way. As the retail shopping of the Kings Road became world-renowned people began to not only come from other parts of London but of the world to spend a day or two on its streets. However it was the now famous Chelsea Drug Store that sold everything but drugs that was soon an epicentre for teenage rebellion and a new generation of music. A bar, restaurant, nightclub and multitude of boutiques insured every night to be filled with various teenaged Londoners from all over the capital whom the rock and roll that played from the speakers spoke to. As popularity grew with the teens the attention they where giving Chelsea was unwanted and they soon became a nuisance in the eyes of the residents. The residents began to protest the “rubbish, noise and hippies” of the Drug Store and soon had the council pave and close then end of Royal Avenue where it met the Kings Road to prevent accessibility.27 As the plan was not indented to put end to a generation of hippies it did have the desired effect on the Chelsea Drug Store and soon the residents had their community back but the eighties brought yet another surprise.
Two young British visionaries were on the verge of changing the world once again from core of Chelsea and its now globally known commercial high street. At 430 Kings Road a shop opened called SEX, whose owners Malcolm McLaren & Vivienne Westwood would redefine fashion and music as we know it, while dressing a generation for the Punk phenomena. Mclaren is best know for managing the highly successful and revolutionary band the Sex Pistols while Westwood has gone on to continually impact British fashion. Influenced by generations of rock and roll, punk music was much more heavy and unruly then rock ever hoped to be and this mentality adapted into fashion. As the residents of Chelsea worked so hard to eradicate the longhaired hippies of the seventies they now had the dyed hair, dog collar wearing, leather bound pierced punks of the eighties invading. The rebellion and fashion naturally wore down and moved on much to the liking of the residents and as the eighties and punk ended in the mainstream so did the last real counterculture Chelsea would see.
As Chelsea and the Kings Road continues to grow it seems that they held on to many values and traditions of they’re past but on a whole have continuous rejected what helped difference them from other boroughs, contemporary art and ideas. Amongst the area it seems the only visible changes to the physical environment are those of retail shops on the Kings Roads. The residents on a whole have somehow developed arrogance over the years that make them reject new and changing ideas like rock and roll and punk music in their community. Yet in William Turners time his beautiful sunsets and skies where also questioned and not fully understood for many years, he simply saw it and created it differently than those at his time. However no resident would be keen on referencing the likes of Turner to those of Sid Vicious or Mick Jagger especially during their peak presents in Chelsea. The residents have become satisfied by allowing the integral part of creativity, change and understanding to slip thru the cracks to other area of London most notable Shoreditch. Yet Chelsea’s residents more so then any other upper class community present themselves as bohemian on the whole.
Chelsea in turn has created a community that is on top and admired by almost everyone under it but turns out generations of public school boys and girls whom tend to be a bit more sheltered and conceited then the rest of country. Everything they see and take in is perfect, shinny, clean, one of a kind, must-have, trendy and projects on them how to act and dress like the adults they admire around them. The numbers, the largest percent of residents in the £60,000+ income group in any region of the country along with the highest number of workers in the financial sector and lowest in the retail sector are direct reflections of what material still rains supreme in Chelsea.28 As the shops change along the Kings Road the formula that keeps Chelsea static may be challenged but never broken.
Directly south east of Elephant and Castle the fields of Walworth began flourishing with ripe corn and cows but its history goes back much father then that. No one is directly sure of Walworth’s exact beginnings, as the Romans are believed to have used it’s paths to travel to then Londinium and evidence of Stone Age tools have been uncovered in the area. However the first recorded history of the land, around 934 to 946 involves an Anglo-Saxon king know only as Edmund whom granted the land then known as Wealawyrd to an entertaining jester named Hitard. Before Hitard made a pilgrimage to Rome he granted the land to the Church of Christ in Canterbury to use the profits for monks clothing. Oddly enough the gift of a jester in the late 900’s still has effect on Elephant and Castle as parts of the land still belong to the Church Commissioners and have the letters E.C.E, Ecclesiastical Commissioners of England over their doors.29 The church would end up playing a significant role in Elephant and Castle’s development, as it would soon be tormented by over population and poverty as well as being a key transport link to London.
The church made good use of the plentiful fields of Walworth to grow fresh fruit and vegetables for its few residents. However records from the Court Rolls of Walworth Manor make many references to brewers whom collected barley from the local fields and did good business particularly with the thirsty travellers on the main roads to London.30 While Walworth was mostly fields the small community primarily laboured the land and of course went to church on Sundays. The first church to show up on the map in 1681 and was that of St Mary Newington on the edge of Walworth. Being that it was not called Walworth at that time it soon became know as the Parish of St Mary Newington. As the people of the parish accounted for their own affairs as a community they started a committee know as the Vestry. One of the first duties of the Vestry was to collect a Poor Rate from all the households to provide for the growing amount of poor, old, sick and unemployed residents. Problems with the poor started as early as 1673 in Elephant and Castle but hit a new peak in 1770 as the area was described to be “burdened with numerous and expensive poor.”31 Thankfully for the poor an Act of Parliament allowed the parish to sell Walworth Common for property development to use proceeds as relief. Thus Walworth lost its only public open space and began a long and influential history with property developers.
The growth of London and especially its improved roads and new bridges transformed Walworth from a country village to a high-class suburb and helped to create what is now Elephant and Castle. The main roads of Walworth like Old and New Kent Road, Kennington Park Road and of course Walworth itself became lined with elegant Georgian houses for successful business and professional gentlemen and their families to live in. These houses attracted buyers with long front gardens, room for servants in the attic and basement kitchens all within a carriage ride to the City or Westminster. Additionally at this time property developers again profited on open fields by urbanizing them with streets of houses known as estates. James Brace, a farmer whom leased his land to Thomas Clutton, a bricklayer began development on the successful Brace Estate in 1763.32 The estates of this time however were quite charming and made up like the other Georgian and Victorian houses around them unlike what was later to come.
While Walworth continually grew as an upper-class society much like Chelsea it need amenities to entertain its residents but more importantly the increasing amount of children. 1831 was a year that looked to change Walworth in an even more positive direction with the opening of its most famous attraction, the Royal Surrey Zoological Gardens. Edward Cross who had just moved from the Strand to Walworth opened the zoo which had the likes of lions, tigers, elephants, reindeer, llamas presented by the ruler of Egypt and a giant tortoise children could ride. Furthermore it had five giraffes from Africa that were the first ever to be seen by the public in England. With a vast variety of animals and a 100 meter glass building, similar to the Crystal Palace built years after for viewing animals it rivalled and may have surpasses the London Zoo opened only three years before in Regent’s Park. It averaged 8,000 visitors a day and soon started a variety of entertainment in Surrey Gardens and the lake on Lorrimore Common that included re-enactments of famous Roman battles. In addition Surrey Gardens was famous for music and in 1845 the French conductor, Monsieur Jullien took over an orchestra of 400 musicians. A few years later in 1856 the zoo closed and music became the importance as the Royal Surrey Gardens Music Hall with its 10,000-person occupancy was built on parts of the old zoo. Unfortunately again Walworth’s population was exceeding the limits and this time all land was needed for property development. Finally in 1872 all 13 acres of pleasure grounds were demolished and packed once again with tight streets of houses.33
Just as Walworth seemed to be heading back in the right direction over population threatened the community to the verge of breaking but it took industrialization and modern transport to snap it all together to this day. The Elephant and Castle area just north west of Walworth had little importance in the days of carriage compared to what it has become thanks to transportation. The earliest history does go back to 1641 and blacksmith John Flaxman whom set up a small shop on an island between the roads to forge shoes for horses.34 Again thanks to it’s location to London travellers found Elephant and Castle a perfect place to stop for a rest and for service to their horse, thus creating more industrial demand. With travel on the increase Flaxman’s blacksmith soon became an inn and pub with an elephant and houdah or grand seat that referred to and looked like a castle on its sign. As coaches travelling to southern England called at the Elephant and Castle to pick up passengers it soon became so well known the whole area adapted its name.
At the time there was very little public transit most ordinary Londoners could afford but modern technology changed that with the horse-bus. Not as modern or fast as some of Elephant’s transport systems today it did revolutionize transport in 1829 and once again used Elephant and Castle via Walworth Road as a major junction to the south. While the introduction of the original double decker buses in 1875 where only horse drawn and held 24 passengers they laid down the routes that motorbuses would later replace.
By 1862 Elephant and Castle residents were not only introduced to the bus but something that would change the way people commuted to work forever, the railway. Steam engines came roaring over the Walworth Road above all other traffic and pedestrians while quickly becoming popular with the working class. Not only was it quicker then horse but special workmen’s tickets could be purchased for a penny by anyone travelling to work before seven am and returning after six pm. The Elephant and Castle station made living outside London even easier then before and sliding property values made it even more popular with the working class.
Even at a time when public transport flourished the City and South London were working on an idea that surpassed anything the world, let alone Elephant and Castles residents could even imagine. On November 4th 1890 a completely new and different type of railway came to Elephant and Castle called the tube. Originally called the City and South London Railway, it ran from Stockwell to King William Street and was the first electrical tube railway of its kind and helped pioneer many of the worlds similar systems. London had experimented with other underground methods of transportation since 1863 but none of which used electricity, until this time no train of any kind had been powered by electricity. 35 All this modern transportation caused a chaotic amount of traffic on the already busy streets of Elephant and Castle and by 1911 subways had to be built for pedestrians to cross the roads.
As transportation systems made commuting much easier for the working class the face of Elephant and Castle’s social class was changing rapidly causing even more problems. In 1801, the first census saw 14,847 people living in the Parish of St Mary Newington but by the start of the 20th century that number had risen drastically to 122,172. As factories, warehouses and railways consumed residential housing in centre London the population came flooding like a wave to London’s surrounding boroughs. Most of the well-off upper-class residents opted to move to less crowded places and their homes were let to multiple families making due in one large home. Along the Walworth Road those long front gardens that enticed upper-class families had been transformed into shops and the area was very much working class or extremely poor.26 With this a new object of property developers was formed, fit more people on the same patch of land by building estates lined with five story block houses. Many people like American George Peabody attempted to help by donating trust for better working class housing but in the end the map of the area looked like a maze of cramped streets with no open space.37
One of the sad side effects of the development of the land was that with significant lack of open space children had nowhere else to play but the streets. Thankfully at the time there was a great and increasing number of churches that like St Mary Newington whom took on the responsibility to help their desperate community. One of the most notable and beautiful is St Peter’s Church just tucked off Walworth Road on Liverpool Grove. It was built in 1825 when Walworth was still growing as a posh Georgian suburb by one of England’s greatest architects, Sir John Soane. Another of the churches that helped the children, poor and elderly was a gothic style church named, St Johns on Larcom Street. A book entitled Walworth past and present described the good work being done at St John’s by the energetic vicar, Arthur Jephson, “There are country homes for poor children, a day nursery, where infants are well cared for in the absence of their parents, and a registry for the unemployed, which has been the means of getting many a man, in want, the opportunity of earning a living.”38
While the churches where busy caring after needy children and unemployed yet another problem was rapidly forming in Walworth and the first warden of the Robert Browning Settlement, Rev. Herbert Stead’s answer changed Britain forever. As the settlement provided free medical treatment and legal advice it became a community centre for social and educational activities, but the Rev. Stead saw the elderly as a section of the community whom were treated unfairly and began plans to help. After Stead had a guest speaker from New Zealand talk about a government pension scheme already developed and running in that country he started a ten-year nationwide campaign for the same in Britain. Knowing only an Act of Parliament could achieve his dream he and the elderly were victorious when in 1908 the first Old Age Pensions Act was passed under Prime Minister Asquith.39 Anyone over 70 years of age could now receive a state pension of five shillings a week, though not very much money it is something all elderly people today should be thankful for.
Another social pioneer of Elephant and Castle was Octavia Hill, who was not only the founder of the National Trust but also established better housing for working people in many places but especially Walworth. When twenty-two acres of land east of Walworth Road still belonging to the Church Commissioners lets ran out on leaseholders they asked Hill to help them redevelop it with the residents rather then profit in mind. While most of the land had become over-crowded slums Hill decide to demolish the entire lot of land and rebuild two storey cottages and three storey blocks of flat on its place, these new houses still make quite charming middle class homes. As she believed in good balanced housing she made sure each cottage had a back garden and that the flats looked out on garden courtyards. In addition she strongly felt that not only good housing should be provided but managed and cared for properly and management still uses minimal rents for repairs and modernizing internally while keeping the exterior characteristic. This is the largest Church Commissioners’ estate still managed in London with its 600 homes and is used by housing management students and visitors still as a case study.40
While Walworth Road and Elephant and Castle were far from trouble no one could imagine the impact the world wars would soon have on the community. Walworth Road was now flourishing with shops and East Street Market with traders meanwhile Elephant and Castle was still home to transport but between 1939-45 that all seemed meaningless. While the First World War was the first to put those at home in a sense of danger the Second took that danger to a new meaning. On route to the heavily bombed centre of London Elephant and Castle boar some of the worst damage of the German air raids killing some 925 people and demolishing almost everything in sight. While civilians used both the subways and tube station of Elephant and Castle during air raids above them their environment burned to the ground. One account from Deputy Warden A.H. Pullin described one night of what happened above ground while one of the blitzes took place on the 10th May 1941. “St Mary’s Church had caught fire and burned like a torch, the rose window in the east was filled as with a glass of the brightest mediaeval orange. –At the Elephant and Castle a major conflagration was developing. In Walworth Road, Newington Butts, St George’s Road, New Kent Road, Borough Road and London Road, shop after shop was consumed. Bands of Fire spread from side to side of the roads and sweeping from end to end, destroyed all in their path. The A.F.S. (Auxiliary Fire Service) were unable to get water from their hydrants. Clouds of red-hot embers rained down and the roar of flames and crashing of falling walls was continuous. Dawn broke but still the H.E.s (High Explosives) fell. –At last at 05.54 the all-clear came.”41 After the war most of Elephant and Castle was devastated and laid that way for almost a decade until the London County Council declared it a Comprehensive Development Area and developed a new scheme that would leave a brand on the area permanently.42
Developers and architects alike were faced with new and extremely challenging issues after the war; they suddenly had a mass of low-income residents and nowhere to put them. However in Elephant and Castle Sir Isaac Hayward along with architect Erno Goldfinger thought they had a solution to both the areas residential and commercial problems. To revitalize the Elephant and Castle area a new roundabout system was build to attempt to eliminate the long history of traffic in the area. Along with this however was the addition of new subways for pedestrians which had unseen problems and the loss of the Elephant and Castle pub which gave the area it’s name due to road widening. To combat commercial loss the Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre, planned after the latest American model was to be the central feature of scheme and opened in 1965. To its credit it was one of the largest of its kind in Europe and the first covered shopping centre in the United Kingdom.43 Finally to combat the residential problem which continually haunts Elephant and Castle Goldfinger and the L.C.C did what all architects at the time thought the solution was build upward. They cleared large areas and replaced cramped streets and small house with towering, high density, and massive concrete estates and changed the skyline of south London with it. Soon tower blocks like the Brandon Estate were housing thousands in six 18 storey and five 25 storey dwellings. Soon after with the advance of technology particularly a new material of pre-cast high-speed concrete slabs more enormous estate tower blocks were constructed. Soon thousands called the Aylesbury Estate and the Heygate Estate home and in some cases they had a population of a small city in the same area one family lived on before. As Elephant and Castle was poised for a triumphant return Sir Isaac Hayward stated, “With its famous name and history of traditions the new Elephant and Castle offers opportunities one would have to go a long way to better. Here’s a real chance for the South to show them how on the north side of the Thames.”44
Regrettable for Hayward but more so for the residents of Elephant and Castle this was not the reality of the redevelopment and once again property development was partially to blame. Traffic is still a problem at the roundabouts while the pedestrian subways became increased unsafe and areas of crime. The revolutionary shopping centre was hardly that it did not fair anywhere nearly what was expected and continually becomes more rundown. Lastly the estates while a quick and untested answer to a very difficult problem may be at the forefront of reasons why Elephant and Castle has declined so quickly.
Once again as a new Elephant and Castle regeneration begins to change the physical environment around its residents it is interesting to note some similarities from that of the last. Traffic again plays a key part in the scheme and the iconic roundabouts will make way for more modern T-junctions thus eliminating the pedestrian subways. The Walworth Road will be extended to the current location of the northern roundabout thus demolishing the shopping centre but a newer more modern shopping, leisure and hotel complex will be built near by. In addition Walworth Road will become a major commercial high street and connect to a new civic square. This time however they are adding yet another transportation system with the Cross River Tram which will take travellers from Peckham to Kings Cross via Elephant and Castle in only 29 minutes. Another positive change is the demolition of the Heygate Estate and the addition of a town park in its place. Current tenants will be moved to Wansey Street and its modern 31-unit plan or assured new housing in one of Southwark’s developing housing sites. Bottom line however, it will cost £1.5 billion, cover a 170-acre area, add 75,000 square meters of retail, build 5,300 new and replacement homes, add five new open spaces and two trams lines all by the year 2014.45 As it is obviously too early to tell what the effect will be it seems to look like much of the same just marketed for twenty-first century profit.
After understanding the history and development of both of these two communities it is easy to see how influence has taken them down two different social and cultural paths that they still fallow today. As an individual who has lived in both communities, I have the unique perspective of experiencing what it is like first hand to observe each environment. Steeping away from both and looking at each area in a new way has allowed me to understand and observe how people, mostly developing and impressionable children take in ideas and possibilities from their physical environment. Taking part in everyday life in both of these communities has allows me to reference history and change with the current state and understand how they have become this way.
In Chelsea as soon as you step foot on the Kings Road you are overwhelmed with materialism and bright windows with the latest fashions and home interiors. As a tradition of Sloane Sq the windows of Peter Jones, the high-end department store change with the seasons and trends. With Christmas approaching the festive spirit of Peter Jones shows the interior of a normal home with an extravagant and elegant dinning table decorated accordingly. Yet as I observed the area it is hard not to notice children and adults alike taking in what Peter Jones shows as a normal Christmas dinner table thus setting a visual representation of what it should look like. Pressures like this are lined up and down the Kings Road and exploit a culture that has been brought up to need material wealth to differ and stabilise them.
Material has become the natural way to exploit this due to the fact that the community has wealth and with that the ability to buy new materials. Instinctively attention is gained buy having the newest or latest materials and this why the Kings Road is almost like a runway for models that desperately seek the attention of others. The residents of Chelsea seem to want to be so different from one another yet this makes them so similar and causes constantly reject of anything outside of their norm. It is a strange thing to have normal people going about their everyday lives ask you to take their photograph for no apparent reason other then a want and need for attention. However in the span of an hour I had two people in Chelsea along the Kings Road approach me and ask me to take their photo. As one young male asked me to take his photo because he was a poet I had to ask myself what type of person walks up to complete stranger who happens to have a nice camera and demand the attention of it. It is a scary but truthful realisation of what both technology and humanity has created and continues to breed particularly in upper-class communities.
After living in near by Battersea and using Chelsea as my main source of commercial, industrial and transportation for a year it is hard not to notice the use of the crest of The Royal Borough of Chelsea and Kensington everywhere. Its put primarily on areas that are not commercial owned like bins, guardrails and lampposts and re-enforces the idea of where you are and more importantly who was here before i.e. royalty. Its style and natural colour of gold continue to instil a sense of class and wealth, and is a more common identity in Chelsea then any of the biggest and wealthiest corporations. Not in the same resulting effect but the swastika was used by Hitler and Nazi party to exploit the very same human behaviours the crest does. As any good bit of design will do it represents subconscious emotion and thoughts that your mind has in taken from your environment and experience. Just as the swastika has been transformed to mean something in modern society the royal crest litters the streets with a mentality of supremacy and class everywhere in Chelsea and Kensington.
In addition it is interesting to note what has become of private industry in Chelsea as corporations have lined the Kings Road. In a sense it is a gentrification of small business as corporations, which are simply groups of small business coming together have created an environment that defines a certain look or style to even survive. This is why places like Sainsbury and Boots, which came to the Kings Road in the sixties and seventies have still survived and most of the fashion retail shops change with generations. Places that provide the community with essential products and services like food, drugs, bookshops, and so on last for years long then most of their neighbours. Meanwhile as London grows outward as it has over the centuries something new threatens the economic and retail markets that is vaguely similar to something that helped Chelsea transform from a small fishing village into a thriving market town.
Five hundred years ago when Queen Elizabeth imposed a three-mile ring around the city for hunting it helped an undeveloped Chelsea to find a purpose and need as well as invigorated local residence into independent private business. Yet it is interesting to note that ruling bodies still use this idea of a zone or ring in cities to effect commerce. In modern London the Congestion Charge was invented to control one of societies relatively newer problems of promoting public transportation and creating order for automobiles. However good this zone has been for London it has been equally as bad for independent business and the poorer residence outside the zone.
While plans come to expand the zone into the boroughs of Chelsea and Kensington the idea of independent business especially by an owner from outside the zone may be lost forever. For example if a lower class immigrant living outside the congestion zone runs a corner shop somewhere in the zone thus having to commute and bring in products to their shop, they will be charged £8 daily. On the contrary the upper class resident that lives in Chelsea could walk or take public transit to that corner market or they could drive if they wanted because residence of the Congestion Charge receive a 90% discount and are encouraged to buy longer and discounted schemes they can afford. If both shop owner and potential customer where to pay the charge for each day in a year at their given rate the customer would end up paying £292 for the luxury of driving but the shop owner would end up paying a staggering £2,920 just to go to work.46 Part of the problem also lies in how the charge is presented to those paying it. Residence would naturally be angry if they were forced to pay £8 a day to drive where they live so information on how to apply for the discount is easily made available where finding information on a possible discount for independent business is far more troubling. It is a notable that the one of the same concepts that unexpectedly began Chelsea’s industrial wealth is now the one that forces that out and continues to widen the gap between rich and poor.
Comparing these ideas and observation to Elephant and Castle and lower-class areas it becomes apparent the same issues of human behaviour apply but are presented differently to their residents. One of the most serious and harmful side effects of this is a mentality of physical strength and toughness presented to again mostly devolving and impressionable children. With the lack of money comes the loss to differ ones self with materials and thus going back to our most basic evolution an animalistic violence is born. Children growing up on the estates can’t simple buy the latest and newest materials to draw attention to themselves and by being tough and violence they earn the attention of their peers with the most basic of human emotions, threatening ones survival. As a result you have children growing up seeing violence and vandalism around them and repeating these actions in their environment until something drastic changes that. In a sense most of these people are acting in a violent way and breaking the laws not because they want to but because they are presented no other way.
In a time when more so then any generation before we have become dependant on wealth to provide us with entertainment and experience of different things outside our normal environment. Yet this is the only way the whole of society can learn by experiencing things first-hand and with the lack of money ones growth is limited. However looking to the way the two areas are set up for the majority of the people you can see how problems and issues get pushed to the side or even forgotten about when they are out of sight. Along the Kings Road most of the shops bear the name of massive national corporations like FCUK, Marks & Spencer’s, Orange and so on whose owners or board members may not even live in Chelsea. Inside of that the people running these shops like the till operators, sales people, and managers often commute there for work but live in middle class areas nearby. Lastly the clients are the upper class whom they cater every need to. This is why the exterior and interior of many of the shops on the Kings Road are so elegant, clean and kept up to date because they are marketing to a society that has come to expect and demand that. It comes down to the fact that because they have the wealth and are able to experience different ideas and aesthetics someone who can’t afford excess may never understand.
Interestingly enough along the Walworth Road you have a very apparent and obvious mix of both corporate and independently owned stores. Again the owners and board members of McDonalds or Somerfield don’t live in this community and instantly their stores look different then those of their independently owned neighbours. More often then not the owners of these stores do live in the community and thus represent the people of that community. As for the workers they are often family owned or hire people form around the area to help them run their business. However where it changes is who these shops cater to, again it is the residents of Elephant and Castle but like in Chelsea it is what the residents have come to expect and will accept. Thus shops become rundown or use garish type and signage not because they want to but because they don’t fully understand the value of it. How can someone who has never experienced the interior of the latest and most modern retail shop come to expect or want that in his or her own community. As humanity evolves there is increasing profit to be gained in withholding and misrepresenting information to those who can’t experience it for themselves.
So thus the experience of environment is necessary and critical to the development of residents and again very impressionable children. So then you have to look at who owns and controls most of the environment in these different areas. In a time where property is so valued and important companies and government have found away to not only profit from that property but also specific areas of that property i.e. advertising. These days almost every source of media output is owned and operated by commercial corporations like Viacom whom have made an industry in the retail of letting areas of property on other bigger areas of property. Every poster, billboard, television ad, store front and so on are examples of this and thru technology it no longer has to be a physical location that sells a product or service but a time slot or internet banner. While these formats are being brought into our homes every day via the internet and television it has made life easier for business to increase it opportunity of sales with advertising thus impacting its influence. While most corporations and commercial artists whom are responsible for the more important decision are aware of the influence and positive and negative sides of how they represent things sadly most consumers are oblivious to it.
This is where artists and more importantly commercial graphic designers come into the whole picture of things as we represent ideas, products and services of corporations that no matter how big or small have influence on the public or consumers. Commercial art was essential forged from the need of the Church to represent stories and concepts of The Bible to the public who at that time was primarily illiterate. Thus visual language was born and has flourished sense into what is a mixture of business and art, graphic design. If the corporations control all forms of output then we control the aesthetic and conceptual ideas inside of that output, thus we need to be aware of its possibilities, meanings and impact both good and bad. Unfortunately the market has become saturated in simplistic, mass-produced and generic forms that don’t inspire because at the end of the day are paid for and commissioned by corporate interest. This goes back to the idea of misinforming people becoming a profitable advent in the same way a society works with laws and rules. If a government drives their ideas and enforces their laws into a society for long enough they will soon be controlled by them and in the same sense if a corporation puts it identity in enough correct locations it can control the consumer.
Then comes the individual designer who is responsible for conveying ideas via type, shape, line, and colour and so forth for their clients. With this comes a social responsibility to your viewers and more often then not includes elements out of your direct control. An individual designer cannot be held responsible for the fact he or she has to put an identity on a piece of work because that mark is the financial supporter and ticket to the mainstream. So from that it comes down to the individual’s moral decisions to take part in campaigns or work with certain corporations that everyone has to come up with on their own case-by-case scenario. To quote Adrian Shaughnessy in his new book, How to be a graphic designer, without losing your soul, “And here’s an odd thing: in a world with no principles, people often respect those who have some.”47
In an industry that is vastly becoming over populated and saturated with corporate interest it is becoming harder to be heard and dangerously exploited. You have a growing number of young designers who are still learning the craft and its power being exploited by companies without even knowing it. Again this is where withholding the truth becomes profitable and as society learns of the methods of corporations you have a backlash by those would do fully understand it. However if commercial interest owns almost all of the media outputs it becomes harder and harder for self-expression and non-bias points of view to be seen by the public. Thus making the Internet one of most creative and free outputs of ideas in modern history but as it has grown with technology it too it has become oversaturated and owned by commercial interest.
Bringing this back to Elephant and Castle and Chelsea we as designers and artists have played an integral role in their previous and continuous evolution. One modern example of this is the seasonal pamphlet provided to the community of Elephant and Castle in social gathering places like the shopping centre that informs and updates the residents of the 2014 regeneration. Other then the physical changes they see in their environment this is the only source of information most will have to make decisions and gather views on the regeneration until it is fully done and a part of their environment. Understanding this it makes sense that 80% of the residents want this regeneration to happen because they are presented a quick fix to many problems that have been marketed to them in a positive way.48 By exploiting the use of red and trendy silhouetted shapes the public is blinded by beauty over truth and reality. The reality of it is housing and retail prices will increase and just as the regeneration after World War II did but the bubble effect will eventually wear away and leave the area needing to regenerate in due time. It comes down to the problems that have been around from the urbanizing of this area and have developed with them. Simply adding a T-junction will not stop the problem of traffic in Elephant and Castle just as the roundabouts haven’t. These are much deeper and sometimes inherent problems that plague communities until something drastic is done to change it.
In effect the regeneration as Southwark council markets it will be good for the area of Elephant and Castle but not for all the residents and is just a quick fix for certain areas of the community. The reason the areas of the roundabouts, shopping centre and nearest estate are being regenerated is because they are in the most commercial viable and visible area thus yielding the most profit. These are the areas every part of society uses daily thus their increased deteriorating state becomes more import to regenerate then other possible worse areas. As the demolition of the Heygate Estate is beneficial for the thousand or so residents that live there and will receive new homes the fate of the residents in the six 18 storey and five 25 storey tower blocks down the road a bit in the Brandon Estate is not as kind. The problem again goes back to the people not experiencing these issues everyday are the ones making critical decisions that affect these problems and in turn the communities. It is out of sight to most thus out of their mind and until it becomes so drastic that it affects their community nothing will be done.
So we are left with a very harsh reality of the situation and one that does not have a quick fix. Changing these problems and community takes much more then one person, it takes many individuals and industries working for one truthful common goal to better society. Sadly this is not a very possible solution as there is too much private and corporate interest involved in these issues and a mentality of saying one thing and doing another is very common. The only plausible solution then comes back to the ideas of Chelsea’s famous resident Sir Thomas More and Utopia, where private property doesn’t exist and everyone in one class with contentment of minimal assets. Yet humanity has created a society unable of doing that, we cannot simple go back and restart we must learn from history and it’s mistakes and try to better on a whole. However the only way of doing that is by taking where the upper class and lower class are and attempting to close the difference bit by bit anyway we can. Going back to the role of the artist as a visual interpreter for the public we must attempt to close this gap by educating and informing people correctly. We must take a moral and social stand against misinforming the public because just as we are reliant on clients for finical support they are dependant on us as a whole for visual public relations. If enough designers inform one another via communication of these ideas and problems we can on a whole change and in a sense check and balance the clients and corporations just as any good system is designed to do. It is important to remember however they are not the enemy; some corporations are positively affecting society but they are an integral part of our community just as we are to them. If history is being created at every moment we must prepare the public and ourselves best we can to make informed and educated decisions when they are in the utmost of importance.