Peckham is cooler than Brixton now, yeah?

[leanderman]

when housing is marketised, and also in short supply, the interests of the poor automatically become opposed not just to those of active gentrification (landlords, property developers and speculators), but also to literally anything that will make the area more attractive to live in ... you end up with the utterly miserable situation of poor people being incentivised to hope that the area they inhabit remains as run-down as possible, because that is their only hope of continuing to be able to afford to live there.

Quite brilliant.

 

[DJWrongspeed]

In the specific case of Hannah Barry, I have my doubts. Her gallery, and Bold Tendencies, are fantastic feats of organisation - with an overwhelmingly white, middle-class audience. Go to one of her events, and you'd be forgiven for not knowing you were in an ethnically diverse, mostly working-class area. That someone of such evident talent and intellect can - or at least it seems to me - fail almost utterly to engage with most of the inhabitants of her adopted turf seems to me either a huge missed opportunity, or evidence that she's more interested in climbing the greasy pole than really looking at the world around her. But of course she wouldn't be the first in any of those.

This is less about this project specifically and more about arts engagement generally. It's just not on most peoples radar. It'll be interesting to see if BT address this pending the right funding. I've seen plenty of local Peckham people just dropping in out of curiosity & because it's free but then not actually hanging about because it's pricey for a drink!

 

[RubyToogood]

I wonder what the audiences have been like for the African film season and the dancehall events they've been having this summer.

 

[teuchter]

The question is, what would "engaging with most inhabitants of her adopted turf" actually involve? Many "art" projects that explicitly try and do this end up just being patronising, obvious (rehashes of the same old themes like getting a bunch of quotes from "local" people and printing them onto something) or just a bit rubbish.

Making exhibitions literally more accessible I think would be more meaningful. Not by dumbing down the art on show but by making sure they weren't set up in a way that was intimidating to (or hidden away from) those outside of the "art" crowd. And yes, expensive bar prices don't exactly help.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

I'm not sure you're ever going to draw substantial local crowds to watch avant garde art anywhere tbh, not just in Peckham. Events like the ones talked about here do well in London because a city of 7-8 million people, plus a massive load of tourists and students, is just about large enough draw on to get a viable crowd in to watch a piano being destroyed in the name of art.

 

[Belushi]

I see Peckham's in the Standards Homes & Property section again tonight with an article 'Peckham Scrubs Up Nicely with a Boho Makeover'

 

[George & Bill]

The question is, what would "engaging with most inhabitants of her adopted turf" actually involve? Many "art" projects that explicitly try and do this end up just being patronising, obvious (rehashes of the same old themes like getting a bunch of quotes from "local" people and printing them onto something) or just a bit rubbish.

Making exhibitions literally more accessible I think would be more meaningful I think. Not by dumbing down the art on show but by making sure they weren't set up in a way that was intimidating to (or hidden away from) those outside of the "art" crowd. And yes, expensive bar prices don't exactly help.

I think your point is correct, and has much wider scope than you might think. I know about Bold Tendencies via people I know in the art world. But I also live less than a mile from where it happens and nobody has ever put a flyer through my door or a poster in the window of my local shop. I'd wager most people in my street have never heard of it. And the point about the bar prices is actually pivotal: when I go up there, I combine the trip with having a drink or two; I'm not rich, but I'm employed with no dependents so I can manage a £4 pint/£5 cocktail occasionally. But the same can't be said for people on the dole, or many families; we often went to museums and galleries when I was a kid, and almost never bought a thing in the cafes, but many had/have picnic areas where you can eat your own stuff - you'd think something like that would be a no-brainer for Bold Tendencies, with the acres of space they have.

 

[George & Bill]

I'm not sure you're ever going to draw substantial local crowds to watch avant garde art anywhere tbh, not just in Peckham. Events like the ones talked about here do well in London because a city of 7-8 million people, plus a massive load of tourists and students, is just about large enough draw on to get a viable crowd in to watch a piano being destroyed in the name of art.

BT has a wide-ranging programme of events, most of them much less stereotypically 'avant garde' than piano smashing. And if you think the affluent white crowd milling around Frank's on a summer evening were drawn by the opportunity to ponder the latest developments in contemporary sculpture, I think you'd be disappointed: most of the ones I know go for the negronis and the view. Which is really the thing: most middle-class people don't go and see art because they necessarily have the faintest idea what it means; they go to hang out with their friends and drink a caffeinated/alcoholic beverage in a somewhat heightened environment. But they then also look at some art, and gradually start to feel at home with it - or even to find that it speaks to them in some way.

 

[editor]

Making exhibitions literally more accessible I think would be more meaningful I think. Not by dumbing down the art on show but by making sure they weren't set up in a way that was intimidating to (or hidden away from) those outside of the "art" crowd. And yes, expensive bar prices don't exactly help.

That was my beef with the Brick Box project at the Angel in Brixton: windows kept permanently covered up, invitations for events only sent via effectively private social networks and just about zero attempt made to engage the local community or invite them to get involved with the space. And having an arty-farty night themed around vaginas was hardly likely to get the local estate banging on their doors (if they even knew it was on, which they didn't as it wasn't advertised).

 

[teuchter]

That was my beef with the Brick Box project at the Angel in Brixton: windows kept permanently covered up, invitations for events only sent via effectively private social networks and just about zero attempt made to engage the local community or invite them to get involved with the space.

As you already know, I don't think this is an entirely fair description of what they actually did. However, I understand your general objection.

And having an arty-farty night themed around vaginas was hardly likely to get the local estate banging on their doors

But this seems to make all sorts of assumptions about the "local estate", and I can't be comfortable with the idea that certain kinds of exhibitions, nights or whatever should be considered ok in one area but not the other.

 

[teuchter]

BT has a wide-ranging programme of events, most of them much less stereotypically 'avant garde' than piano smashing. And if you think the affluent white crowd milling around Frank's on a summer evening were drawn by the opportunity to ponder the latest developments in contemporary sculpture, I think you'd be disappointed: most of the ones I know go for the negronis and the view. Which is really the thing: most middle-class people don't go and see art because they necessarily have the faintest idea what it means; they go to hang out with their friends and drink a caffeinated/alcoholic beverage in a somewhat heightened environment. But they then also look at some art, and gradually start to feel at home with it - or even to find that it speaks to them in some way.

Yup... I first knew about Frank's etc through "art world" friends too. However, those same friends now tend to avoid it because it's so expensive, overcrowded and full of chattering youngsters from Dalston.

 

[editor]

But this seems to make all sorts of assumptions about the "local estate", and I can't be comfortable with the idea that certain kinds of exhibitions, nights or whatever should be considered ok in one area but not the other.

I'm not making that assumption at all, but I do expect any venture bigging up their self-proclaimed, grassroots, street-level community interaction ("we like to hang out where the street drinkers are, where the bins are kept" etc etc) to make some effort to engage with the actual community they're operating in.

 

[teuchter]

I'm not making that assumption at all, but I do expect any venture bigging up their self-proclaimed, grassroots, street-level community interaction ("we like to hang out where the street drinkers are, where the bins are kept" etc etc) to make some effort to engage with the actual community they're operating in.

Fair enough, but you objected to the fact that a night was "arty farty" and "themed around vaginas". Why exactly do these things make it inappropriate to the "local community"?

 

[editor]

Fair enough, but you objected to the fact that a night was "arty farty" and "themed around vaginas". Why exactly do these things make it inappropriate to the "local community"?

You really can't work out why a privately advertised night called, "Cunt" (or whatever it was called) might not exactly be the thing to get local residents involved?

 

[Winot]

You really can't work out why a privately advertised night called, "Cunt" (or whatever it was called) might not exactly be the thing to get local residents involved?

Is it the profanity or the private nature of the advertisement that's the issue?

 

[editor]

Is it the profanity or the private nature of the advertisement that's the issue?

You can't work out why a night billed as "CUNT CRAFTS" (Feat Lady Cunt performing “The Healing Journey of my Cunt” and Miss Vagina Head) may possibly be seen as somewhat offensive and unsuitable for a project that claimed to be aimed at the local community?

Or how about a night that invited paying punters (£40 a head) to "get warmed up with canapés off a peachy bottomed lady, slippery nipple in hand"?

No? Oh well. No problem. Must be just me then, so I'll leave it.

 

[teuchter]

Why are you so reticent to explain why you think it would be offensive?

 

[editor]

Why are you so reticent to explain why you think it would be offensive?

If you can't work it out for yourself, why not knock on some of the doors of families in my block and see what their reaction is to you inviting them to pay £5 to meet Lady Cunt performing “The Healing Journey of my Cunt” at a night of Cunty Crafts as part of a local community project?

 

[teuchter]

That wouldn't answer the question.

Why are you so reticent to explain why you think it would be offensive to them?

 

[editor]

Why are you so reticent to explain why you think it would be offensive to them?

Surely even you can work out why a supposed 'community' evening calling itself Cunty Crafts featuring Lady Cunt retelling stories of her cunt might be offensive to some members of the local community, no?

I'm not going to spell it out for you because I don't believe you could be this stupid.

 

[George & Bill]

Surely even you can work out why a supposed 'community' evening calling itself Cunty Crafts featuring Lady Cunt retelling stories of her cunt might be offensive to some members of the local community, no?

I'm not going to spell it out for you because I don't believe you could be this stupid.

To me, it's the other point that's the important one - that venues feel physically inaccessible and events are publicised through effectively rather exclusive networks. I'm personally not bothered if some people are offended by events put on by arts organisations - the cloying aesthetic of friendly colours and group hand-holding is one thing that ghettoises much 'community' art, arguably - and I'm not convinced that some sort of prudishness differential between different sections of society is a major factor at play in the de facto class-selection that exists in the arts.

 

[teuchter]

Surely even you can work out why a supposed 'community' evening calling itself Cunty Crafts featuring Lady Cunt retelling stories of her cunt might be offensive to some members of the local community, no?

I'm not going to spell it out for you because I don't believe you could be this stupid.

I'm going to note the gradual change of emphasis from your original post which mentioned a night being "arty farty" and "themed around vaginas" through subsequent posts featuring an increasingly repeated swear word, and guess that your issue is that the local community might be offended by swear words.

 

[editor]

To me, it's the other point that's the important one - that venues feel physically inaccessible and events are publicised through effectively rather exclusive networks.

Well, that goes hand in hand with my point. Despite billing themselves as a 'community' arts organisation, they ran the place with little regard to the needs of the local community, putting on some essentially private expensive events that seemed far more likely to alienate locals. When they did have a night on, passers by would usually only see two door staff around a dimly lit side entrance with no posters or mentions of what was going on inside. It was almost like they didn't want those "street drinkers" and locals to take an interest.

But for the record, I've got no problems with people putting on arty nights focused around a cunt or a cock or anything else if that's how they get their kicks. Art comes in all forms and artists have got the right to be weird/strange/offensive, but when they're claiming that they're doing it in the name of the local community? Nah. They were only interested in indulging themselves.

I'm going to note the gradual change of emphasis from your original post which mentioned a night being "arty farty" and "themed around vaginas" through subsequent posts featuring an increasingly repeated swear word....

I was quoting directly from their own literature about the event. That is what they were advertising. Naturally, they didn't bother making any posters/leaflets for that one, of course (or at least none that were visible in the surrounding community). Any idea why?

Anyway, they've gone now.

 

[Ms T]

When I was doing jury service earlier this year, one of my fellow potential jurors (a City boy who was originally from China via Bangkok because his Dad worked for the UN) was telling me that he was buying a buy-to-let property in Peckham, because "it's the next big thing".

 

[editor]

When I was doing jury service earlier this year, one of my fellow potential jurors (a City boy who was originally from China via Bangkok because his Dad worked for the UN) was telling me that he was buying a buy-to-let property in Peckham, because "it's the next big thing".

(((Peckham)))

 

[Onket]

Oh well. No problem. Must be just me then, so I'll leave it.

I bet you don't!

 

[Onket]

When I was doing jury service earlier this year, one of my fellow potential jurors (a City boy who was originally from China via Bangkok because his Dad worked for the UN) was telling me that he was buying a buy-to-let property in Peckham, because "it's the next big thing".

When we sold our house in Peckham last year we only had one 'interested' potential buyer who wasn't a buy to let landlord, and he was getting £100k off his parents for the deposit.

It's the cost of housing in London that is at fault really, and the difficulty of getting the deposit together and getting a mortgage agreed, not Peckham specifically.

 

[Ms T]

When we sold our house in Peckham last year we only had one 'interested' potential buyer who wasn't a buy to let landlord, and he was getting £100k of his parents for the deposit.

It's the cost of housing in London that is at fault really, and the difficulty of getting the deposit together and getting a mortgage agreed, not Peckham specifically.

Yep, plus people regard property as their "pension", which is understandable.

 

[leanderman]

Yep, plus people regard property as their "pension", which is understandable.

Exactly, given recent history.

 

[not-bono-ever]

v