Monday 12 November 2012

References

Politics

The London 2012 Olympics is by far the the most important event in Stratford's history. The development and "regeneration" of the area has provided a crucial facelift and resulted in a significant increase in interest. This has had a massive impact on the area and its establish constituents, be it residents or businesses. What is of interest is the how positive or how negative this impact is?

Why Stratford?
Why was this area chosen as the district to host London 2012?
Would this "regeneration" have occurred were it not for the olympics?

The London Borough of Newham has had the 4th highest number of crimes out of all the London boroughs over the last year. So why choose this area to host the greatest show on Earth? Stratford as a choice was merely a strategic decision by the olympic council, because it offered the necessary space to construct the sporting venues at the closest distance from central London, at the lowest cost. It also offered easy access to major hosting venues like the Excel and the O2 arena. The supposed "regeneration" was merely preparation for the olympics, with the majority of the funding used to construct the olympic park, the athletes village, and to improve the transport system.Were it not for London 2012, this scale of investment in the area would never have occurred. In fact, the £9.3 billion spent overall is seen in many quarters as the "cost of staging the games". The argument here is that Stratford was granted the role of stage, not on any sort of tangible merit, but purely out of the convenience of location and having the required space and landscape.

So what impact has hosting the games had on Stratford? Let's start with the positives: The olympic park and the Westfield shopping centre are impressive venues to boast about; the games have created positive awareness of the area, attracting tourists and shoppers; there has been expansion in the transport links; increased jobs; and new, modern homes are now available. Stratford is now on the map!

What are the negative impacts? Strangely they are very much linked to the "positives":

1.Local businesses have suffered, with customers favoring the new Westfield shopping centre.

2. Residents relocated from their homes, with rental/property prices now at an all time high. In addition to this, they have to now compete with an influx of trendy middle class people interested in moving into these new homes, attracted by the regeneration of the area.

Analysis of the impacts will show that the negative aspects of the impact have affected only the residents and local businesses, where as the positives are mostly benefitting stakeholders in the westfield shopping centre, and visitors to the area. Stratford has become victm of a twisted web; a scheme developed to favor higher powers and not the local community. The regeneration of the area was part of the dress-up. London was about to host the greatest show on the earth and English pride would spare no expense in making the main stage as pretty as possible. After all, the whole world was watching.

So who REALLY stands to gain from this "regeneration"?

The corporations as vultures; Westfield shareholders and associated retail giants, scooping up profits and continuing to do so long after the games; Quatari developers who have purchased the Athletes village from the government, for half of the amount it cost to build; and TFL and its associated parties. Capitalism in the highest degree.

And the loser is....

-The locals mislead by the bright lights; prospects of customers coming in, prospects of retail jobs, better transport facilities. But only the latter is of any significant relevance. Fair trade-off or daylight robbery?

What do you think? Would love your comments.

The athletes' village is believed to have cost about £1.1billion to build, although it was sold to Qatari developers last year for only £557million

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175316/London-2012-Olympics-Sorry-Stratford-Games-chiefs-dont-want-see.html#ixzz2D2roFKNp
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The People

                                                 THE PEOPLE

                                       THE BATTLE OF THE CLASSES

                                       By CHIGOZIE UK IBE. STUDENT NO:U0943369

INTRODUCTION:BRIEF HISTORY OF STRATFORD

Stratford is a district in East London, England, in the London Borough of Newham. It is located 6 miles (9.7 km) east northeast of Charing Cross and is one of the major centres identified in the
London plan.It was historically an agrarian settlement in the ancient parish of West Ham, in the county of Essex, which transformed into an industrial suburb, following the introduction of the railway in 1839. As part of the growth of London in the late 19th century, Stratford significantly expanded and increased in population, becoming the centre of administration of the Borough of West Ham in 1886 and it has formed part of Greater London since 1965. The more recent economic history is underpinned by a move away from railway works and heavy industry towards becoming a significant commercial and cultural centre. Stratford is the location of the London Olympic Park and is currently experiencing regeneration and expansion linked to the London 2012 Olympics.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratford,_London)

STRATFORD IN RECENT HISTORY

Stratford has always been a town, for working class people, which was transformed into industrial suburb with the introduction of the railway in 1839, as part of the growth and expansion of London as a city in the late 19th century. And until recent years circa 2007, when it is was confirmed that London would be hosting the Olympic Games in summer 2012, was still majorly considered to be a town built and catered to the lower working class to middle class people. Whether or not the same could be said now in my opinion is very questionable and debatable.

I was born in East London, Hackney to be precise, so Stratford was always around the corner, even though I was raised in Tottenham and Edmonton (both in North London) most of my life, I always had an idea of what Stratford was like. Now since I was a child growing up I always considered Stratford to be a place for working class people, with people from diverse backgrounds and ethnic origins; for example to me, you had your traditional East End English people ("cockneys") to your Asian people (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan) to your Black people ( African- Caribbean people: Nigerians, Ghanaians, Jamaicans, St Lucians, Dominicans, Trinidad and Tobagans and Barbadans or Bajans) etc....... And my earliest memories were of Stratfrord shopping mall which ironically people seem to forget since the intoduction of The Westfields Shopping Centre, and the Stratford Rex ( a popular nightclub predominantly catered to those who were of African-Carribbean origin.)

STRATFORD SHOPPING CENTRE

STRATFORD REX

BATTLE OF CLASSES: WORKING & MIDDLE CLASS VS 'BOURGEOUISE' UPPER CLASS

It seems to me that there has been an emergence of almost a new influx of class into Stratford as an area predominantly since London won its host bid for the Olympics 2012 and Stratford was chosen as its host town and base for all the main events. Whereas before we have seen that it was viewed by many to be a traditionally working class town, there have been attempted plans to rejuvenate the area and industrialise it further by attracting people of a more wealthier and higher class. Circa 2007, there have been a lot of jobs and job opportunities created with the creation of the Stratford Westfields Shopping Centre and various other businesses created in the area. A significant amount of the private sector workforce have relocated their offices and expanded to the area, possibly because of the Olympics and the potential opportunity for a growth in business and revenue, and also there have been a lot of properties and housing development projects geared towards these working professionals and businessmen/women. This is evident by the costs of these properties as most of these properties people from the working to middle class simply cant afford. Some of which can be seen below, in the picture below.

AN EXAMPLE OF A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN STRATFORD

Future housing

Planning for people

Thousands upon thousands of people will be moving to Stratford over the coming years, and the area and its developers are working hard to create the kind of housing that will accommodate them. Apartments adjoining the Stratford’s rejuvenated centre with all its arts, entertainment and retail opportunities; Georgian-style terraces of family dwellings in the northern quarter of the Olympic park; and modern Scandinavian-style houses lining the waterways to the south.
Canalside housing and in parkland, homes in the Athletes Village, homes in the urban heart of Stratford City. Homes to rent, homes to buy, affordable part-rent/part-buy homes. All enjoying the incredible connectivity, infrastructure and facilities which this fast-growing area has to offer. All developed with a consciousness of the urgent need for a low-carbon, energy efficient future and benefiting from a menu of eco-innovations: green roofs, heat pumps, maximised insulation and combined heat and power systems.
And many conceived and designed by some of the world’s leading urban architects.
Stratford’s new developments will offer housing for every age and income. They will sustain and strengthen the youthfulness and diversity of the area, they will dovetail with Stratford’s history and heritage, and they will be built with respect for its existing communities.
Stratford is planning for the future - by planning for people.

HOW TO IDENTIFY CLASS? SIGNIFYING AND CODING

How does one identify class? How does one determine what class a particular person or a group of people belong to is a particularly intriguing and poignant question, and underlying issue here. Are there certain hegemonic discourses and predominant opinions on what attributes or characteristics that belong to a certain class? I attribute class to a number of things and I believe a number of people do the same. We live in a society today where a lot is judged on appearance and presentation, so one is judged on how they look, what they do, and how they do it. In reference to class, I would associate class with not only race, because the temptation is to associate class with race but to certain extent I believe that it is no longer that relevant, i mean 50 years ago if you were asked what a traditional middle class was or looked like, you would be tempted to say, English, White and perhaps lived in a household with 2.5 children in a house with a car. However I believe this is no longer the case, as today in 2012, there are a number of middle class people in London and all around the U.K, who are from ethnic backgrounds or minority groups. However with reference to those who I say are from the 'Upper class' or 'Bourgeouise' group of society, I would traditionally say, these people are natives of the country, so in this case, White, dressed in fine suits or attire, smartly presented, very articulate in how they present themselves and the way they talk, normally drive flash and expensive cars and own their houses as oppose to mortgages. These people may carry expensive suitcases and mobile phones and digital devices such as Iphones, Ipads or Imacs.

However I do believe an ethnic person or a person from an ethnic minority group could attain or belong to this class if they had the wealth and were well enough positioned in society, for example a person of position such as a Doctor, Politician or Lawyer (Barrister) or Judge (QC). Though whether or not a person of colour or from ethnic group would be regarded as a member of this social class, remains to be seen because in my opinion I do not think White members of a "Upper class" sect of lets say a English society would fully embrace a member of an ethnic minority as their true social peer.

BATTLE OF CLASSES CONTINUED (THE THEORETICAL APPROACH)

One could argue that this battle of classes is closely linked to associated with the concept of 'Mode of production' or 'Economic structure'.
According to (Wright, Class counts, comparative studies in class analysis) there are times, when the claim that class (or closely associated concepts like 'mode of production' or 'economic structure') is 'more important' than other factors is a substantive thesis, not a heuristic device. Classical materialism is the most elaborated instance of such an argument. As G.A Cohen (1978) has forcefully demonstrated, the part of historical materialism that is built around the base/superstructure metaphor ascribes explanatory primacy to class through the use of functional explanations: the base (the economic structure conceptualized in class terms) "functionally explains" the superstructure. What does this mean? It means that super-structural phenomena take the form that they do because this form helps to reproduce the existing economic structure. This is quite akin to functional explanations in biology where a given trait of an animal is functionally explained by its effects in helping the animal survive and reproduce. Why are the bones in the wings of birds hollow? because this enables them to fly. The beneficial effect of hollowness (lighter wings) explains the fact of hollowness.

In the social case, the functional explanation embodied in historical materialism means that various social institutions; certain features of the state, certain features of the state, certain aspects of ideology, certain kinds of laws and so forth; are explained by the fact that they generate effects which help reproduce the economic structure. Since the economic structure is itself composed of social relations of production which collectively define the class structure, this is a form of class primacy.
(Wright, Class counts, comparative studies in class analysis)
So with reference to Stratford and its rejuvenation and transformation into an industrial, commercial town, one could argue that this is indeed deliberately intended to attract people from a higher class which in effect represent the 'ruling class' in which case would be MPs, local leaders and government & government appointed officials in office, to increase growth in the economy.

One could also argue that Stratford being invested into and transformed; is an attempt by the 'Borgeoisie' to maintain their power. According to (Giddens and Held, Classes, Power, and Conflict, Classical and Contemporary Debates) the Borgeouise cannot exist without constantly revolutionising the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first condition for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionising of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the borgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast-frozen relations with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses, his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind. The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the whole surface of the globe. it must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.

One also must look at the idea of modernizing the notion of class, and the theory of the role of class playing a part in the production of modernity. According to (Eder, The New Politics of Class) Durkheim relates the process of social differentiation to the conditions producing it. According to Durkheim's theory, it takes demographic growth and increasing social density as the central causal variables for the progressive dissolution of collective consciousness (and the individualization resulting from it) thus the key to explaining modernization is ultimately demography. The alternative theoretical approach to Durkheim is that of Marx. Marx's theory states that the evolutionary change of society (a change that has been conceptualized by later theorists as differentiation and rationalization) is the product, first, of the contradictions between the forces of production and the social relations of production and, second of the contradictions between social classes. Ultimately, contradictions are the causes of modernization (Godelier 1973)

STRATFORD WESTFIELDS SHOPPING CENTRE

STRATFORD UNDERGROUND STATION

Above is a picture of a typical busy day at Stratford Underground Station. Now here is a clear example of a mix of classes and ethnic groups in Stratford, all of this encapsulated in this picture. In addition, as a UEL student I travel to and from Stratford to get to University everyday and in the morning and especially in the evening I see so business professionals of a higher class walking around even sometimes more so than the traditional working class people who live and are based in that area.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratford,_London) Accessed on the 12th November 2012.
Class counts, Comparative studies in class analysis, Erik Olin Wright, published in 1997, printed in Great Britain at the University Press, Cambridge.
Classes, Power, and Conflict, Classical and Contemporary Debates, Anthony Giddens and David Held, published in 1982, in London, printed in Hong Kong.
The New Politics of Class, Social Movements and Cultural Dynamics in Advanced Societies, Klaus Eder, first published in 1993, Sage Publications, London.

Media representation

London 2012 has made history for many reasons, it has hosted the 2012 Olympics, which is seen to be one of the greatest sporting events in the world. The area which is situated in the heart of East London has been transformed over the last decade, turning acres of industrial land into green space for local residents and visitors of the Olympics to enjoy. Stratford has made history, once being known for high unemployment rates, high levels of crime rate and being one of the most deprived parts of London and infact the whole country. Now is seen as a tourist hotspot because of the London 2012 games, people see it as a tourist destination, this is partly because Stratford has created the biggest shopping mall in Europe called Westfield. "Westfield Stratford City is adjacent to the London Olympic Park, East Village, Stratford Regional and Stratford International stations. The shopping centre is part of a large multi-purpose development project called Stratford City. It is promoted as contributing significantly to the local economy, with the creation of up to 10,000 permanent jobs, including 2,001 jobs going to people in the local area."

So has this helped the local people in Stratford? Many have complained about the increase of costs and the congestion that the games would bring. People of London have been told to always plan before a journey and use more public transport where they can. As a result of this many local residents have decided to stay in during the games to avoid the rush and commotion. There were many costs of having the Olympics in Stratford such as local shops and businesses had to either relocate or be forced to shutdown, many small businesses that are still running there has seen a lost of revenue due to the fact that now Westfield is open, many people also lost homes and the cost of living in Stratford has increased therefore making it more difficult for the poorer people living within Stratford. So has the media showed this? Of course not. The media have represented Stratford as a vibrant and a place to be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westfield_Stratford_City

What I have done is tried to dig deeper and show you the 'real' Stratford. In order to do this I have conducted interviews with local residents who have lived there theyre whole life and residents who have moved in more recently. What the media fail show to is the the shortcomings that Stratford still holds till this day, parts of Stratford is still heavily deprived and this is what the media does not want to represent.

George Reese who has lived in the heart of Stratford all his life when asked had said "parts of Stratford have been completely untouched and and the Olympics money was only used on Westfield and the Olympic village itself" he had gone to say "where I live which is two minutes away from the Olympic village, there is still kids causing nuisance and theres also a strong sense of gang culture, and even violence but the media fail to show this because the wanna show us what they want and that is that Stratford is meant to be all rosy and has changed, which is not true"

Rachel Harris who has lived in Stratford over a year has said "Stratford is a lovely place to live in, I moved in from Norwich so I could be a part of the games and be part of history and there was none other place then Stratford". When I asked Rachel about why she thought this she replied saying "they have the biggest shopping mall in Europe, the houses are lovely here and also said everyone wants to come Stratford now and I was no different". I went on to ask Rachel about if she knew about Stratford before the Olympics and if she knew anything about the area and how deprived it actually was, her answer was "no I did not know about Stratford before I moved in". When I showed Rachel the 'dark side' of Stratford she was shcocked and did not believe parts of the area was still heavily deprived and needed refurbishment. The reason this is because the media do not show that side of Stratford and have kept it hidden away from public eye mainly because it would give a negative view of the Olympics. Stratford is represented as a vibrant and a nice place to be according to the media but not all is positive as there is more than meets the eye.

However spokesman for Newham Council, which is responsible for Stratford, said: 'Nowhere else in London is changing at the scale and pace of Stratford.

'Over the next 15 years it will become a new metropolitan centre supporting many thousands of jobs.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175316/London-2012-Olympics-Sorry-Stratford-Games-chiefs-dont-want-see.html#ixzz2D167r6rj

Before and After

stratford london before the olympic park was built

Before Olympics

Stratford now

Olympic Village in Stratford

History

Yusef Ibrahim-said

1043960

History of Stratford.

In this section, I am analyzing the history of Stratford as a local space, before the London 2012 Olympics. The sports event transformed the localized space into a global stage for the world to see, London. Moreover how the geographical area, in terms of buildings and how the people social class has changed after the Olympics. i will be analyzing how the working class have been moved from their childhood homes to a strange location, where the council decides to move them. in this section i am also analyzing the type of people that have moved in, in terms of their social class. by doing it will show the type of place Stratford was and what the Olympics organizer ambitious view of how Stratford should appear to the world through the notion of regeneration, for best of London cosmopolitan society.

Stratford in 2005

this images shows how Stratford looked in 2005. As you can see the tower building appears to be aged and needs work or taking down to build new modern apartments.

hidden Stratford.
this pictures shows how some parts of Stratford appeared just before Olympics, however this part, has been hidden from the public view.

I have been reading a article from the BBC, which analysis at how Stratford was in the mid- 19th century, and how the outsiders views and perspectives on Stratford then. Stratford was known as 'Stinky Stratford'. the reason for this was:

Event organizer, Claire Days, explains it has come a long way from its reputation as 'Stinky Stratford':

The Olympic Park was a hub of industry in east London from the mid-nineteenth century.
The introduction of the Metropolitan Building Act of 1844 prohibited noxious trades within the city limits of London, forcing them to set up factories just outside. it was the number of noxious trades that moved to the area that gave rise to the name of 'Stinky Stratford'."

With the name, however, came many opportunities for employment and in addition to Yardley's, there was Berk Spencer Acids, Jenson and Nicholson Paints and Clarnico's.

Michael Pitt is a local history enthusiast

These companies gave life to the communities that grew up around them, not only providing employment, but often entertainment and sports events as well.

Sharing Stratford's stories - life before the Olympics.

"We've been through it all - the Blitz, factories opening up then later closing their doors on us, and the closure of the docks, all adding to the hardship in east London."

Joan Lowe has lived in Stratford for most of her life and although she turns 81 next month she remembers vividly working in the old Yardley's factory in the 1960s.

"You wouldn't think it from the photos, but Yardley's used to stand pretty much where the Olympic Stadium is now.

Those were the good days but it was a different world; now a forgotten world."

It's this "forgotten world" which the charity, Eastside Community Heritage.

reading this story about Joan Lowe at the aged 81, has helped understand Stratford from an insider point view. she explained that those factory were seen as stinky factories, gave these local individual employment, livelihood, friends, family but more importantly, these factories gave the local a sense community and home. from reading this article i understood Stratford as a public space had a lot of happy nostalgic memories which were very close to many people hearts. however now its known as the forgotten history to the mainstream public.

Olympic Park Reminiscence

A photograph taken by Mike Steel in 2004 captures how a mountain of fridges once sat
on the site where the Aquatics Centre has now been built.

this picture shows the Olympic site in 2004 , from an outsider point view looking in,
this site was seen in society as a hub of factories and a bundle of mess in the area.

Average Property Selling Prices in Stratford (£000's)

This report displays the average property sale prices different types of property in Stratford for each month from April 2000 to August 2012.

This graph shows just before the announcements of the Olympic games ,
London Stratford house prices increase dramatically almost double the prices in some cases.

Detached

Apr 2000-

Aug 2012-

Change-

Semi

£140,167

£420,000

+200%

Terraced

£122,698

£260,057

+112%

Flat

£208,000

All

£124,286

£238,337

these figures shows from April 2000, the house prices for all types of properties were half that now. this shows the announcement of Olympics games has caused the house prices to increase because of attraction in tourist and the notion sold to the public of regeneration.

Bibliography.

http://www.home.co.uk/guides/house_prices_report.htm?location=stratford&all=1

http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/london/hi/people_and_places/2012/newsid_9041000/9041124.stm

Home Page