4 ms·

oh come on, this is somewhat a nostalgia trip. I would assert that you're as equally annoyed that your definition of what it was is now inaccurate as you are ab

oh come on, this is somewhat a nostalgia trip. I would assert that you're as equally annoyed that your definition of what it was is now inaccurate as you are about the changes. For those without that prior frame of reference what is now will just be what it was and they'll add their own complaints next decade. And thus time marches on and we cannot change it.

detritus 7y ago
Sure, KX is somewhat 'better' in some ways than it was a while back, and I'm not against development per se (I used to note your observation when I worked in Camden and realised each generation down there would rue the loss of whatever version of 'old Camden' it was they held dear) - what I'm concerned about is the sudden comprehensive change of an entire area. I'm generally suspicious of inorganic large developments as they tend to crowd out smaller businesses and encourage more chains of widespread consumer outlets, as they're the only ones who can afford to sign up 'off plan'. Coal drops yard and the new St Martins are very pretty, and certainly striking and elegant but I do worry that they're quite synthetic and sterile and what impact that will have on the students. Whether or not the future students of St Martins will be any better or more successful than the ones who studied at that cold building in Holborn, I don't know. - ed typos
- foldr 7y ago
  >Sure, KX is somewhat 'better' in some ways than it was a while back I really think you must not be familiar with Kings Cross at all to say this. I mean, can you name any specific business or building that you miss? It astonishes me sometimes what a bunch of whiners us Londoners are when it comes to new developments. It's a city, not a museum.
  - detritus 7y ago
    Whereas I'm still astonished when I try and couch my opinions on the internet in non-absolutist terms and they're invariably taken as blunt, literal weapons. I even stated in my first response here that "London doesn't sit still" and that it's "a bit 'too much, too quick'" that concerns me. I wonder if we forgot certain lessons from 60s architectural adventures. As for an answer to your question - Bagleys and The Cross spring to mind.
    - foldr 7y ago
      Aren't those both clubs? Not a very impressive response. Clubs often open in run-down or otherwise unattractive areas. They move when the area changes. I don't think we want to keep Kings Cross as a complete poohole just to keep a couple of clubs open. I say this as someone who used to live there. It might be fun for you to go to the run down part of town to go to a trendy club, but it's not so great for people who are in the area on a day-to-day basis. I can see what you're saying in general, but to use Kings Cross as an example is borderline trolling. No-one misses the old Kings Cross.
  - pmlnr 7y ago
    > It's a city, not a museum. Cities like Budapest, Prague, Vienna have quite strict regulations when it comes to buildings. Eg. Budapest still doesn't have anything taller, than 30 tiers. Respecting and maintaining a certain look doesn't mean it'll become a museum, rather that it has a personality and everyone agreed to keep that personality. London, at this point, is the other end of this spectrum: no personality, no regulations on look/height/etc based on values. (Sometimes I wonder about regulations at all, knowing the case of the melted Jaguar with the Walkie Talkie: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-23930675 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-23930675 )
    - foldr 7y ago
      It's quite ridiculous to suggest that London doesn't have any regulations on buildings, or that the city doesn't have any personality. Do you know why the cheese grater is the shape that it is?
      - pmlnr 7y ago
        > Do you know why the cheese grater is the shape that it is? I do not. Personality is an interesting topic. I love Hackney or the area around Wapping; there's certainly a personality around Muswell Hill and Highgate; the Barbican is brilliant and unique, etc. But the Liverpool Street Station area? Nah. Not that for example Budapest has a face everywhere: it has a decent amount of socialist blocks that you can find anywhere in the former Eastern Block, and a lot of generic housing areas, but the inner circle is quite heavily regulated, especially on the height of buildings. As for regulations: regulations on what looks are allowed. The question mark for the walkie-talkie was because it's a collector mirror, and whoever designed it should have realized that it's dangerous.
        foldr 7y ago
        Lots of rules: https://www.gardenvisit.com/blog/the-122-leadenhall-cheesegrater-and-protecting-londons-skyline-landscape-view-of-st-pauls-cathedral-from-fleet-street/ https://www.gardenvisit.com/blog/the-122-leadenhall-cheesegr...
  - detritus 7y ago
    I'm sorry that my response to you below isn't 'impressive' enough for you. Must try harder! Again, you seem to be polarising the engagement here into absolute terms - of course I wouldn't for a second agree with keeping "Kings Cross as a complete poohole just to keep a couple of clubs open", but the loss of those clubs and that culture surrounding it are to my mind indicative of a change in the city that inevitable as it is, is pervasive, permanent and in some ways saddening. I can't be right or wrong in this opinion, just different to your perspective and that's ok - neither of us need 'win' here.
    - foldr 7y ago
      You're always going to lose something when a city changes. I'm just baffled that your overriding reaction to the changes in Kings Cross is sadness. I do actually think it's important to keep whining in check because it holds London back. The fact that people are even willing to pretend that they want the old Kings Cross back (lol) is indicative of how deeply ingrained the whining culture is.
      - detritus 7y ago
        Can you point out where I said I want the old king's cross back, please? You seem to continually choose to interpret things in the most polarised terms that fit whatever narrative it is you wish to read. My stated concern here is in the density and pace of development - the change in what (I feel and believe) should be a more organically-grown locality, rather than some mass vision impressed upon the area.
        foldr 7y ago
        "Liverpool Street, Kings Cross, Holloway - all places once warm and familiar to me are now cold, oppressive masses of dense, synthetic development." That seems like a broadly negative reaction to the changes. If you think the changes have been for the worse, then it seems fair to presume that you'd rather they hadn't happened. If you actually like the changes overall, then we are in agreement. As for organic change - well, Kings Cross had decades of opportunity to deshitify organically, and it didn't. How long do you wanna wait?

detritus 7y ago

Sure, KX is somewhat 'better' in some ways than it was a while back, and I'm not against development per se (I used to note your observation when I worked in Camden and realised each generation down there would rue the loss of whatever version of 'old Camden' it was they held dear) - what I'm concerned about is the sudden comprehensive change of an entire area. I'm generally suspicious of inorganic large developments as they tend to crowd out smaller businesses and encourage more chains of widespread consumer outlets, as they're the only ones who can afford to sign up 'off plan'. Coal drops yard and the new St Martins are very pretty, and certainly striking and elegant but I do worry that they're quite synthetic and sterile and what impact that will have on the students. Whether or not the future students of St Martins will be any better or more successful than the ones who studied at that cold building in Holborn, I don't know. - ed typos

foldr 7y ago
>Sure, KX is somewhat 'better' in some ways than it was a while back I really think you must not be familiar with Kings Cross at all to say this. I mean, can you name any specific business or building that you miss? It astonishes me sometimes what a bunch of whiners us Londoners are when it comes to new developments. It's a city, not a museum.
- detritus 7y ago
  Whereas I'm still astonished when I try and couch my opinions on the internet in non-absolutist terms and they're invariably taken as blunt, literal weapons. I even stated in my first response here that "London doesn't sit still" and that it's "a bit 'too much, too quick'" that concerns me. I wonder if we forgot certain lessons from 60s architectural adventures. As for an answer to your question - Bagleys and The Cross spring to mind.
  - foldr 7y ago
    Aren't those both clubs? Not a very impressive response. Clubs often open in run-down or otherwise unattractive areas. They move when the area changes. I don't think we want to keep Kings Cross as a complete poohole just to keep a couple of clubs open. I say this as someone who used to live there. It might be fun for you to go to the run down part of town to go to a trendy club, but it's not so great for people who are in the area on a day-to-day basis. I can see what you're saying in general, but to use Kings Cross as an example is borderline trolling. No-one misses the old Kings Cross.
- pmlnr 7y ago
  > It's a city, not a museum. Cities like Budapest, Prague, Vienna have quite strict regulations when it comes to buildings. Eg. Budapest still doesn't have anything taller, than 30 tiers. Respecting and maintaining a certain look doesn't mean it'll become a museum, rather that it has a personality and everyone agreed to keep that personality. London, at this point, is the other end of this spectrum: no personality, no regulations on look/height/etc based on values. (Sometimes I wonder about regulations at all, knowing the case of the melted Jaguar with the Walkie Talkie: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-23930675 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-23930675 )
  - foldr 7y ago
    It's quite ridiculous to suggest that London doesn't have any regulations on buildings, or that the city doesn't have any personality. Do you know why the cheese grater is the shape that it is?
    - pmlnr 7y ago
      > Do you know why the cheese grater is the shape that it is? I do not. Personality is an interesting topic. I love Hackney or the area around Wapping; there's certainly a personality around Muswell Hill and Highgate; the Barbican is brilliant and unique, etc. But the Liverpool Street Station area? Nah. Not that for example Budapest has a face everywhere: it has a decent amount of socialist blocks that you can find anywhere in the former Eastern Block, and a lot of generic housing areas, but the inner circle is quite heavily regulated, especially on the height of buildings. As for regulations: regulations on what looks are allowed. The question mark for the walkie-talkie was because it's a collector mirror, and whoever designed it should have realized that it's dangerous.
      - foldr 7y ago
        Lots of rules: https://www.gardenvisit.com/blog/the-122-leadenhall-cheesegrater-and-protecting-londons-skyline-landscape-view-of-st-pauls-cathedral-from-fleet-street/ https://www.gardenvisit.com/blog/the-122-leadenhall-cheesegr...
- detritus 7y ago
  I'm sorry that my response to you below isn't 'impressive' enough for you. Must try harder! Again, you seem to be polarising the engagement here into absolute terms - of course I wouldn't for a second agree with keeping "Kings Cross as a complete poohole just to keep a couple of clubs open", but the loss of those clubs and that culture surrounding it are to my mind indicative of a change in the city that inevitable as it is, is pervasive, permanent and in some ways saddening. I can't be right or wrong in this opinion, just different to your perspective and that's ok - neither of us need 'win' here.
  - foldr 7y ago
    You're always going to lose something when a city changes. I'm just baffled that your overriding reaction to the changes in Kings Cross is sadness. I do actually think it's important to keep whining in check because it holds London back. The fact that people are even willing to pretend that they want the old Kings Cross back (lol) is indicative of how deeply ingrained the whining culture is.
    - detritus 7y ago
      Can you point out where I said I want the old king's cross back, please? You seem to continually choose to interpret things in the most polarised terms that fit whatever narrative it is you wish to read. My stated concern here is in the density and pace of development - the change in what (I feel and believe) should be a more organically-grown locality, rather than some mass vision impressed upon the area.
      - foldr 7y ago
        "Liverpool Street, Kings Cross, Holloway - all places once warm and familiar to me are now cold, oppressive masses of dense, synthetic development." That seems like a broadly negative reaction to the changes. If you think the changes have been for the worse, then it seems fair to presume that you'd rather they hadn't happened. If you actually like the changes overall, then we are in agreement. As for organic change - well, Kings Cross had decades of opportunity to deshitify organically, and it didn't. How long do you wanna wait?