Bucket and Spade Time

Folks - I'm grabbing my spectral bucket and spade, donning my towelling cloak and my straw tricorn and I'm actually going to have some time off. I'll be back , yabbering on about god-knows-what on Monday 1st Sept. Happy Hols, guys...

Greenwich Wildlife (5)

Is it 'wildlife?'

Well it could be. Paul sent me this Mandarin Duck that he spotted in Maryon Wilson Park. Chances are there's another of them just out of shot as they are romantics of the bird world.

Because they're so attractive, they've been used as ornaments in lakes for years, and every so often, a young couple pair up, obviously against their parents' wishes, and secretly elope. They may be endangered in their native Russia and China, due to deforestation, but Russia and China's loss is our gain.

There are about 1,000 wild breeding pairs in Britain, apparently - and though these may have been brought in to Maryon Wilson for pretty, they could also be of those lost young couples, desperate for a pond to call their own, Wild or not, they're still helping keep up the world population.

We have to be extra careful with them, though, as they're not protected birds here, despite their worldwide decline. That's because they're not technically native British birds. Cue one of those 1950s B Movies about misunderstood teenagers...

For the Chinese, they are symbols of love and wedded harmony as they are said to mate for life. Ahhh...

Body Worlds.

So. As the monster Tutankhamen exhibition rumbles to a close at the Dome, we look towards the next blockbuster - Bodyworlds.

I confess that the stripping down of dead (I prefer "differently manifested" - we Phantoms are sensitive about such loaded words...) bodies and reinventing them as art leaves me pretty much literally cold although I daresay it will pack in the crowds, if not quite in the numbers that visited King Tut.

But however radical the exhibits of Gunther Von Hagens may be, to me this is a logical step on from the sort of entertainment that regularly appeared at the Greenwich Fair twice a year.

There were all sorts of freakshows - from Royal Waxworks where "the whole court of France is to be seen," through prize fighters and quack-doctors, to a German ox with six legs and a 'learned dog who could shuffle and cut" - but there were dead bodies too.

Ok - so we went to gawp at the corpses hanging from gibbets whereas these bodies are donated but in some respects there will always be a question looming over an exhibit like this. However much it's dressed up as "educational" and "scientific," it is, let's face it, just a good old-fashioned circus sideshow, albeit on giant proportions. "Plastination," the name for Von Hagens's technique, is a wonderful word - and sounds just like one of the cures a quack doctor from the 19th Century would use for a miracle cure.

I guess it's hard to follow an act like Tutankhamen (another dead body if you want to get technical, though of course we only saw the results of unwrapping him.)The site is set up for blockbusters and they don't come along too often. The other giant hitter, the Terracotta Army, has just been to London and Pompeii doesn't look like it's coming our way any time soon (more death with both of these - what is it about us and death..?)

Which massive exhibition would you like to see coming to the O2 next? And while we're about it, there's still loads and loads of room inside that Dome. Maybe we should be putting first-dibs on what we'd like to see in the rest of the space. My own personal choice would be a bowling alley. I'd want it all retro like Bloomsbury Lanes - though maybe without the karaoke.

Any other ideas?

Favourite Front Gardens (11)

Trinity Buoy Wharf,E14



We haven't had a favourite front garden for ages. Maybe this is because the weather's been so bloomin' duff that I haven't been out looking for them - or maybe nobody wants to do much in the way of primping and preening their greenery in the rain.

But I said I'd bang on about Trinity Buoy Wharf a bit more, and today, I want to show you what a bunch of creative people do with no fixed gardens.

Trinity Buoy Wharf (not actually in, but I like to think "honorary" Greenwich) was basically an experimental station built along the Thames to test out lighthouse technology before it was used in really dangerous areas. There are some fab stories about it - one of my favourites is where they'd fire up a new type of bulb and some poor sod would have to leg-it round to Shooters Hill to see if they could see the light - and famous people - Michael Faraday, no less, who worked there, but that's for another day. A dark winter's day, perhaps, when stories of bravery and derring-do on the high seas are all the more dramatic.

Trinity Buoy Wharf has a fascinating life these days too. It's inhabited by creative types - with wonderful installations and art projects (see Aluna for one of my favourites) - and a great diner - all of which I'll also get onto in good time. They warrant looking at in more detail than one post.

The place is a wonderful mix of the old - Victorian warehouses, light-ships and the lighthouse itself - and the new - a pile of containers, painted bright colours and inhabited by arty types. And there's nothing arty types like better than creating exciting plant projects.

All over the place pieces of art mingle with found objects, juxtaposed in curious ways, both inside and outside the workshops of potters, mosaic artists and sculptors. Strange inventions and old objets d'art and honest tools mingle together - and grow from and alongside plants. Gay annuals and bright bedding jostle with runner beans and courgette plants, tomatoes and herbs.

This place is great. On the first weekend of every month most of the installations are open, and it's best to go along then. It's currently a bit of a trek to get to - you have to either drive or go to Canning Town on the Jubilee and take a 15 minute walk. But occasionally, just occasionally, they have a "festival" day and there's a free boat service from the O2 - and if you see one of those advertised, GO. It's a great afternoon out. The website is a bit out of date - it's still advertising the last festival - but I checked London Open House Weekend and it's going to be open then.

Laura Williams, the artist responsible for Aluna, tells me that since the Thames Clippers are now based around there, they can pretty much hop on a Clipper any time they want to go across to Greenwich. Wouldn't it be great if there was a boat service every weekend the art is open?

Academies Burney and Westons

Barry is doing a little family history and writes with a question that is probably a bit beyond me - though I'll bet it's not beyond a few of you...

He is mainly concerned with the "Royal Hospital School, as I had four 19thC ancestors go there (with families living for many years in the Walnut Tree Road collection of streets).

I am trying to pinpoint two related institutions to the School - the Burney Academy in or close to Burney Street, and Weston's Academy on or about the School's infirmary facing King William Street."

The Phantom is stumped on this one - apart from what I assume you mean is the Dreadnaught Hospital which is on King William Walk and which is now the library of the University of Greenwich, if memory serves me right (and which is open on Open House Weekend this year if you're interested...)

And that's one of the problems with living in a place that is dripping with royal connections, monuments of national (and international) importance and glorious, glamorous history. The 'ordinary' story of everyday folk seems to get lost in between the floorboards of sumptuous tales involving kings and queens, famous people, influential events and naval heroes.

Where other towns would carefully preserve the day to day life of ordinary buildings, we have such a plethora of grandness that we take for granted - and happily forget - a part of our history that is just as valid.

Looking at my bookshelves I have umpteen volumes about Greenwich's pomp and grandeur; just a few books (mainly out of print) about what the rest of us would have been doing - and let's face it - most of us would have been looking to the docks for our livings. Mary Mills especially has made several very decent fists at charting the industrial history of our town and there are other even more obscure books (someone very kindly copied a book for me by Barbara Ludlow - long out of print - for which I am very grateful indeed) but, perhaps understandably, most people choose to look at our gilded history rather than our rusted one...

The Heritage Centre in Woolwich goes some way to helping, but space is increasingly tight (whenever I go there it's absolutely heaving with family history researchers) and although they do document the lives of ordinary people, the focus is on the arsenal, given its location.

I guess what I'm saying, Barry, in a very roundabout way, is that I haven't got a clue. But I'll betcha someone here does.

Flat Rates

A few months ago, Henri sent me some wonderful pictures of her wedding - you can enjoy one or two of them on my weddings and events section. But now she writes with the classic problem that tends to follow weddings around. She writes:

"The husband and I are looking to leave New Cross when our lease runs out at the end of September, and we really, really want to re-relocate to Greenwich. It's handy for me, being able to roll out of bed and nip off to uni, and a convenient push-off point for him to travel to wherever he may be working then. The problem is we're having a hard time identifying areas of Greenwich (town or borough) where we can find a reasonable compromise of size, cost, and safety.

We're looking for something with 1 or 2 bedrooms, house or flat, for under £900 a month, and not down some dark, seedy alley miles away from any transport. Or Police. Do you have any advice? Inside info?

We don't mind something a bit shabby, if it means we get a few extra feet for our money (I much prefer a nice high Victorian ceiling over sunken lights in my bathtub and an oven that speaks to me) but we'd rather not live on the 16th floor of a scary council estate either. Know any areas we should be looking at?

Plumstead seems to have a nice range of shabby but affordable and slightly more spacious housing (although it's a bit close to the in-laws in Abbey Wood to be my pick of the Greenwich area) but apart from that and....Thamesmead *shudder* we're having trouble finding anywhere that isn't full of 'state of the art' and 'luxury', which seems to be code for 'shoebox with spotlights'."

The Phantom sympathises. However swish the new housing may be round here it tends to be a) tiny and b) stupidly expensive. I've never been able to work out why they call some of it "affordable" - I can't imagine many people on lower incomes actually being able to manage even the small part that they are expected to stump up at those prices. Following your code for 'Luxury' as equalling "shoebox with spotlights" I'd say "affordable" translates as "shoebox without spotlights hidden behind the bins..."

I have to put my hands up here - I don't really keep much of an eye on prices. I am sure that people here have a better idea than me but hey - it's my blog, so I'm going to have my two-penn'orth...

To be honest I suspect that Greenwich Central may be a bit scary for that sort of money (though it's always worth just checking - you never know what you may be able to find and with this credit-crunch thing going on you may find a landlord who would rather do a good price than be forced to sell up.) East Greenwich is worth a look - and ideally situated for amenities - the tube, train and sundry shops - but even that seems to be getting a bit pricey these days.

Since your husband (does he actually have a name???) has to commute, you need to be nearish the railway - though of course there are two good lines - the one that goes through Blackheath and the one that goes via Maze Hill.

I'm a big fan of Charlton. It's on both railway lines, which means you get a better selection of trains, and it has some great housing stock. You'll have to pick your area for safety purposes - but I think it's an underrated area. Sadly I'm not alone, and prices have been creeping up recently.

Ditto Woolwich. That's going to explode in the next few years - if I were buying, I'd be tempted to look there - it's got good transport links (soon to be fantastic) a shopping centre that may look tatty but has a solid, provincial feel, and it's a short distance to some excellent open spaces. Oh - and it has a very good Chinese restaurant.

If you want to get lots for your money, Plumstead isn't a bad choice at all - though tradition seems to dictate that you may to be more careful to find a safe area. I don't know too much about most of Plumstead to tell the truth - but I have friends who live there and none of them has been mugged in over 18 years. And it has the bonus of being on the railway and near to countryside. Some bits, especially around the common, are really rather grand.

Which brings me onto Shooters Hill. A little bit more out of the way, but still pretty nice, and close to lots of countryside and open air. I understand the Highwayman problem has abated in the last hundred years.

As we were talking a few days ago the Royal Herbert development is really rather cool. Don't bother trying to get the ex-water tower though - I think last time it was up they wanted a million for it. I have no idea whether they actually got it. I think the bit around it is rather charming, though it feels a bit remote.

Eltham's a funny one. it goes from the extremely old and posh right through to some truly grotty bits. It's a little bit out of the way so it may come up cheaper (as long as you're not after that amazing Tudor place next to the palace...) but I'm really into dodgy territory here - I really don't know.

One last thing. You shudder at Thamesmead, but I know several people who live there who are fiercely defensive of it. They love the fact that they have modern houses with lots of room and gardens for their kids to play in at prices they could never afford elsewhere.

Last time I was there (I was re-visiting the fabulous Crossness Engines - which if you haven't ever seen you must asap) they were building some very nice-looking flats on the river. I can't imagine they will be as pricey as anywhere upstream. I wouldn't count on the mythical "Waterfront Transit System" (read "bus") coming into service any time soon though.

I've yabbered on enough. Time to hand over to people who may actually have some answers to your questions...

The Chingford Meridian

Another in my Greenwich-related days out today; the glorious Chingford Meridian. Right at the top of Pole Hill, the highest point in Chingford, the then-Astronomer Royal, John Pond, erected an obelisk so that everyone north of the river could delight in Britain being the centre of the world. It was put up in 1824 under the excuse that it would help astronomers find True North from the transit telescope. It was the pride of Chingford.


Then disaster struck. Zut alors! The Meridian line changed. It wasn't as bad as it could have been - Paris was most keen to become the city of the Meridian - but it did shift everything by the frustratingly short distance of 19 feet, in 1850. Suddenly the good folks of Chingford felt as though they were somehow committing a fraud - luring unsuspecting meridian-chasers up to the top of the hill, only to sell them a lie.

They considered just moving the monument - but it was solid granite and had been enough of a huff and puff the first time. No one wanted the job of moving it again...

It hung around like a bad smell, embarrassing the mayor and shaming the councillors for 34 years. When the new line was officially adopted in 1884, they decided enough was enough. A new, somewhat less attractive pillar was erected (I mistook it for some kind of MOD relic when I first saw it) and an apologetic plaque stuck on the old one.

Visiting the monuments is quite a fun quest, if you're stuck for something to do in the long school holidays. We spent quite some time trying to work out exactly where it was, so you don't have to - the map reference is here - and, in fact, once you actually have the map it's quite obvious where it is - it's the bit marked "Obelisk..."

You can drive reasonably close - go to the top of a loop-y road of a very residential nature and park as near the apex as possible. You have to climb the last 50ft or so, but it's not a big deal - the grass is roughly cut and although there are no signs you just head for the top.

We had a fight against time - a massive storm loomed in the West - we watched it approaching through the handy gap in the trees (hence the moody look of the shot at the top - click on it to see it properly.)

I'd say that the very best time to go would be on a bright winter's day, when the trees are bare. The view is of central London - the Gherkin, BT Tower, London Eye, etc. and very dramatic, but if the trees were leafless I'm pretty sure you could see Greenwich (after all it was intended for exactly that...)

Most of the time we were alone, though a snogging couple did turn up at one point, and thinking about it, it's a perfect lovers' walk. In between slurps, he loudly announced that the Meridian Line began at the Millennium Wheel. She ooohed and aahed appropriately.

They didn't last long up there, and we didn't last much longer than them - the storm was getting closer and closer. We left it as long as we dared, but still didn't make it back down the hill before giant drops announced a torrential downpour. The last part was an undignified scramble down some rather muddy slopes in great stair rods of rain.

There's one last oddity about this place. On the granite column, another small plaque tells us that TE Lawrence (of Arabia) and his friend Vyvyan Richards had intended to build a place to print copies of Lawrence's Seven Pillars of Wisdom on the top of the hill. It never happened - but Richards lived in a hut up here until 1922.

Random but fun...

Rear Window (11)

I rather like starting out a post in August with a snow pic - wonderfully dramatic. Today, Rear Window takes a peek through the nets chez Mr & Mrs DeeBee, who live in one of the streets around the power station. I'm guessing perhaps Hoskins St but can't be sure.

I love the houses in the two or three streets around here - there's something really idiosyncratic about them that I've not seen anywhere else. At a guess I'd say they're turn of the 20th century or Edwardian - but they could be slightly older or younger. They have some great detail in them - I love the coloured tiles in the doorways and the fact that although they look the same, they are actually most of them slightly different from each other.

The sun coming over the power station was taken in June, when DeeBee sent this to me (I told you I was behind on my mail...) but my favourite shot is this one, taken at night. There's something at once comforting and sinister about that building. What I wouldn't give to have a poke around inside...

Sadly, despite my writing to TfL and having a long conversation on the phone with a helpful man a few months ago, it's not one of the buildings being opened for Open House Day this year. Neither are my other choices. But there are some interesting things coming up and I'll be setting aside Sept 20/21 for a spot of exploring. And there's always next year...

The Lucky Greenwich Gnomes

Benedict sent me a wonderful pair of gnomes, which will form part of my "alternative Greenwich Park walk" when I get round to creating it...

They are the Greenwich Guardian Gnomes, which, if you go at the right time of day, you may just catch peeking from out of their rain-hopper homes.

Tradition says that anyone who spots them can make a wish. Of course Tradition is less clear as to whether your wish will actually be granted - but hey - they're gnomes and they're lucky. Take a chance...

Here we have Mr Wicked and Mr Worried - but there are others too - Benedict wants to collect 'em all - maybe we could start a craze like those card-swapping games you get in playgrounds...

If you'd like to find them for yourself, imagine you're standing at the Blackheath Gate, looking in. On your left are the loos, but behind them are some random maintenance buildings. Check the rain hoppers by the gutters to see if you can see them. And don't forget to make a wish...

Mays, Mayes, Maize, Maze Hile, Hill

Jo asks:

"Why is Maze Hill called so – presumably there was a maze since that would be in keeping with the royal park etc."

The Phantom Replies:

The answer to this is not at all straightforward - and it's not necessarily correct either. It doesn't help that it's not always been spelled like that. Over the centuries it's been spelled using all the versions in the title.

According to my trusty Hasted, it is "supposed to have taken its name from Robert May who lived, 1683, in Park Wall, now Park Terrace." He got his information from the court rolls of Westcombe. Gregory Page - who is better known for his developments at more central Blackheath - is listed in 1717 as living in Mayeshile.

As an aside, I was chatting with a friend the other day who's studying old manuscripts for a PhD, who told me that what we think of as 'quaint,' archaic spelling on old documents was actually deliberate - that the authors of documents knew full-well that they were spelling things differently every time and that being able to spell words in ingenious ways was considered a mark of education and sophistication - which would explain why things are sometimes spelled - in our eyes awry - several times in the same document. I have no idea if it's true, but it certainly sheds a different light on old manuscripts...

But back to the Mays. Turning to Neil Rhind, I read that Mays Hill would have been established by the latest, the end of the 15th Century when our old friend Humph pinched a lump of common land to build his own palace - and Maze Hill would have been the cart track up the side of his new acquisition.

Neil Rhind seems to disagree with Hasted - in that it was named after Sir Algernon, not Sir Robert May. But far more interesting to me is the theory that there was actually a maze - albeit rather a long way away. A turf maze - a bit like the one at Hall Place rather than a formal one like at Hampton Court. It was, apparently, on the site of today's Wemyss Road - just round the corner from the main drag. It's not really a direct route though, and it's frankly a stretch for me - though I guess at a pinch it could commemorate the cutting of the maze...

It's also spelled Maize Hill - though I've not heard that there were any plantations of corn around there in particular.

No - I'm going back to my friend's theory in that our ancestors enjoyed the art of creativity in spelling. Mr May - whether Algernon or Robert - seems the most likely solution to me - it being originally "May's Hill."

I got told off for speculation yesterday and since I may as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb, I have one last thought to add. I have not heard or read this from anyone - it's merely from my own ponderings. That since this was a pathway cutting the Park from the rest of the land and that one thing that the area was well-known for - especially in Henry VII's time, was the abundance of May trees.

There was nothing Good King Hal and his "lusty bachelors" enjoyed more than setting off of a spring morning, and riding out towards Shooters Hill to gather may blossom, ' "caracolling" (I think this means singing rude songs) along the way and challenging each other to "feats of horsemanship," according to Rev. LeStrange. Could that particular hill have enjoyed a particularly spectacular display of blossom?

I'll be getting onto some of the intriguing buildings - and their occupants - of Maze Hill on other days...

Protest Cancelled

Rebecca has just told me that the planned protest about the Equestrian Events at Greenwich Park has been cancelled. I just checked the website for any more details and it just seems to be put down to "problems."

I wonder - have they been banned from holding a protest?

Anyone have any info on this?

The Phantom Rants AGAIN...

Anyone seen that rather odd article in Time Out this week where they, somewhat spuriously IMHO, postulate on what would happen if the Olympics were cancelled? (What next, I wonder - "What would happen if London had a plague of toads, the Thames ran blood or the Martians landed..?")

The article, a featherweight piece clearly borne of the silly season, doesn't really seem to address the issue at all - with many of the movers and shakers interviewed not seeming to be directly answering the question, making me suspect it was cobbled together out of a bunch of old interviews. The equestrian events in Greenwich Park - the one place that many actually WANT to see stopped - isn't mentioned at all. Not once.

Interestingly though, one of the talking heads is Chris Roberts. "It doesn't worry me," he boasts. "We're taking responsibility for the legacy as a borough. Councils must remember, after 2012 there won't be an Olympic Delivery Authority or London Organising Committee, so it's up to them and the residents."

Darn tootin,' Chris. The very fact that they know damn well that they won't exist after 2012 gives bodies like the ODA and the LOCOG no incentive whatsoever to create anything that will last beyond 2012. They will be expecting the councils and the government to clear up their mess as they plough through anything and everything to get their own goals achieved.

So what if a few trees get uprooted? We gave you a good Olympics. I know we said that we had 'no plans' to cut down trees or dig massive holes - but ain't you heard of Contingency, mate? It got to the eleventh hour and they had to come down. It's a shame and all that, but - well - you wanted the Olympics. You can grow some more. We delivered it for you on time. So what if there's no legacy? Not our problem, mate. All you asked us to do was get you to the ball, Cinderella. We got you there. Now it's struck midnight; the party's over. You find your own Prince Charming. We're off to collect our fat cheques and then going on a well-earned holiday. Sweep up that glass from that shattered slipper, will you, eh..?

There's a protest rally this Sunday in the park, organised by the Facebook group Stop The Olympics Destroying Greenwich Park. Meeting at 2.00pm at Blackheath Gate, expect a lot of angry people. I tend to be of the opinion that even if you hold the milder view that if the Equestrian events are going to happen inthe park, they must be heavily-regulated, it's worth going along. Bargaining is always about asking for more than you actually want, so you can concede small points to get big ones....

Greenwich District Hospital Site Meeting

I've just heard on the jungle telegraph that the planning meeting for the GDH site is to be held at the town hall on 28th of this month at 6.30pm. Far be it for me to even consider that it was scheduled for this time and date to maximise the possiblity of most people being on holiday - I'm sure the planners didn't even think of it...

My contact suggests that anyone with any objections should go - and state their thoughts 'loudly and clearly to the committee.'

Since the findings by CABE, however sensible, are not actually in any way binding, don't rely on their report to get anything changed. Loud voices are the order of the day it would seem...

Animotion

Warning. This post requires audience participation.

Nick has what he calls a "random" question, which I've not been able to address for some time as my Flash player stopped working and refused to reload.

What you need to do is don a frilly shirt, velvet kneepants and a stretchy head band, plaster-on some pink and blue eyeshadow, preferably in zig-zag lines, backcomb your hair and take a look at this pop video from the 1980s.*

The band is, of course Animotion; the song I Engineer.

No - I don't remember it either - perhaps it's because it's so very generic 1980s electro-pop that I could have heard it and not really noticed. If I was asked to create a pastiche of music from that time, I might come up with exactly this video - pretty boys (and one girl) with big hair and big shoulders, mooning around a fuzzy creepy place that's just out of focus, looking mean and moody photographed from oblique angles and singing about - well - I'm not really sure what...

But back to Nick's question. He wants to know where the fuzzy creepy place is. "All I know is that it was an abandoned WWII (haunted) hospital in Blackheath, London," he tells me.

You know, Nick - it is familiar - I have seen this place before - but not in 'real life.' I've seen photos of it - and I'm trying to remember where. It may well have been at an illustrated talk by Neil Rhind. I'm not convinced it still exists, though it could have been turned into luxury flats by now and be virtually unrecognisable.

It's a fabulous place - presumably set-dressed for the video, but gloriously creepy all the same. It looks Victorian, rather than purpose-built WWII. The interiors are wonderful and the covered walkways are great.

I am sure someone here will be able to identify this place even though I, frankly, can't. It's interesting that an obscure American new wave act (who have, apparently, reformed and, judging from the pictures look a hell of a lot better now than they did then) may have unwittingly created a fascinating historical record (no pun intended) of a lost building - for, whatever it is now - a fab-looking old place in a desirable area - it certainly won't be looking like that any more...

So, folks - do you know this place? Does it still exist? What was it?

And is it haunted? Hell. Why not...

* I should warn you that this song is horribly catching. I've only seen the video twice and I'm already convinced I remember it from the 80s and it's rattling around my head in a most annoying I'm-going-to-be-with-you-all-day manner...

1790 Roadmap

Stonemuse has been shopping on Ebay and has kindly sent me a picture of his latest acquisition - a road map from 1790. I know very little about it, other than it appears to have been published by J. Cary, July 1, 1790.

I think what this says most to me is just how hit-and-miss travel was in those days. This is the main Dover Road - and yet the traveller is given information on a need-to-know basis only.

Interestingly, we are given the names of individual landowners - Mr Angerstein - Mr Page - Mr Todd - Mr Snodgrass - and the odd landmark - Sevendroog Tower, for example, which wouldn't have been particularly old when the map was made. There's also a list of respectable inns - in Essex - I'm not sure what their relevance is.

It certainly leads to some questions - Is The Sun Public House an early incarnation of that landmark of traffic-report misery, The Sun In The Sands? And where's The Spread Eagle? I thought it was a bit of a must-stay on continental journeys...

It seems a bit odd to look at a map this way round - we're used to looking at charts where North is at the top. Try turning it round like this to get a more recognisable image:

I don't know about you but I have wonderful images of travellers dancing before my eyes. Cooped up in rickety coaches, wrapped in heavy cloaks, tight breeches, Spitalfields silk dresses and fur muffs, their trunks and cases and hatboxes piled high upon the roof, full of excitement of what they would discover on the Continent. The ancient wonders of Rome, perhaps, or the mighty learning of Paris. The lasciviousness and danger of Naples; the fabulous art works of Germany.

And all this mingled with a terrifying frisson at the thought of Highwaymen on Blackheath...

Heart of East Greenwich Report

Andrew has just sent me a fascinating link to a report by CABE with their suggestions to improve the design of the proposal for The Heart of East Greenwich (AKA the old hospital site.)

CABE is The Commission for Architecture and Built Environment which acts as the government's advisor (read "Jiminy Cricket") on new urban projects. As far as I can tell, they look at projects from the point of view of those who will be using the spaces/buildings/facilities and make grass-root suggestions to make them better - both to use and to look at.

As far as I can see pretty much every suggestion they make seems to be solid and positive. Much of it leans towards the "could try harder" angle, but in most cases it at least points the would-be developer in the right direction. Personally I would have liked to see more suggestions limiting the amount of traffic spilling into the immediate area - but CABE at least makes a fist at channelling the traffic in a sensible manner.

Sadly they have no kind of enforcement facility - "we do not make statutorily binding decisions (although we are a statutory body)" but since they come from within the government maybe, just maybe, there's an outside chance that they will be listened to, even if only a little bit.

See the very sensible suggestions here and hope that they will have some impact where those of us locals who commented don't appear to have any at all.

Load Of Old Bull - Or Great Day Out?

An interesting one today, folks - upon which I'd value your opinions...

A couple of weekends ago, we saw the second visit of the Red Bull Air Race. I confess I was quite surprised to see it a second year running - but hey - I ran with it. After all, I'd gone the first year and quite enjoyed it. This year I didn't manage to get free tickets and I hadn't loved it enough the first time round to fork out another twenty-odd quid to stand all afternoon.

Dazza did go though - he managed to get some freebies - and he's sent me some fab pics which illustrate this post.

But given that I wasn't actually at the event this year, I began to understand just how bloomin' noisy it is - not just the race days, but during the week leading up to the event.

The Thames Path was closed to - well everyone who hadn't paid, actually, leading to us being effectively locked out of our own facilities - especially, I understand, the wildlife centre at the Ecology Park.

That weekend I was doing some reasonably complicated exterior work with my neighbours and there were times when we couldn't hear each other shouting instructions to each other as planes roared over our heads.

Personally, I let it go. It's one weekend a year and I did enjoy it well enough last year. But Catherine has voiced some concerns - and it's not the first time I've heard them. She says

"I found it a noisy invasive pain in the proverbial, on one of the sunniest weeks, when I could finally sit out in my excuse for a garden."

She asks the rhetorical question "Were any Greenwich residents consulted on whether they agreed to this every year?"

And she does have a point. I had assumed it was a one-off last year and I embraced it - but do we want a whole weekend of aerial petrolheads every year?

Catherine brings up another point - "Did anyone else found event to be more like a throwback to pre-carbon awareness 20th Century events, than something Greenwich Council of Sustainable Tourism should actually be promoting - if it really knew what sustainable tourism meant..."

I just don't know, myself. I'd like to think that Greenwich Council was making lots of money out of this - and if it's not, then it needs to start making a noise. I'd like to think that we would be asked if we wanted our path closed every single year - I sincerely doubt anyone was asked.

On the other hand, despite my guilt about all that carbon, I did enjoy it last year. And Dazza's pics are great.

Let's have a poll. What do you think - has the Red Bull Air Race outstayed its welcome or should we embrace its fumey fun with open arms?

Vote here, guys...

Scatty Phantom

Sorry folks - I've lost something - and for the life of me I can't remember who sent it...

It was a magazine interview with the course designer of the Equestrian events for the Olympics, Sue Benson. I read it, but now can't find it to pass on.

Anyone know the article?

Sorry about this - I didn't realise that virtual offices could become as untidy as real ones My cyber intray is as overflowing as my earth-bound one...

:-(

Los Dawsons

Paris, early 1990s. Virtually every little bar you go in has its own little resident musical thing going on - a trio - a soloist - a duo - a whole band. This isn't 'an event' as such; it's just part of the provided atmosphere. Music because it's fun to make and fun to listen to.

Back in London, it's not that hard to find live music either. It's more formal and there seem to be more health and safety hoops to jump through - but it's there. Hell - even Greenwich has a thriving little jazz scene, where the Trafalgar Tavern jumps and little bars, lost to us now, follow.

Sadly, those bars in Paris got tidied up in the mid-late 90s by an incoming regime determined to crack down on - well, fun, as far as I can see. Even the Folies closed. Back in England though, I'm not really sure what happened. We just seemed to lose the knack of going out for a quiet drink or a meal and have a little live entertainment that wasn't some drunk individual screaming into a karaoke mic. And in Greenwich the lid was finally closed on live music as a general thing when Greenwich Inc started taking over the town.

We still have a couple of pockets of brave, live music, but we can't look to the major venues like The Trafalgar any more. We have to go underground. Sometimes literally. Olivier, down at Olivers, for example.


At ground level, The Lord Hood, for those who like trad, and Peter de Wits for mainstream stuff still just about battle on (though PdW, slightly worryingly, always seems to be shut these days whenever I try to visit.. .) One-offs on an occasional basis at other places. None of these gaffs is huge, just run by individuals who are passionate about live music. They can't make much money, but they believe in it. And I applaud them for their courage and tenacity.

Happily, it's not just in Greenwich town centre that these tiny venues tough it out to bring us live music. Cattleya (Chu and Cho) in Charlton Church Street, another place that could easily have used the "we're too small" excuse hosts Los Dawsons every other Sunday night. It's taken me a long time to make it down to see them. Sorry, guys.

It is what I call 'Hangover music.' Blues, pop covers and good old fashioned rock & roll, played simply and, largely, acoustically by two guitars and a double bass. Three guys crammed in behind a wall of music books, hats and coats, and a fixed circular table that is in just the wrong place. The audience is crammed the other side. The little bar table that runs around the wall has been flapped-down on hinges to make room for (not many) more punters; the tables squashed together to get as many bums on seats in as possible. The place is full. Business is brisk. Meals are served. Drinks are brought out.

The guys themselves are clearly on their day off. To say they're not dressed up for the occasion is an understatment - their dress as casual as their music. And that's how it should be. I'm sure they scrub up just fine for a 'proper' gig - a wedding, perhaps, or a barbeque, but this gig is for them. They are doing this because they love it. And it shows. I can even tell which songs they like doing best. The blues and R&R are played with big grins on their faces, Hound Dog and Blue Moon of Kentucky rip from them with the kind of gusto I've reserved for my Thai curry. The latin stuff slinks around like the poor waitresses trying their best to edge between the tables.

The pop covers seem more like they've been added in as crowd-pleasers. They're ok - played perfectly well - but they're more like day-jobs - they're working at it. Doing them because they will get a bigger round of applause (which they do, btw.) Personally I'll take the Big Mama Thornton stuff every time.

Los Dawsons are gaining ground because they work at it behind the scenes - they are managing to get little one-offs in other venues now, but I find myself asking a bigger question. If these little places can make live music work on a simple, every day level (sorry Los Dawsons - I don't mean you're 'everyday' in a bad sense - I mean that the music you play is the kind of stuff that one can sit with a pint and a bowl of tapas and just relax to) then why can't more places have this kind of thing instead of forcing us to watch enormous TV monitors showing two obscure countries playing some obscure Eurosport or listen to the kind of muzak that nobody even hears?

Greenwich is full of musicians, both pro and amateur. We even have a major national music school here. But the amount of live music in our bars and restaurants is pitiful.

I urge you, however worn out by a weekend's relaxation you may be, make an effort to get down to see Los Dawsons for a final Sunday-night chill before the week begins. They're only there on alternate weeks; find out which ones here. And do pre-book - Cattleya can get very full indeed...

Risum Teneatis Amici?

Today marks the anniversary of two Greenwich events. The first was the solemn laying of the foundation stone for the King's new Royal Observatory on the site of Duke Humphrey's Tower - August 10, 1675. The second marks a 'hilarious' joke played by the soon-to-be Astronomer Royal, John Flamsteed on the same day, which led to a misunderstanding that has resounded down the centuries.

Flamsteed was well-known as an irascible astronomer with no time whatsoever for astrology. He had spent some time studying the art but had never managed to make any sense of it. He had come to the conclusion that astrologers filled their almanacs with "astrological whimseys tending only to abuse the people and disturb the public with anxious and jealous predictions," and was convinced they were charlatans to a man, only in it for the cash.

He noted that whenever things didn't happen according to prediction, astrologers were always making up excuses about minor alignments or other heavenly events that had got in the way. He complained that whenever predictions went really pear-shaped the astrologers merely said that God had overruled the heavens.

He was particularly scathing about a certain Mr Gadbury, pointing out that he was all-very-accurate when reading charts of dead people but "he predicted danger of death in 1661 for the King of Sweden (or 1663 if he should escape 1661), certain death in 1660 for the Prince of Orange, and the same in 1667 for the Duke of York, yet today (1674) all three are still alive and well."

He went on to say "Since astrology finds no natural grounds to sustain it, and since experience shows us its falsehood, I hope my readers will withdraw any credit they may have given to this imposture." What made him seethe even more was that at the time, Astrology and Astronomy were lumped in together as a more or less single subject and he was nigh-on apoplectic at the thought of being tarred with the same brush as such "foolish and opposite to reason" flim-flammery.

Why am I talking about this? Because, on this date in 1675, as a jolly jape to amuse his scientific pals, John Flamsteed actually drew up a horoscope for the Observatory's birthday. You can see it at the top of this post. Don't ask me to explain it - I have no idea how it works.

Despite the fact that he headed the whole thing with the Horace quote "Risum Teneatis Amici?" (Can you help but laugh, friends?) Flamsteed's comedy horoscope has followed him down the years like a bad smell. There are not a few modern astrologers who believe that Flamsteed was an Ephemeridist himself - something that would make him turn in his grave.

Enjoy this beyond-comment extract, from Horogem, for example:

"In 1675, it was Flamsteed who selected Greenwich, England, for the erection of an observatory. The reason for his choice? When he made his mathematical calculations during the 1670s, the meridian running through Greenwich was the geodetic equivalent of no degrees of Aries- the first of the Zodiac signs and the beginning or spring point. London was then the world's greatest city and the center of learning. Greenwich lies on the zero degree of longitude and, from that line, the meridians are numbered. Also from that line, comes "Greenwich mean time," upon which time in every corner of the Earth is based."

Well. There you have it.

Happy Royal Observatory Day, One and All!

Strange Thing

Jo's been busy snapping today and has sent me a real oddity. I have absolutely no idea what this is or why it's sprouted a white tarpaulin.

I dont think it's got anything to do with the early medieval tide mill that archaeologists have just discovered down there - it seems to be in the wrong place. It seems a bit large to be some police crime scene. Can anyone shed any light on this, er, shed?

Greenwich Wildlife (4)

Jo has been watching a family of cormorants that "regularly perch on the old coal loading pier outside the power station, drying their wings and digesting their catch."

She notes that that must mean that Greenwich has a fair abundance of unseen wildlife - the fish in the Thames. So the river must be pretty healthy - especially for a city waterway. I still don't much fancy a swim though...

Last-Minute Meeting

Lorna just told me about this, folks, so I've skipped the Parish noticeboard just this once; She tells me:

The police are holding a meeting at 7.30 tonight at Randall Place Christian House to discuss the anti social behaviour in St Alfreges passage.

Just in case you want to go along...

Unique Collections

Trevor asks:

"Wonder if you can tell me what has happened to the little toy/model shop that used to be near the Cutty Sark along Greenwich Church St and whether theres any info on its history on your website - I remember the shop being there on a school trip to the Cutty Sark back in 1982 and I've always popped in when ive visited Greenwich ever since - to me it became as much of a Greenwich landmark as the Cutty Sark itself. Unfortunately after a trip to Greenwich yesterday I was saddened to see that it seems to have been replaced by a toddlers clothing shop."

The Phantom replies:

I think you mean Unique Collections- a wonderfully dusty old toy and medal shop - it sold firemen's helmets and ancient medals alongside dinky toys and model Thunderbirds, and it seemed to be located in another century.

Sadly, it pretty much was - it closed in, I believe, somewhere around 2003/4 if memory serves. I was deeply saddened to see it go - and unable to get much excited by its replacement. But such is life. I don't know the full story of what happened - I suspect it's the familiar tale of rising rents and falling customer base. I am sure that someone here will know what happened who can dish the dirt...

HOWEVER. I have been doing some digging and I have found that they are still going, albeit online these days. So if you're trying to find that extra special dinky toy, tin soldier or model robot, try visiting their website. You can even visit them by appointment - though they're in Chipstead, Surrey, these days...

Raan Take Two

Folks - I hereby give formal notice of the withdrawal of my original review of Raan restaurant in the O2.

What's happened to change my views? Certainly not the way it looks - it is, in decor, pretty much exactly the same as ever. But appearances are deceiving and Raan is very much not what it was.

Just a few months ago, this was one of the very, very few restaurants in Greenwich included in Time Out's Top Fifty eateries in the capital (I'm looking forward to trying out the intriguing Deptford Project, btw). The North Indian food was excellent, the service immaculate and the feel quirky and independent.

When Greenwich Inc bought it out, I assumed that they would keep the winning formula that had catapulted the place into being regarded as one of the best places to eat in London. After all - it looked exactly the same. No name-change, no outward difference at all.

It just didn't occur to me that all Greenwich Inc seems to have been after when acquiring this accolade-winning restaurant was that coveted corner-position in the Dome at the end of Entertainment Avenue.

Gone is the fabulous Indian cuisine. In comes bog-standard basic Pan-European-American food - steak and fish, cheesecake and pie.

I should mention that this is NOT bad food. It's perfectly ok - averagely cooked,averagely presented and averagely served. Everything's ok. There were no complaints from our table. But there were no murmurs of appreciation either. This was fuel - perfectly edible, perfectly nice - but a disappointment after eating in the old Raan.

I can't find Raan mentioned in its new capacity anywhere. Not even on Greenwich Inc's own website. Could it be that they are trading on old reviews? Or is the truth more depressing - that stadium-goers don't really care what they're eating and Greenwich Inc knows this?

Peter "The Phantom" Parker Scores A Scoop

Good citizens relax! All is well; we are being watched and protected by our own superhero.

I was toddling up Victoria Way in Charlton a few days ago when I spied something strange atop a chimney stack.

Could it be? Clutching my faithful box-brownie, I tip-toed quietly towards the crouching figure, hoping that his eagle eye and razor-sharp reflexes wouldn't trigger before I could get a picture. The Daily Planet pays good money for clear shots of Spiderman himself...

The conditions weren't good (they never are when you're trying to capture a myth - The Loch Ness Monster - The Abominable Snowman - Boris Johnson actually in London...) but I think that my pictures will be clear enough for conspiracy theorists everywhere to agree that Spidey does exist...

Aluna

I get heartily fed up with Corporate Art - usually in sculpture-form, designed, effectively, by committee, even if it has a famous name attached to it, poorly executed and often just in the wrong bloomin' place (I don't, for example, disapprove of a statue of The Unknown Construction Worker - but what's it doing outside the Tower of London?)

Companies decide they want a piece of Art and put the job out to tender. Somehow it seems that it would be better that the art actually grew out of a moment of inspiration - from someone with something to say, rather than coming up with something that "will do," as long as it fits in with the corporate image.

Anyone who's been to Bluewater recently may have seen the uninspiring selection of submissions for the in-my-view-utterly-pointless Angel-Of-The South sculpture to be hoved up - around Ebsfleet, if I recall. The folks up North have their Angel - and, I'll admit, very fun it is too. But that doesn't mean we have to have one too (though of course anyone who was reading last week will remember this is not a new thing...)

In my humble opinion the best form of art grows from an artist's very soul - where they have absorbed what is around them, the issues they care about and the history and landscape that the art is to be in (and no I don't count the entry for the Angel of the South statue that looks exactly like a dodgy Kent scrap metal yard - I don't believe it's actually occurred to the guy...)

You could say that makes me a hopeless idealist and that sponsorship has gone on for centuries. Perhaps I am and of course it has. But Art where the artist actually has something to say does exist. What I don't get is why they don't seem to attract the kind of giant corporate sponsorship that the vacuous ones do...

If you haven't already met her, allow me to introduce you to Aluna.

She is (or might be, if they ever get the cash) the world's first tidal-powered Lunar Clock. A gigantic series of concentric glass rings, she's made out of thousands of tiny recycled glass panels each containing a little LED light. As the tide rises and falls, powering the lights, they illuminate various areas of the rings, telling the exact state of the tide - and the phase and time of the Moon. The relationship between the Moon and the tide have been vital to the Thames and to London for - well - for ever, actually, and this is a physical - and IMHO beautiful - representation of that.

It will be so big that, if it actually comes about, they'll be able to use the ground around the base (at the currently derelict East India Dock Basin across the river) as a park and place for festivals for people to whom the Moon is still a powerful religious/spiritual symbol.

I met Laura Williams, the artist who came up with this eccentric, but perfectly-placed and conceived project, when she opened her studio for all-comers over a weekend at Trinity Buoy Wharf a couple of weeks ago (an extraordinary place; I will be banging on about TBW