Hackney Fashion Hub: A parallel universe of tourist wealth, launching in 2014

A tsunami-sized wall of cash is heading to Morning Lane, a shabby thoroughfare in Hackney - but who will benefit from it?

Two years after the riots, a tsunami-sized wall of cash is heading towards Morning Lane, a shabby thoroughfare in Hackney.

The local council secured £5m from the Greater London Authority’s regeneration fund for areas affected by the riots and it is being spent on a project costing tens of millions and called the “Hackney Fashion Hub”. Fashion outlets, a café and design studios will be housed in two new seven- and five-storey buildings and 12 railway arches located opposite and adjacent to the old Burberry factory, which has attracted busloads of Japanese tourists since it opened as an outlet store in the 1990s.

The developers are the Manhattan Loft Corporation, “the company who brought loft living to London” and whose recent projects include “67 of the most unique apartments in London, on the top floors of the Grade I-listed St Pancras Renaissance Hotel”. The architect is the trendy David Adjaye and work starts in 2014.

As well as big-brand fashion salesrooms, the development will include design studios “where locals can show their work”. The stress is on the word “local” and the council is keen to persuade us that this project is not just to attract tourists and investment from the Far East.

So we, the locals, should be over the moon about it, shouldn’t we? I spoke to Lia, who lives in Hackney and works at a vegan, volunteer-run café on Clarence Road, a focus of the London riots. She knew nothing about the development. But some local people do know and are into their designer brands – as the discerning young men who looted the Carhartt outlet near London Fields showed in 2011. Perhaps this is why David Adjaye’s shops on Morning Lane have massive, futuristic-looking riot shields on the front. I asked Adjaye Associates about them and got this reply: “No, those are simply shutters; all shops have shutters on them. They are shutters that cleverly also function as rain shields.”

Hackney Council claims that the new hub will be physically integrated with and encourage visitors to go to “other areas of Hackney” (such as the betting shops and pawnbrokers on the Narrow Way) and “new signage” will encourage them to do that. But in reality it is separated from Hackney Central by the bus station on Bohemia Place, while retailers on the Narrow Way in central Hackney, a site of rioting, are excluded from the party.

They are somewhat disgruntled. So the council has painted bright geometric shapes on the road outside their premises. “Next week we’re getting some pot plants,” said Ayub, who owns a local clothes shop. “They’re trying to kill us.”

So everyone has been catered for: the underclass in the ghetto of the Narrow Way and Clarence Road; the Chinese, South Korean and Japanese visitors in their parallel universe of tourist wealth on Morning Lane; and those who can afford the new flats on Chatham Place. If the shopkeepers still feel dissatisfied, they could participate in a scheme the council has set up called Hackney Is Friendly; it’s a “place to find a friendly face on the Narrow Way. Come in and say hello if you’re passing.”

 

It's all no change in Hackney: a simulated view of the new fashion hub. Photograph: Getty Images.

This article first appeared in the 12 August 2013 issue of the New Statesman, What if JFK had lived?

Show Hide image

France’s burkini ban could not come at a worse time

Yet more legislation against veiled women can only further divide an already divided nation.

Since mayor of Cannes David Lisnard banned the full-body burkini from his town’s beaches, as many as 15 French resorts have followed suit. Arguments defending the bans fall into three main categories. First, it is about defending the French state’s secularism (laïcité). Second, that the costume represents a misogynistic doctrine that sees female bodies as shameful. And finally, that the burkini is cited as a threat to public order.

None of these arguments satisfactorily refute the claims of civil rights activists that the bans are fundamentally Islamophobic.

The niceties of laïcité

The Cannes decree explicitly invokes secular values. It prohibits anyone “not dressed in a fashion respectful of laïcité” from accessing public beaches. However, the French state has only banned “ostentatious” religious symbols in schools and for government employees as part of laïcité (the strict separation between the state and religious society). And in public spaces, laïcité claims to respect religious plurality. Indeed, the Laïcité Commission has tweeted that the ban, therefore, “cannot be based upon the principle of laïcité”.

While veils covering the entire face such as the burqa or niqab are illegal, this is not to protect laïcité; it is a security matter. The legal justification is that these clothes make it impossible to identify the person underneath – which is not the case for the burkini.

 

By falling back on laïcité to police Muslim women in this way, the Cannes authorities are fuelling the argument that “fundamentalist secularism” has become a means of excluding Muslims from French society.

Colonial attitudes

Others, such as Laurence Rossignol, the minister for women’s rights, hold that the burkini represents a “profoundly archaic view of a woman’s place in society”, disregarding Muslim women who claim to wear their burkini voluntarily.

This typifies an enduring colonial attitude among many non-Muslim French politicians, who feel entitled to dictate to Muslim women what is in their best interests. Rossignol has in the past compared women who wear headscarves through choice to American “negroes” who supported slavery.

Far from supporting women’s rights, banning the burkini will only leave the women who wear it feeling persecuted. Even those with no choice in the matter are not helped by the ban. This legal measure does nothing to challenge patriarchal authority over female bodies in the home. Instead, it further restricts the lives of veiled women by replacing it with state authority in public.

Open Islamophobia

Supporters of the ban have also claimed that, with racial tensions high after recent terrorist attacks, it is provocative to wear this form of Muslim clothing. Such an argument was made by Pierre-Ange Vivoni, mayor of Sisco in Corsica, when he banned the burkini in his commune. Early reports suggested a violent clash between local residents and non-locals of Moroccan origin was triggered when strangers photographed a burkini-wearing woman in the latter group, which angered her male companions. Vivoni claimed that banning the costume protected the security of local people, including those of North African descent.

Those reports have transpired to be false: none of the women in question were even wearing a burkini at the time of the incident. Nonetheless, the ban has stood in Sisco and elsewhere.

To be “provoked” by the burkini is to be provoked by the visibility of Muslims. Banning it on this basis punishes Muslim women for other people’s prejudice. It also disregards the burkini’s potential to promote social cohesion by giving veiled women access to the same spaces as their non-Muslim compatriots.

Appeals to public order have, occasionally, been openly Islamophobic. Thierry Migoule, head of municipal services in Cannes, claimed that the burkini “refers to an allegiance to terrorist movements”, conveniently ignoring the Muslim victims of recent attacks. Barely a month after Muslims paying their respects to friends and family killed in Nice were racially abused, such comments are both distasteful and irresponsible.

Increased divisions

Feiza Ben Mohammed, spokesperson for the Federation of Southern Muslims, fears that stigmatising Muslims in this way will play into the hands of IS recruiters. That fear seems well-founded: researchers cite a sense of exclusion as a factor behind the radicalisation of a minority of French Muslims. Measures like this can only exacerbate that problem. Indeed, provoking repressive measures against European Muslims to cultivate such a sentiment is part of the IS strategy.

Meanwhile, the day after the incident in Sisco, riot police were needed in nearby Bastia to prevent a 200-strong crowd chanting “this is our home” from entering a neighbourhood with many residents of North African descent. Given the recent warning from France’s head of internal security of the risk of a confrontation between “the extreme right and the Muslim world”, such scenes are equally concerning.

Now more than ever, France needs unity. Yet more legislation against veiled women can only further divide an already divided nation.

The Conversation

Fraser McQueen, PhD Candidate, University of Stirling

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.