Times Article On Glasgow East

[Stainrod's Fedora]

It IS hilarious though, in a Rab C Nesbitt kinda way

As I rest my weary head, I also rest my case.

[seamus]

I'm not suggesting I 'feel the poverty' but even passing through Shettleston gives you a pretty good indication of what the area, and it's residents, are like. Do you recognise the people he describes in the piece?

You said I stay just up the road in Cumbernauld

There is a vast difference staying in Cumbernauld than Shettleston in money and community.

Cumbernauld is banjo country.

Pockets of poverty are not exclusive to the east end.

[wearealldoomed]

That's a fair point. I was born in Glasgow and live up the road in Cumbernauld, but the places Gill visits and the people he encounters are exactly the kind of places and people my eyes are drawn to while passing through the area. What we can say is that he doesn't paint an accurate picture of the whole of the east end - as you've noted, he doesn't take Mount Vernon of Tollcross into consideration - but he does describe those he has decided to focus on in perfect detail.

Fair enough, but I thill think predjudice and snobbery come across loud and clear in the article.

You'll encounter similar characters on Kilmarnock Road in Shawlands, yet if there were a Glasgow South by-election in the offing, I doubt that national newspaper correspondents would be packed off there to compose articles of this nature.

[Supras]

It's hardly abuse. The report does make dim reading, and may certainly be exaggerated, but it's hardly abusive.

Let's say the article was written by an english reporter and was about the whole of Scotland as opposed to shettleson. Same content, same overexaggerated insults, and I think it would be certainly classed as abuse.

If someone said the people in my area "do not look good" and compares them to cave dwellers then I would certainly be offended and would consider it abuse.

It is written by a man from edinburgh who clearly thinks he is better than the people he is writing the article about.

[Nizzy]

You said I stay just up the road in Cumbernauld

Yes, and what's your point? I also said passing through Shettleston gives you a pretty good indication of what the area and it's residents are like. Do you not agree? And I don't believe anyone is saying poverty is a problem exclusive to the east end. What some of us are saying is that he paints a pretty accurate picture of the people he's focused on, which I think is a fair point.

[Nizzy]

If someone said the people in my area "do not look good" and compares them to cave dwellers then I would certainly be offended and would consider it abuse.

Even if it was the truth? Saying people 'do not look good' is hardly abusive, is it? I'd suggest you're an inverted snob. You're hung up on the fact Gill's from Edinburgh, and is upper class at that, and are finding that hard to get past that. What would be your reaction if it had been written by a native of the area who shared his sentiments?

[Nizzy]

Supras, read the article again and pay particular attention to the part about the elderly gentlemen that inhabit Shettleston's pubs. If that isn't a damning indictment of the current Labour government, as opposed to a stinging attack on the people of Glasgow's east end, I don't know what is.

[Supras]

Even if it was the truth? Saying people 'do not look good' is hardly abusive, is it? I'd suggest you're an inverted snob. You're hung up on the fact Gill's from Edinburgh, and is upper class at that, and are finding that hard to get past that. What would be your reaction if it had been written by a native of the area who shared his sentiments?

I was unaware that Gill was upper class.

I don't think a native of the area would write such an article, and I certainly do not think a native would share the idea that the people from the area "do not look good"

However, had the article been written by someone from Glasgow East then I would view it the same way I view the article now.

Supras, read the article again and pay particular attention to the part about the elderly gentlemen that inhabit Shettleston's pubs. If that isn't a damning indictment of the current Labour government, as opposed to a stinging attack on the people of Glasgow's east end, I don't know what is.

I am totally aware of that, however saying the people "do not look good" has nothing to with politics and shouldn't be in the article.

[seamus]

Yes, and what's your point? I also said passing through Shettleston gives you a pretty good indication of what the area and it's residents are like. Do you not agree? And I don't believe anyone is saying poverty is a problem exclusive to the east end. What some of us are saying is that he paints a pretty accurate picture of the people he's focused on, which I think is a fair point.

Cumbernauld is in North Lanarkshire not Glasgow its also a totally different more affluent enviroment and about 4 miles away.

Everyone that can walk and who you can see at a certain time of the day does not give a picture of the residents in Shettleston what about the High Flats, Disabled, Older People,Asylum seekers ,Refugees,Workers or others that were not fortunate enough to be seen by you?

[Michael W]

Let's say the article was written by an english reporter and was about the whole of Scotland as opposed to shettleson. Same content, same overexaggerated insults, and I think it would be certainly classed as abuse.

If someone said the people in my area "do not look good" and compares them to cave dwellers then I would certainly be offended and would consider it abuse.

It is written by a man from edinburgh who clearly thinks he is better than the people he is writing the article about.

No it wouldn't. It would be classed as exaggerated and also perhaps as stereotypical. The writer clearly doesn't think he's better than the people he's writing about, unless I missed the "look at me, I've got a good job, you giro people can f**k off" paragraph.

FWIW - I think Nizzy makes a great point, Now climb down off that high horse.

[Supras]

No it wouldn't. It would be classed as exaggerated and also perhaps as stereotypical. The writer clearly doesn't think he's better than the people he's writing about, unless I missed the "look at me, I've got a good job, you giro people can f**k off" paragraph.

FWIW - I think Nizzy makes a great point, Now climb down off that high horse.

I keep highlighting this section as it backs up my point

The constituency is large and incoherent. It looks like the national museum of pebble dashing – everything that could have the bottom of a fish tank stuck to it has.

The people do not look good here. Often it is difficult to tell men from women, old men from older men. The mean parades of shops are dotted with tanning parlours. Yet the locals have the blotchy pallor of cave-dwelling consumptives; only their first two fingers are stained brown.

In the pubs there are shellsuited angry men with faces like melted funeral candles.

This is not painting a vivid description of the area, it is abuse of the people living there. I find it hard to believe that you do not see the condescending nature of this article .

[Nizzy]

I certainly do not think a native would share the idea that the people from the area "do not look good"

I am totally aware of that, however saying the people "do not look good" has nothing to with politics and shouldn't be in the article.

So the residents of Shettleston all walk about thinking they and their neighbours look fantastic? Look at the article as a whole Supras. The fact they 'don't look good' is political. Gill is saying that these people are among Labour's staunchest supporters and yet the party has turned its back on them, allowing the area, and it's people, to fall into disrepair. He does note that the people he encounters haven't helped themselves, which goes back to what I said about people having the choice not to become products of their environment, but he's laying the blame at the feet of those in power.

Cumbernauld is in North Lanarkshire not Glasgow its also a totally different more affluent enviroment and about 4 miles away.

Everyone that can walk and who you can see at a certain time of the day does not give a picture of the residents in Shettleston what about the High Flats, Disabled, Older People,Asylum seekers ,Refugees,Workers or others that were not fortunate enough to be seen by you?

I didn't say the people I've seen are the only inhabitants of Shettleston, but they do give a pretty good indication of those who live there, wouldn't you say. As I've already pointed out, Gill only scratches the surface of the populace, but does accurately describe those he meets.

Again, like Supras, you seem to be hung up on where others come from. The fact I live in Cumbernauld matters not a jot. I grew up in a single-parent family in one of the town's least-salubrious areas and am a direct descendent of Maryhill's shipyard workers. Hardly the affluent background or lifestyle you seem to be suggesting.

The thing is, I'm qualified to talk about and describe what I've witnessed, as is Gill. And, as I'll say for about the fortieth time in this thread, he does a pretty good job of it.

[Michael W]

I keep highlighting this section as it backs up my point

This is not painting a vivid description of the area, it is abuse of the people living there. I find it hard to believe that you do not see the condescending nature of this article .

Yes, which is why it is exaggerated. The article is not however, abusive. Condescending and abusive have to different meanings.

That article is not abusive. If you really want to see what abuse looks like in text, carry on telling me this article is abusive and I will show you what abuse looks like.

[Nizzy]

This is not painting a vivid description of the area.

It does, you know.

[Bloobell]

It is written by a man from edinburgh who clearly thinks he is better than the people he is writing the article about.

He is

[seamus]

I didn't say the people I've seen are the only inhabitants of Shettleston, but they do give a pretty good indication of those who live there, wouldn't you say. As I've already pointed out, Gill only scratches the surface of the populace, but does accurately describe those he meets.

Again, like Supras, you seem to be hung up on where others come from. The fact I live in Cumbernauld matters not a jot. I grew up in a single-parent family in one of the town's least-salubrious areas and am a direct descendent of Maryhill's shipyard workers. Hardly the affluent background or lifestyle you seem to be suggesting.

The thing is, I'm qualified to talk about and describe what I've witnessed, as is Gill. And, as I'll say for about the fortieth time in this thread, he does a pretty good job of it.

If you think you can assess a full community through driving through and looking I salute your arrogance I can see how you identified with the article

[Nizzy]

If you think you can assess a full community through driving through and looking I salute your arrogance I can see how you identified with the article

You're failing to grasp what I'm saying. No where have I said everyone who resides in Shettleston could be put into the same bracket, but I am saying those you see while passing through area give you a pretty good indication of who lives there. In what way is that arrogant, or in fact, untrue? I'm also saying that Gill has successfully and vividly described the people he met there. Do you disagree?

[Supras]

So the residents of Shettleston all walk about thinking they and their neighbours look fantastic? Look at the article as a whole Supras. The fact they 'don't look good' is political. Gill is saying that these people are among Labour's staunchest supporters and yet the party has turned its back on them, allowing the area, and it's people, to fall into disrepair. He does note that the people he encounters haven't helped themselves, which goes back to what I said about people having the choice not to become products of their environment, but he's laying the blame at the feet of those in power.

I didn't say the people I've seen are the only inhabitants of Shettleston, but they do give a pretty good indication of those who live there, wouldn't you say. As I've already pointed out, Gill only scratches the surface of the populace, but does accurately describe those he meets.

Again, like Supras, you seem to be hung up on where others come from. The fact I live in Cumbernauld matters not a jot. I grew up in a single-parent family in one of the town's least-salubrious areas and am a direct descendent of Maryhill's shipyard workers. Hardly the affluent background or lifestyle you seem to be suggesting.

The thing is, I'm qualified to talk about and describe what I've witnessed, as is Gill. And, as I'll say for about the fortieth time in this thread, he does a pretty good job of it.

I'm don't think Glasgow East has got worse since 1997.

It is clear from a lot of the article that the author is showing how labour have failed this constituency, it is also clear he is a Conservative supporter, however saying the people "do not look good" and comparing them to cave dwellers has nothing to do with politics, they are spiteful pointless comments obviously coming from the rather bizarre rivalry between Endinburgh and Glasgow.

I take it you'd like the article all the same if it was about Cumbernauld, which is probably as bad as Shettleston.

Yes, which is why it is exaggerated. The article is not however, abusive. Condescending and abusive have to different meanings.

That article is not abusive. If you really want to see what abuse looks like in text, carry on telling me this article is abusive and I will show you what abuse looks like.

Ah yes internet abuse, go on then, make me laugh.

It does, you know.

Not it doesn't.

[Michael W]

Ah yes internet abuse, go on then, make me laugh.

You don't seem to understand exactly what abuse is. Perhaps it would be a usefull learning curve.

[Supras]

You don't seem to understand exactly what abuse is. Perhaps it would be a usefull learning curve.

I'm sure it would