Brick Lane and the Pursuit of Female Autonomy for Bangladeshi Women in London

“No one ‘becomes’ a woman purely because she is a woman… it is the intersections of carious systematic networks of class, race, [hetero]sexuality and nation… that positions us as “Women,” (Mohanty et al. 12-13, qtd. in Chakraborty 32). In “Bengali Women’s Writings in the Colonial Period: Critique of Nation, Narration, and Patriarchy,” Sanchayita Paul Chakraborty and Dhritiman Chakraborty show how this gendered, self-formed conception about the intersections of the systemic networks of patriarchy, race, religion, and identity is visible in the ‘caged’ and submissive condition of Bengali women. While Chakraborty asserts that “there are no basic differences between man and woman in consideration of their nature, rationality, and intelligence,” the ‘caged’ injustice of Bengali women is the direct result of the carious and corrupt patriarchal culture that’s written off as tradition (Chakraborty 31). The patriarchal culture of ‘tradition’ in Bangladesh diminishes and oppresses female visibility by actively rejecting the trappings for women to achieve economic freedom and individual autonomy by threatening fear, abuse, and even death.

Monica Ali’s Brick Lane details the diasporic experience through the narratives of two Bangladeshi sisters, Hasina, a displaced migrant in Dhaka, and Nazneen, an immigrant in London. Ali complicates a simple dichotomy between civilized London and primitive Bangladesh through Hasina and her written correspondences that compare the oppression and abuse against women in both geographical spheres to disclose the corruption endured by Bengali women due to their patriarchal tradition. While Hasina’s letters reveal the inability of Bangladeshi women to obtain cultural recognition, they also show the banishment of female autonomy in Bangladeshi culture that normalizes harsh punishment. However, the narratorial force of Nazneen’s immigrant experience works to unveil the possibility for growth and opportunity that culturally exists for women in London. While the patriarchal system in Bangladesh benefits only men, Brick Lane displaces immigrated men from a culture that supports the oppression of women and relocates them into an environment that does not. The doubling Ali manipulates in the dual-narrative provided by Nazneen and conveyed through Hasina’s letters discloses that while these immigrants originate in a highly patriarchal culture, there is a gap between the fates of men and women immigrants in London. Ali reveals that those who assume success ultimately fail in an environment where the patriarchal tradition is not the norm, while women conversely flourish and develop autonomy and self-determination. The free indirect discourse of Nazneen’s narrative constructs a parallel that differentiates between the woman’s experience in Bangladesh and London to argue that a tradition wholly reliant upon patriarchal extremes and female oppression will inevitably fail without the holistic support of a cultural backing. Brick Lane confronts the Bangladeshi tradition of gendered politics through Ali’s diasporic distinction that relies on the novel’s characterization of women to demonstrate that women can achieve recognition and autonomy without fear of reprisal.

The sister doubling Ali applies through the trope of letter writing provides a parallel and a glimpse into what traditional Bengali life may have held for Nazneen. A close analysis of extracts from Hasina’s letters alludes to the reality of life for women in Bangladesh, which confirms that while patriarchal structure benefits men, women often face punitive, if not deadly, consequences. Hasina recounts the beating and continuous threats that her coworker Aleya suffered from her husband in reaction to his wife’s acknowledgment at work, retelling to Nazneen:

Last month gone she best worker in factory and get bonus. They give sari and for this sari she take beating. Foot come all big like marrow and little finger broken… Renu say at least you have husband to give good beating at least you not alone (Ali 124).

In a culture that maintains patriarchal oppression and power, men thrive because the culture of the community supports it; and women fail because there is no viable alternative. When Hasina chooses to inform Nazneen about Renu’s reasoning that “at least [Aleya] has a husband to give a good beating,” the disturbing mentality of this tradition corroborates and accurately conveys the corruption of a culture that overlooks domestic violence. Aleya’s recognition at work brought about her publicized attention that led to her suffering. However, Ali consequences the resistance and rebellion of the patriarchal tradition with greater severity. Hasina visits her friend Monju at the hospital, who, after refusing her husband’s decision to sell their seven-day-old son, burns them both with acid while accompanied by his siblings. Hasina relays the story to Nazneen in a visceral sensory description of the “thing that lie on mattress”—her inability to stomach the odor, Monju’s melted cheek and mouth, and the ear that “have gone like dog chew off,” (Ali 275). The husband’s sister’s participation in the mutilation of another woman and child suggests that this ruthless behavior is standardized in a targeted pattern of widespread gender-based violence against Bangladeshi women and girls.

However, when presented with the opportunity to develop autonomy outside of patriarchy, Nazneen comes to realize and be inspired by women’s prosperity in London. The possibility for female recognition, even within Brick Lane’s Bengali community, without punishment is not only possible but acceptable. Nazneen’s first moments outside of her Tower Hamlets flat without the supervision of her husband Chanu excite and embolden her curiosity and self-awareness as she confronts women and people outside of her immediate community. Walking alone, Nazneen felt a “leafshake of fear—or was it excitement?—passed through her legs. But they were not aware of her. They knew that she existed… but unless she did something, waved a gun, halted the traffic, they would not see her. She enjoyed this thought” (Ali 40). The equalizing freedom of anonymity Nazneen experienced with the excitement that “passed through her legs” emboldened a moment of self-confidence at the realization that her slight against Chanu in leaving her house had gone unpunished.

Similar to Hasina’s interest in the lives of her female friends, Nazneen remarks on the women in her surrounding life. In particular, Nazneen perceives Razia’s resilience and achievements—her decision to learn English and obtain British citizenship, that arouses hope and instills confidence as she witnesses Razia prevail in the face of adversity. As a businesswoman, the sole provider for her family, and as a Bengali woman who prospers outside of the patriarchal tradition, Razia represents optimism for Nazneen. However, the most explicit patriarchal rebellion is the resistance demonstrated by the nameless girls in burkas at the Islamist fundamentalist meeting of the Bengal Tigers. The downfall of the patriarchal tradition is that it is only successful if the culture it populates holistically supports its practices. The two girls wearing burkas refused to allow men to silence them while rising to correct the Questioner’s failure to recognize women, insisting that the audience be addressed as “brothers and sisters” and not simply “brothers” (Ali 235). The success in this small act of rebellion is the direct result of the patriarchy’s failure to recognize the female population—that which the greater community of London does. The multicultural metropolis London constitutes likewise showcases competing forces in representing other people and cultures unbounded by systemic barriers. This ethnic diversity encourages resistance by awakening a sophisticated understanding of freedom and agency, whereas in Bangladesh, speaking out against the patriarchal structure is discouraged and inconceivable.

While women thrive given these new opportunities and freedoms, Brick Lane’s male diasporic experience differs because the men cannot fathom surviving without a patriarchal structure. While London embodies the opportunities for women that Bangladesh does not, allowing for both genders to succeed without the formula for patriarchal dominance, the Bengali men in Nazneen’s life cannot move beyond the limitations of their own culture and community in this new locale. Chanu failed to succeed in England because of his sense of entitlement that prevented him from being satisfied with his occupation, so he inevitably returned to Bangladesh. Hasina astoundedly remarks on Chanu’s transitional search for work in a letter to Nazneen, noting, “Your husband is very good in finding jobs,” (Ali 135). Ali’s inflection of humor in this dramatically ironic comment relies on the cultural barriers between Bangladesh and London. The reader understands that while Chanu occupies many menial jobs, they never uphold the degree of sophistication that he thinks he deserves. Karim likewise failed to reach the impact and influence over the Islamic community that he aspired to, so he also retreated to Bangladesh to join an Islamic extremist group. Ali symbolically declares the end to the patriarchy’s indomitability with the death of Razia’s husband. Ali’s deadpan declaration about Razia’s husband’s death by “seventeen frozen cows” in his slaughterhouse job utilizes Ali’s dark humor to argue man’s failure to survive outside of hierarchy (Ali 295). As the sole beneficiaries of this ‘tradition,’ men cannot comprehend that opportunities exist for both men and women outside of the community. The ability to think tolerantly was never ingrained in them.

Nazneen’s newfound self-awareness at the novel’s end overcomes the plight of women in Ali’s narratorial quest for female autonomy. In her rejection of Chanu and Karim, Nazneen renounces the patriarchal life of autocracy they represent for her and her two daughters. While refusing Karim’s marriage proposal, Nazneen conceptualizes the life he’d imagined for them. He said, “she was his real thing. A Bengali wife. A Bengali mother. An idea of home,” she was “an idea of himself that he found in her,” (Ali 382). Nazneen admits to Karim, “what we did—we made each other up,” confirming that after finding her voice and self-determination, Nazneen can distinguish between the role of the ideal Bengali wife and mother left behind in Bangladesh from the independent and competent woman that London constructed (Ali 382). In a crucial moment of feminine resilience and autonomy, Nazneen rejects her former passivity along with her decision to remain in London with her daughters without Chanu. Nazneen asserts, “No, I can’t go with you,” to which Chanu admits that “[he] can’t stay,” exposing their arrival at crossroads in their marriage (Ali 402). Nazneen cannot return with her daughters to the oppression her sister writes about, while Chanu cannot remain in a society that does not cater to his esteemed expectations.

Chakraborty’s claim about female agency and women having their own “identity and purpose in life irrespective of her position in relation to the man and the family” is embodied in the novel’s ultimate partnership. After Karim and Chanu withdrew to Bangladesh, Razia and Nazneen face taking their lives into their own hands, prompting a sense of belonging and even acquiring agency as they find work as independent seamstresses. In a moment of ecstatic liberation, Nazneen “waved her arms, threw back her heard, and danced around the table” to what we can presume is Janis Joplin’s “half singing, half screeching” cover of The Isley Brothers’ “Shout” (Ali 412). She continued to sing along, “filling her lungs from the bottom, and letting it all go loose,” while “abandoning her feet to the rhythm, threading her hips through the air,” Nazneen even “swooped down and tucked her sari up into the band of her underskirt,” to expose her bare legs (Ali 412). Brick Lane contrasts the abuse of women that Hasina describes in Bangladesh with the embodiment of liberated joy and celebration of female communion Nazneen experiences in London to challenge and expose the exploitation of women in a cultural tradition that denies them recognition, let alone sovereignty. Nazneen’s physical and mental release in this dancing passage reveals that women want to let loose and act for themselves given the opportunity.

Brick Lane demarcates the diasporic experience of both men and women that becomes apparent through the cross-cultural barriers uncovered by Hasina’s correspondence with Nazneen. Without Hasina’s letters, Ali’s novel loses its sense of achievement, performing as a novel about one woman’s diasporic experience rather than a complex comparison and political commentary about gender roles within the patriarchal Bangladeshi tradition. Razia’s final confession to Nazneen announces, “This is England, You can do whatever you like,” signifying an uplifting end to a novel that includes socially constructed gendered oppression (Ali 415). Given that the men arrive with the cushioning of having been raised and benefitted from a patriarchal system, London should theoretically bolster the perceived success for men and women. However, aided by Hasina’s incidents in Bangladesh, Ali inflects free indirect discourse into Nazneen’s narrative to reveal that the novel’s demonstrated patriarchal dependence and upbringing disadvantages the male diasporic experience, assuming a sense of entitlement that inhibits the development of male autonomy and independence.

Works Cited

Ali, Monica. Brick Lane. Black Swan, 2014.

Chakraborty, Sanchayita Paul, and Dhritiman Chakraborty. “Bengali Women’s Writings in the Colonial Period: Critique of Nation, Narration, and Patriarchy.” Zeitschrift Für Anglistik Und Amerikanistik, vol. 66, no. 1, 2018, pp. 19–34., doi:10.1515/zaa-2018-0004.

Mohanty, Chandra Talpade, Ann Russo, and Lourdes Torres. Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991.

This work represents my own in accordance with University regulations. /s/ Nicole Kresich.

 

 

Monica Ali Biography

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/monica-ali-i-wear-the-same-smelly-pyjamas-again-and-again-it-s-revolting-2243857.html

Monica Ali was born on October 20, 1967, in Dhaka, East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), to a Bangladeshi father and English mother. Her father worked as a teacher, and her mother was a counselor. However, due to their controversial interracial marriage, the Ali family emigrated to England in 1971 following a Civil War outbreak in Pakistan. Settling in Bolton, near Manchester, Ali went on to study at Oxford, where she completed a degree in an interdisciplinary program combining philosophy, politics, and economics. After university, Ali worked in the marketing department of a publishing house before going on to subsequent jobs in sales and marketing. She married consultant Simon Torrance, and in 1999, gave birth to her first child, a son named Felix. During this time off, Ali began experimenting with writing fiction. In 2001, Ali’s daughter, Shumi, was born; however, shortly afterward, Ali’s father died. This loss prompted her to reflect on family values and history, which subsequently encouraged the manuscript for her first novel, Brick Lane, published in May 2003. Following the success of Brick Lane, Ali continued to write professionally, publishing Alentejo Blue (2006), In the Kitchen (2009), and Untold Story (2011). Ali currently resides in London with her family. 

Surviving Isolation: A Commentary on Clarissa’s Parties in Mrs. Dalloway

“Since she was lying on the sofa, cloistered, exempt, the presence of this thing which she felt to be so obvious became physically existent; with robes of sound from the street, sunny, with hot breath, whispering, blowing out the blinds. But suppose Peter said to her, “Yes, yes, but your parties – what’s the sense of your parties?” all she could say was (and nobody could be expected to understand): They’re an offering; which sounded horribly vague… But to go deeper, beneath what people said (and these judgments, how superficial, how fragmentary they are!) in her own mind now, what did it mean to her, this thing she called life? Oh, it was very clear. Here was So-and-so in South Kensington; some one up in Bayswater; and somebody else, say, in Mayfair. And she felt quite continuously a sense of their existence; and she felt what a waste; and she felt what a pity; and she felt if only they could be brought together; so she did it. And it was an offering; to combine, to create; but to whom? An offering for the sake of an offering, perhaps. Anyhow, it was her gift. Nothing else had she of the slightest importance; cannot think, write, even play the piano.” (Woolf, 121-122)

The presence of the omniscient narrator in Virginia Woolf’s, Mrs. Dalloway unveils Clarissa Dalloway’s struggle to balance her innermost thoughts with the external yet intimate world of the socially elite. Coupled with the overwhelmingly sensorial imagery, Clarissa’s tendency towards introspection in the opening lines suggests a deeper purpose in organizing her party. Lying on the sofa, the isolating diction the narrator ascribes to Clarissa’s “cloistered” and “exempt” state illustrates her in private seclusion, sheltered from the outside world and the social happenings of upper-crust society (Woolf, 121). However, the “presence of this thing,” the gravity of her impending party, “became physically existent,” (Woolf, 121). In possessing knowledge about interior thoughts and emotions, Woolf’s omniscient narrator relays the tangible impact that Clarissa’s departure from isolation provoked in her sudden feeling of excitement and vivacity surrounding her nearing party. Woolf’s employment of the semicolon in this opening sentence connotes a sudden shift in tone from an overwhelming sense of solitude to a visceral stream of sensory experience. The personification of the outside world that Clarissa suddenly becomes aware of– the heat of the sun, the noise from the street, and the “blowing of the blinds”– corroborates an immediate introduction of life into the bleak space surrounding Clarissa’s position on the sofa (Woolf, 121). 

Clarissa’s preoccupation with what she presupposes as Peter’s demanding inquisition into the purpose of her parties in the dialogue of her innermost thoughts (“what’s the sense of your parties”) reiterates the internal struggle Clarissa faces with defining meaning and purpose in hosting these extravagant social events (Woolf, 121). The structural significance of the parentheses Woolf effects in Clarissa’s response to this question, “(and nobody could be expected to understand),” reveals an aside into Clarissa’s innermost thoughts, where the significance of “nobody” connotes Clarissa’s self-ostracism from exterior society (Woolf, 121). Clarissa’s tendency towards introspection in this parenthetical break recognizes that her hesitation in returning to the public eye stems from a deeper, more personal reasoning that she alone can understand. 

In positing her parties as “offerings,” the diction Clarissa manipulates suggests that her social events operate as gifts in contribution to society. The effect of proposing the party as one would describe a gift or a blessing beholds a deeper purpose in her intention. However, before we arrive at this intention, Woolf structurally interrupts with another parenthetical, “(and these judgments, how superficial, how fragmentary they are!)”, marking a return to Clarissa’s internal debate between the frivolity of her parties despite her previously excited tone (Woolf, 122). Yet, in succeeding this parenthetical with a question preoccupying her purpose in life, Clarissa refocuses on what brings her existence joy. This newfound responsibility to celebrate life conflicts with the moment of bleak isolation in the passage’s opening where the deeper purpose of Clarissa’s party is unveiled to share this joy through the community engagement that her parties offer. 

Clarissa responds to her own question with clarity: living in isolation is a “waste” and should be “pitied,” therefore her purpose in life is to bring people together (Woolf, 121). Stemming from her own experience in isolation, Clarissa questions the purpose in existing without the intimate connections formed that celebrate humanity as it should operate: together. Therefore, her “offering for the sake of an offering” occupied the highest importance, not solely for Clarissa herself, but as her social motivation and responsibility to instill the joy of human interaction and engagement with her guests (Woolf, 122). In describing her parties as “offerings” and “gifts,” Clarissa relies upon her social gatherings to provide meaning to a world that would otherwise be considered wasted. Despite the superficiality she criticizes about social events, Clarissa posits her party as a gift to both herself and those amongst her social sphere to extract the essential function in hosting: Clarissa throws parties in an attempt to draw people together and offer the community engagement essential to achieving a sense of fulfillment and belonging. 

Clarissa’s desire to achieve purpose in her rediscovery of the social world reflects the notion of rebirth experienced during this post-World War I and post-pandemic locale. Recovering from the isolating effects of quarantine herself, Clarissa’s nervousness about her reintegration into society stems from her recently having been ill with the Spanish Influenza. Woolf explores the isolating effects of the war and the pandemic on human behavior and the idea of permanence in Mrs. Dalloway. However, it is in this passage that we see Clarissa struggling with post-pandemic social anxiety, as well as a nostalgia for a world before this sense of discontinuity. Clarissa raises the question amidst her inner struggle with returning to society, “(and nobody could be expected to understand),” because none of her peers had undergone similar seclusion, uncertainty, and fear that plagued Clarissa while she was ill. As someone who had evaded death herself, Clarissa’s motivation and hesitation to refocus on life becomes clear; she suffers from the social anxiety of her isolating experience, yet has returned to the forefront intending to share her appreciation for social interaction (Woolf, 121). The tension implicated in Clarissa’s internal struggle to exist in a world following the uncertainties about the aftermath of war and influenza affirms Clarissa’s socially charming yet private and protected demeanor. The language Woolf invokes to describe Clarrisa’s party as an “offering” connotes something open to the public, yet intimately privatized with a guest list. Contextualized in a way that revives the socio-political history of the early 20th-century, this tension embodies the lived experiences and attitudes of this impacted, post-war society yet inspires a new appreciation and perspective towards human belonging.

Mapping Modern London: The Social Aesthetics of Westminster

The Modern London (1804) Guidebook to Landmarks embodies the civic duties and social atmosphere popular in the City of Westminster wherein the social motivations and priorities surround the promotion of London’s burgeoning culture and the traditions of the professional and those adjacent to the Crown. 

The Society of Arts encapsulates the public spirit of the age through its encouragement of the rapid progress and the prospering condition that contribute to London as a burgeoning Metropolis. Founded by William Shipley and other private gentlemen in 1754, this institution commends and awards Premiums and prizes to individuals who have achieved success in areas encouraging the arts, manufactures, and commerce. Oblong and elegantly proportioned, the meeting room is arranged in an oval form, where portraits of noble lords and The President, his Grace the Duke of Norfolk, are hung with esteem. The Society’s prominence is acknowledged in the seating of the committee, wherein the distinguished attendees include the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary, the Vice-Presidents and Chairmen of Committees, ladies of rank, and duchesses, foreign ministers, and other dignitaries of distinction. 

A sketch of the Society of Arts, located in the Modern London (1904) Guidebook to Landmarks, situated between Covent Garden and Westminster, in a moment of awarding its annual prizes for the encouragement of arts, manufactures, and commerce.

In continuing with the Society’s reputation for the encouragement of excellence in the arts and commerce, the walls are decorated with a series of paintings, among the finest productions of the age, to represent man’s progress in civilization. Remarked by the refinement of its taste, these paintings include the Society’s President as part of the Olympic Games, a picture of prominent men in robes distributing the rewards of the Society, and the Triumph of Navigation, where Father Thames, designed with charming extravagance, sits in a car being drawn by river nymphs. The exquisite atmosphere projected by the Society of the Arts infers that the priorities of this guidebook correlate with the notion of leisure, in that, this landmark, considered one of the finest spectacles in Europe, is tailored to describe those who have the luxury and time to promote artistic expression and culture.

A sketch of the three principal offices connected with the government of the country: The Treasury (right), The War-office (center), and The Admiralty (left) from the Modern London (1904) Guidebook to Landmarks. The Parade of the Foot Guards present themselves in the foreground.

The guidebook details the Horse Guards or War-Office, wherein the landmark indicative of these public buildings is one of the finest about the Metropolis. In one view, this landmark beholds three principal offices connected with the government: The Treasury, The War-office, and The Admiralty. The War-Office, located in the center of the three, comprises the station where part of his Majesty’s troops usually perform duty. The Treasury, located to the right of the War-Office and enclosed with a wall, contains the gardens of the house, while the building to its left is The Admiralty, home to the apartments and offices of lords. The significance of government buildings prioritizes a professional, educated attitude surrounding the inhabitants of Westminster.

The Parade of the Foot Guards, another landmark, celebrates tradition and honors achievements, as inferred from the decor of the Turkish piece of ordinance. Brought by British troops from Alexandria, the ordinance is mounted on a carriage of English workmanship and ornamented with very elaborate devices to display London’s successes and global reach.

 

Populating the Social Elite: The Proliferation of Gardens and Entertainment in the Liberty of Westminster

Neighboring the Queen’s Palace, the demographic of Westminster’s population comes across as less dense than the surrounding area of London as delineated by the red line on Horwood’s Plan (1792-1799). Comparable to the city and its additional boroughs, Westminster gives the impression it is heavily populated. However, the city’s residence next to Saint James’s Park, Green Park, and the Queen’s Gardens, as well as the city’s location, a mere one street from the River Thames, give the illusion of more open space. While London, as a whole, persists upon its placement about the Thames, the institutions of which make up the City of Westminster strongly point to its higher-class residency, who, of which, make up the court, the nobility, and other people of distinction, with a certain composition of tradesmen and artists. Dividing the City of Westminster into subcategories based on points of interest: establishments of leisure and entertainment, institutions of reverence, and buildings that pertain to the adjacent parts of the royal services, we can begin to comprehend the livelihood and professional nature of this upper-crust population. 

A screenshot of Fores’s Guide (C. 1789) indicating the close proximity of The Little Theatre (above) and the Italian Opera (below) on Haymarket Street.

The presence of two theatres on Haymarket Street indicates that those who live in this area can afford leisure activities or comprise the actors that perform at these companies. The seasonal nature of this amusing pastime, The Little Theatre’s summertime availability, and the Italian Opera’s wintertime entertainment emphasizes that this leisure activity is offered only to those who can afford to enjoy the social and cultural amenities of year-round entertainment.

In addition to Saint Martin’s Church, a notable institution of reverence and considered one of the finest churches in London, The Banqueting House of Whitehall demands the same category of distinction. Host to daily divine service, The Banqueting House of Whitehall beholds a statue of James II upon a pedestal, esteemed to be one of the finest of its kind in England, and serves as an area of notoriety, praise, and respect.

The Admiralty is a large office and apartment building occupied by the lords that possess a large hall and seven spacious houses appointed only to the lords and commissioners of The Admiralty. The elegant wall designated in front of the court gives The Admiralty its air of exclusivity and prominence.

With Westminster’s proximity to the Queen’s Palace, The Horse Guards and The Kings Mews are buildings that concern adjoining parts to royal services. The King Mews, or the falconry of the King, was converted into a stable for horses and coach of state by Henry VIII. Constantly on duty as sentinels, the armed troops that constitute The Horse Guards stand watch on horseback. However, this building serves a dual purpose, functioning as a control point to a vaulted passage that leads into Saint James’s Park.

The prominence that these points of interest indicate that the inhabitants of Westminster are educated and affluent, and those employed by these institutions are likely in the service of the Queen.

 

Leisure and the Social Elite: Color and the Environment in the City of Westminster

The environment surrounding the City of Westminster and its adjacent parts favors the occupation of the social elite as well as the polite and commercial artists. Where the main feature of the natural environment in the City of London gravitates around the River Thames, running centrally through the city, the built environment surrounding the Liberty of Westminster differs from the domains encircling the Tower of London and the Docklands that run along the water. As topographically delineated by the red line separating London proper from the surrounding areas in Horwood’s Plan (1792-1799), the City of London is predominantly impacted by buildings and industry, with a notable lack of surrounding natural environment that exists apart from the River Thames. This contrast is especially distinct when juxtaposed with the surrounding environment outside of this topographical border; wherein the geographics of Westminster possess more freedom for leisure with its numerous fields and gardens than the rest of London’s inherently compact, urban cityscape. Rather than the occupation of industrial warehouses and wharves, as is the case closer to the city surrounding the Tower, the buildings located alongside the River Thames in Westminster cater towards a more dignified and upper crust crowd that persists in this location so close to the Queen’s Palace and Parliament Street. This stretch along the River Thames consists of the Privy Gardens, Westminster Hall, and Northumberland Gardens, with a few wharves recognized by the names Scotland Yard and White Hall Timber Yard.

The area surrounding the intersection of Charing Cross and Cockspur Street is relatively similar in both Horwood’s Plan (1792-1799) and Faden’s 1819 revised mapping of London. The built environment remains the same, favoring the habits of the upper class and persons of notable distinction, such as the royal family and members of Parliament, wherein occupancies of leisure, such as opera houses, gardens, and squares, persist more frequently compared to the more industrialized and mercantile subsection of London that makes up the habitations of tradesmen and the merchant class. While Haymarket Street and its opera houses prevail into Faden’s 1819 revision, Regent Street, running perpendicular to Charles Street outside of Saint James’s Square, is a new addition that had required the tearing down of residences that line Haymarket Street in Horwood’s Plan. The incorporation of color, however, in Faden’s 1819 revision, gives light to the overwhelming presence of gardens. While the existence of gardens persists more frequently in the Liberty of Westminster, as indicated by Horwood’s Plan of London (1792-1799), the color reveals how expansive and frequent these gardens appear to exist. The existence of such gardens alongside the River Thames, in particular, delineated in this stretch that borders Westminster and Covent Garden noted in the 1819 revision, is much more frequent than the showing of gardens located near the Thames in the Docklands. Faden’s attention to color characterizes the Liberty of Westminster by its inhabitants’ accessibility to leisure activities, systematizing London’s burgeoning Metropolis through this geographical assumption by class to suggest that the occupants in this subsection of London concern the social elite.

 

Borough Market, Southwark, London – Favorite City

Borough Market in London / https://www.londonperfect.com/blog/2019/03/visiting-borough-market/

Borough Market in Southwark, London was a favorite destination of mine when visiting London! This supersized farmer’s market — full of delicious, gourmet street food — was a sensational cultural experience. Dating back to as early as the 12th century, it was such an astounding and unique experience that celebrated history, culture, and food. There was no better way to immerse myself in the eclectic character that London beholds than through its stomach!