Dear Editor,
I hope you're doing well - I thought I would reach out to you, hoping that you might be able to support our campaign. I am looking to spread the word about ‘Decolonising Wembley.’
This project aims to address the imperial nostalgia among urban professionals involved in the construction of Wembley. Specifically, it involves retroactively renaming the streets and buildings that commemorate the 1924 British Empire Exhibition. We're approaching the 100-year anniversary of the British Empire Exhibition at Wembley where the famous Kings Speech took place - by addressing modern commemorations at Wembley, we hope to raise awareness about the legacy of British imperialism and encourage people to reconsider their relationship with it.
There will be a few high-profile public talks that we'll be delivering on this.
The figure below highlights the 22 known commemorations of the British Empire Exhibition.
‘Decolonising Wembley’ is a project aimed at challenging the celebration of British imperialism and the legacy of the 1924 British Empire Exhibition. The project aims to investigate the realities of British imperialism, the raison d’etre of the 1924 British Empire Exhibition, and the nomenclature of assets such as roads, buildings, open spaces, etc. at Wembley, London that commemorate and celebrate this contested event in history.
The project dissects the act of naming a street or building after an event, person, or building as an act of celebration that honours and memorializes the Exhibition’s legacy. Thereby preserving and romanticizing a contested narrative in Wembley’s history for generations to come.
Decolonising Wembley is a collaborative project that brings together academics, historians, activists, and community members – that seek to challenge the imperial nostalgia among urban professionals involved in the construction of Wembley and to promote a more critical understanding of the past. One of the key aspects of the project is the retroactive renaming of streets, open spaces and buildings that commemorate the 1924 British Empire Exhibition. This renaming process is an important step towards acknowledging the complexities of history and the impact of colonialism on the world.
The project also investigates the raison d’etre of the 1924 British Empire Exhibition and its role in promoting British imperialism. This research aims to deepen our understanding of the event and its impact, and to provide a more nuanced perspective on the legacy of British imperialism.
The launch of the Decolonising Wembley project is an important initiative that seeks to challenge the celebration of empire and to promote a more critical understanding of the past.
This is a serious cause of concern, especially as Brent is one of Britain’s most diverse boroughs – British imperialism has caused much strife and pain for our communities, Lord Woolley CBE said it best:
“For many, including me, there is nothing, absolutely nothing, to revere about the empire. It means slavery, murder, theft, barbaric cruelty and colonialism. We cannot and must not attempt to erase our history, but we can choose which parts we put on a pedestal.”
For more information about the Decolonising Wembley project, please visit our website at www.decolonisingwembley.com and visit the socials @decolonising.wembley
Kind Regards,
Nabil Al-Kinani
Urbanist // Cultural Producer // Creative Practitioner
is there evidence this is something anyone actually thinks/cares about?
ReplyDeleteRe: evidence
ReplyDeleteApart from the citation in the article above, and a history of a counter-critique going back to the exhibition, and further back than that; in the last few years, there is plenty of evidence that these issues are thing people thinks/cares about.
The privilege they must have to think about that. Do you think if they moved to a country in Africa or Adia they would also spend time thinking about street names that reflect the history of the area and people who live there?
DeleteI am a Wembley local historian, already involved in planning ahead, with Brent Museum and Archives, for commemorating (not celebrating) the centenary of the British Empire Exhibition in 2024.
ReplyDeleteWe are already aware of the sensitivity over "Empire", and I welcome the project's intention to conduct 'research [which] aims to deepen our understanding of the event and its impact, and to provide a more nuanced perspective on the legacy of British imperialism.'
However, to make a key part of the project, before conducting that research, 'retroactively renaming the streets and buildings that commemorate the 1924 British Empire Exhibition', and listing 22 names that it plans to remove is, I believe, going about things in the wrong way.
There may be names which can or should be changed. Empire Way is one example - but that was renamed, from the original Raglan Gardens, when the Empire Pool and Sports Arena was opened in 1934.
The pool was given that name because it was used for the 1934 British Empire Games (now the Commonwealth Games, aka "the Friendly Games"), a sporting event that brought people from all backgrounds and nations together.
The letter mentions 'the King's Speech', but the opening sequence from that film shows the stuttering speech of the then Duke of York at the closing ceremony for the second year of the exhibition in 1925.
In the speech that King George V made, at the opening of the BEE in April 1924, he spoke of the exhibition being '… a graphic illustration of that spirit of free and tolerant co-operation which has inspired peoples of different races, creeds and ways of thought to unite in a single commonwealth and to contribute their varying national gifts to one great end.’
King George V saw the British Empire as a family, with himself as the parent, the big "Dominions" (such as Australia and Canada) as the children, and the other nations/colonies as cousins. We can see now that this was a distorted sense of reality, but a key aim of the exhibition was: ‘to enable all who owe allegiance to the British flag to meet on common ground and learn to know each other.’
One of the 22 'symbols' identified for action in the letter is the 'Lionhead memorial', on the open space at Wembley Hill Road. I was heavily involved in getting that reinforced concrete lion head corbel saved, when the last surviving part of a BEE building, the Palace of Industry, was demolished in 2013, and installed as a memorial to the exhibition during its 90th anniversary in 2014. I make no apology for doing so.
I was invited to make a short speech at the unveiling of the memorial in July 2014. I made clear that as well as commemorating the exhibition which took place in 1924/25, it was a positive symbol of the welcome that Wembley, and Brent, have given to people from across the world ever since.
The British Empire Exhibition was an important event in Wembley's history. If it wasn't for that, we would not have had a Wembley Stadium, which went on to become a "Venue of Legends", and make the name of Wembley known across the world. It is certainly something which deserves to be commemorated, and enjoyed for the many interesting stories of what happened here, the people who came to be part of it, and the beauty of its architecture.
Yes, let's use the centenary to reassess the British Empire Exhibition, and what it, and "Empire" mean to Brent residents now. But, please, let us do that as part of a commemoration which considers the positive as well as the negative sides of this historic event, which happened here in Wembley.
@Philip, thanks for your comment - everything is academically sourced and has been researched extensively. I respect your position, but we have a difference in opinion. I suggest you read further into the reality of the British Empire and the actual function of the Exhibition.
ReplyDeleteWe'll be sharing more and more over the course of the next few months - and hopefully I can paint a clearer picture for you. One that is not marred with nostalgia for a past which indignifies and humiliates the others.
Watch this space :) love and respect, Nabil
Your website says you have expertise in "Who designs space? Who has access to newly-created space? What’s the cultural impact of these newly-created spaces? Who are new spaces being built for? Who is affected by newly-created space? What are the narratives that must be preserved when new spaces are being created?" - so trust you used this expertise to object to all the high rise tower blocks that have been built or will be built in Wembley.
DeleteFar more important that people get proper family homes rather than high rise shoeboxes overlooked by other tower blocks built so close by - not sure the name of the road or building is so much of a concern?
Dear Nabil,
DeleteThank you for responding to my comment. I do look forward to learning more about the British Empire Exhibition from a different perspective.
But please don't imagine that, just because I am a 70+ white British man, my views about the exhibition (which was an important event in the local history of the area we now call home) are 'marred with nostalgia for a past which indignifies and humiliates others.'
I'm confident that we can both learn from others as we move forward to the exhibition's anniversary.
@philip, thank you for your comment - I appreciate and respect your position, and assure you that research into this has been extensive and well thought through. You'll find that this topic will have been extensively researched and everything is academically sourced, so rest assured that due diligence has taken place.
ReplyDeleteI find myself disagreeing with your opinion and your stance, I hope that over the course of the next few months (as the work gets shared) I can help you reconsider your nostalgia for a past that is marred with the humiliation and indignity of others.
Sending you love and respect, Nabil
The project's focus on renaming streets and buildings at Wembley attempts to challenge imperial nostalgia but falls into the trap of reinforcing national identities. By renaming these spaces, the project inadvertently perpetuates the idea of fixed and essentialised national histories. Marxism recognises that nations are artificial constructs that emerge from the needs of the ruling class to consolidate their power and exploit the working class. Therefore, our aim should not be to reimagine national narratives but to transcend the very notion of nations altogether.
ReplyDeleteMarxism envisions a world without nations, where the working class transcends borders and unites against capitalist exploitation. While the project seeks to challenge imperial nostalgia, it fails to recognise that imperialism was an essential step in the historical development of capitalism. The consolidation of various territories under a single empire created the necessary conditions for the emergence of a global proletariat. It is through the unification of the working class across nations that we can pave the way for a revolutionary transformation, leading to a society free from class divisions and exploitation.
This project's emphasis on acknowledging the complexities of history is commendable. However, Marxism goes beyond superficial gestures of recognition by analysing history through a class-based lens. British imperialism, rooted in the pursuit of economic gain and the extraction of surplus value from colonies, caused immense suffering, slavery, and exploitation. To truly understand the past, we must examine history as a class struggle, highlighting the role of the ruling bourgeoisie in advancing their own interests at the expense of ordinary people.
As Imperialism, as a manifestation of capitalism, represents the global expansion of capital and the exploitation of resources and labour. The 1924 British Empire Exhibition was an embodiment of imperial ambitions and the promotion of British capitalism. Rather than solely critiquing the legacy of the exhibition, we must expose the exploitative nature of capitalism itself. The artist / urbanist and project leader needs to shift the focus to the economic system that perpetuates imperialism,as only then we can strive for genuine liberation from capitalist oppression.
The project's focus on renaming streets and buildings at Wembley attempts to challenge imperial nostalgia but falls into the trap of reinforcing national identities. By renaming these spaces, the project inadvertently perpetuates the idea of fixed and essentialised national histories. Marxism recognises that nations are artificial constructs that emerge from the needs of the ruling class to consolidate their power and exploit the working class. Therefore, our aim should not be to reimagine national narratives but to transcend the very notion of nations altogether.
ReplyDeleteMarxism envisions a world without nations, where the working class transcends borders and unites against capitalist exploitation. While the project seeks to challenge imperial nostalgia, it fails to recognise that imperialism was an essential step in the historical development of capitalism. The consolidation of various territories under a single empire created the necessary conditions for the emergence of a global proletariat. It is through the unification of the working class across nations that we can pave the way for a revolutionary transformation, leading to a society free from class divisions and exploitation.
This project's emphasis on acknowledging the complexities of history is commendable. However, Marxism goes beyond superficial gestures of recognition by analysing history through a class-based lens. British imperialism, rooted in the pursuit of economic gain and the extraction of surplus value from colonies, caused immense suffering, slavery, and exploitation. To truly understand the past, we must examine history as a class struggle, highlighting the role of the ruling bourgeoisie in advancing their own interests at the expense of ordinary people.
As Imperialism, as a manifestation of capitalism, represents the global expansion of capital and the exploitation of resources and labour. The 1924 British Empire Exhibition was an embodiment of imperial ambitions and the promotion of British capitalism. Rather than solely critiquing the legacy of the exhibition, the artist / urbanist might expose the exploitative nature of capitalism itself. By shifting the focus to the economic system that perpetuates imperialism, we can strive for genuine liberation from capitalist oppression.
Many humans and civilizations have committed terrible atrocities against others over thousands of years under the banner of religious duty, especially in Christianity and Islam, and other causes. This causes me great anxiety and many others. Can we have a discussion about replacing words and people"s names associated with them, since they only serve to promote and glorify such crimes against humanity? Let's re-write the history of England and remove anything that offends us.
ReplyDeleteThank you for raising the important topic of examining certain aspects of religions that may be viewed as problematic today.
DeleteThe portrayal of God in the Old Testament, particularly in relation to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah received as homophobic, and the issue of child brides in Islam are sensitive subjects that require careful consideration. In addition to Christianity and Islam, it is worth mentioning that other religions have also faced criticism for certain practices. For instance, Hinduism has faced scrutiny for aspects such as the caste system and gender inequality.
It is important to acknowledge that no religion is immune to criticism, and unless the millenial creative wants to close down all places of workship to make flats it is only through critical thinking, dialogue, and reform that positive changes can be fostered. It’s important the next generations are considered strong enough to engage with difficult histories rather than so sensitive even street signs need Orwellian erasure.
Who are the other academics, historians, activists, and community members involved in this? you don’t list them on your web site. Which is just a copy of the text on here. When and where are the high profile talks. Are you holding discussions or just promoting your perspective?
ReplyDeleteTwo thirds of the population/residents of Wembley came to the UK, from the Countries that were part of the British Empire/Commonwealth, given British Citizenship and were automatically considered British Citizens and therefore wanted to settle, and make the UK their home. That's exactly why Wembley is so diverse place to live.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you should be asking them whether they want, care of feel the need to support the idea of changing the names of places, building, spaces etc?
There are much more important issues to address in this economic climate especially when it comes to lack of affordable housing.
Lack of affordable housing and badly maintained roads and pavements and flytipping, littering, street drinking and paan spitting all over Wembley - I'd much rather time and money was spent on solving these issues for the benefit of everyone who lives here!
DeleteJust another "academic" wasting their time trying to start an utterly pointless debate at a time when the borough, city, country and world face far greater issues.
ReplyDeleteWhy stop with names? Why don't we get rid of the stadium as well. It was unlikely to ever exist without the Exhibition and is the most obvious symbol of British colonisation in the area.
Ah that's right, these things are only ever about something as shallow as changing names and do nothing to help correct or acknowledge what happened in the past except to help us forget about them once their names disappear to history.
Also, Rutherford was a scientist of world renown. Hardly an brutal invader of the third world who should have his name stricken from the history books.
Nabil, you should spend your time fighting for the deep injustices in society that are happening right now before our very eyes.
Getting rid of Wembley stadium is an idea as the notion of a national football stadium is reminiscent of the ancient Roman coliseums and deeply problematic. While both structures symbolise grand spectacles and mass entertainment, they also represent the underlying inequalities and exploitation inherent in capitalist societies. The construction of colossal stadiums reflects the priorities of the ruling class, who invest vast resources into creating opulent venues for the amusement of the masses while neglecting essential social needs such as healthcare, education, and affordable housing.
DeleteMoreover, these stadiums often serve as profitable ventures for wealthy owners and corporations, perpetuating the commodification of sports and further widening the wealth gap. Just as the Roman coliseums were used to distract and pacify the masses, modern-day national stadiums can be seen as a tool to divert attention from systemic issues and maintain the status quo. The spectacle of sports becomes a form of false consciousness, diverting attention away from the class struggle and reinforcing the dominant ideology. In a truly equitable society, resources would be directed towards addressing the fundamental needs of all individuals, rather than prioritising lavish structures designed for temporary entertainment.
What on earth are you talking about? Football is and always has been a working class game.
DeleteYou should be addressing your anti capitalist mantras at Brent Council and the multimillion pound developers such as Quintain who have built so many hugely overpriced flats in Wembley, hardly any affordable housing and hardly any council housing - loads of them have been sold to rich overseas buyers and will stand empty or be let pir as air b&bs whilst loads of young people in London are having to sleep rough.
And don't forget Labour run Brent Council decided to give Quintain £17.8 million from our NCIL funds to build their vanity steps outside the stadium, there was nothing wrong with the ramps that they replaced and that £17.8m could have been spent on so many other projects in Wembley for the benefit of all of us residents.
Please remember these issues when voting in the next local elections where you should always vote on local issues NOT national issues!
Name one working class football club in the top division?
DeleteSuggest you ask each club to do a survey of their fans to find out the answer to that question 😀
DeleteOn Rutherford, his scientific breakthroughs, while groundbreaking and transformative for the field of physics, inadvertently provided the knowledge and framework necessary for the development of devastating weaponry. The destructive power of nuclear weapons, as demonstrated by the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, has raised significant ethical and moral concerns, as well as heightened global tensions during the arms race era, and even now with Russia Ukraine.
ReplyDeleteI don’t want to speak for the urbanist, but they might argue that scientists, including Rutherford, have a moral responsibility to consider the potential ramifications and ethical implications of their research, especially in areas that could have significant destructive potential.
The consequences of nuclear weapons extend far beyond the scientific realm and have profound political, environmental, and humanitarian implications. So should there be a Rutherford way?
What is his actual connection locally?
Yes, let's not learn anything, live in the mountains with our goats, believe the world is flat and have faith in divine healing. Who needs scientists, right?
ReplyDeleteBritain was invaded by the Romans and the Vikings who killed hundreds of thousands of British people - are we going to rename Hadrian's wall? Are we going to rename Britain, London, York and all the other places with Roman or Viking inspired names?
ReplyDeleteAn interesting article in The Spectator (from Spectator Life) dated 24 February 2021 written by George Pieri entitled "The problem with renaming London's streets" sums it up simply by saying "you can't keep editing the scenery to represent the day's demographics".
ReplyDeleteThe statues and street names that are deemed by some to be so problematic are now our history whether they like it or not. They remind us that London's rich tapestry of immigrants is part of a chapter that stands alongside the old. Many aspects of London's long and incredibly rich history are evident in its' street names.
I've just finished reading "Empireland" by Sathnam Sanghera. It is not the easiest of reads, but worth the effort.
ReplyDeleteIn its final chapter, "Working off the past", it examines what should be the objective of decolonisation, but goes on to say:
'But the term "decolonizing" is terrible: campaigners might have a better chance of succeeding if they talked about widening curriculums rather than decolonizing them, for that is what decolonizing involves.'
Dear Philip, I hope you’re doing well and have had an enjoyable and restful Easter period - thank you for sharing your update following the reading of “Empireland”. I greatly enjoy this discourse and I’m grateful that you’re willing to listen to alternative perspectives (this is a sign of good character, and I want to acknowledge it!!).
ReplyDeleteI somewhat agree and disagree with that statement. I agree mainly because “decolonisation” is an intimidating term. The “de-“ prefix can make it difficult for audiences to be receptive. Many negative terms start with this prefix, such as deconstruct, decant, etc. The Latin origins suggests it means to remove, reduce, devalue. Which invokes negative feelings for audiences who may not necessarily see the issue with colonialism. Making it difficult for a discussion to happen in the first place!! My disagreement largely stems from two issues: (1) to “decolonise” is in reality the only appropriate term. For we hope to move away from concepts and ideas that uphold colonial thought in a population, as these can prove very very dangerous in community cohesion and serenity. And (2) to widen the curriculum is a positive action, but by retaining and including coloniality in a curriculum, we run the risk of validating the thoughts its produces.
My belief is that “decolonisation” requires an acknowledgment of colonial thought, but does not validate it. I am a sincere advocate of publicly and overtly opposing colonial thought and associated items. One of my favourite quotes below by the phenomenal Edward Said:
Every single empire in its official discourse has said that it is not like all the others, that its circumstances are special, that it has a mission to enlighten, civilize, bring order and democracy, and that it uses force only as a last resort. And, sadder still, there always is a chorus of willing intellectuals to say calming words about benign or altruistic empires, as if one shouldn't trust the evidence of one's eyes watching the destruction and the misery and death brought by the latest mission civilizatrice.
-Edward Said, preface to the 2003 edition of Orientalism, 1978
In earnest, I don’t think we aren’t saying the same thing - I hope this message is received with your consideration and love.
Dear Nabil,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your reply to my comment about Sathnam Sanghera's view on the use of the word "decolonising". It explains well why you have used that expression.
There are many things that we agree on, and I will be doing my best, in what I write or speak about to commemorate the British Empire Exhibition this year, to share a better understanding of the reality behind Britain's colonial history, as well as the history of the event that happened at Wembley 100 years ago.