On Losing My Job

It is strange when your whole being seems to be thrown quite dramatically upside down. And then to the side a bit. And then eventually down some sort of metaphorical but entirely real feeling gutter. It was Oscar Wilde who famously exclaimed that although he may have been lying in the gutter, he was in fact looking at the stars, a sentiment I not only feel I understand, but that I can put into practice.

I lost my job in an unfair and abrupt process. Less bothered about losing the thing that occupied my days, it was more the lack of income and place to live that has shook my entire being. Losing these elements of my existence links to losing other more deep rooted aspects; I feel I now have a lack of choices, a lack of security, a lack of agency and a lack of independence. It’s an act that was entirely out of my control, and I don’t like losing the element of control, therefore I am out of my comfort zone. It has also, expectedly, affected my self esteem and this is something I am really uncomfortable with.

I’ve never been sacked before, I like the control that comes with handing in my notice knowing I have somewhere else to be. I’ve also never been sacked for not being able to do my job, which makes it all the more confusing. The situation I currently find myself in the middle of is all the more baffling as there is no strain of logic running through its centre. Were I incapable and unable to fulfil my role correctly then this would be an entirely fair and justifiable outcome, but this isn’t the case. 

I have to regularly remind myself to not try and make sense of insane scenarios. I have a plethora of experience in this department, which my early years taught me. Me and my ex bosses could be stood in Etherow Park, looking at the duck pond and I could say, ‘Oh, look at that lovely duck’ and if they’d already decided that it was a cow, they would remain completely adamant that it was in fact, a cow. Sometimes there are people you encounter who have so much of their own stuff going on that the power of reason is simply not enough. 

I decided within the first week of unemployment that I didn’t need to understand it, rather just accept it, and I have. This doesn’t mean however, that it doesn’t hurt. I can accept something and still not like it. The thing I’m struggling with is accepting just how much this out of control act may have affected me. I may not have been in my dream job but losing it in such a confrontational and aggressive way has been massively insulting. Although I know my logic; don’t attempt to understand it, accept that that place is no longer where you needed to be, focus your attention and energy into more positive things, this can still be really hard due to the actual act itself. I constantly reinforce my positive attributes to myself. It’s really easy to get into negative thinking, especially when two people you thought were on the same page as you have behaved as if you were incompetent, but I am learning to recognise when this kind of thinking starts to take over, and have strategies to work my way out of it. What’s difficult to accept about it affecting me is that I really truly, honestly wish it hadn’t.

As in any human being, when stuff happens to me, it has a knock on effect. Not only am I feeling the consequences but so are my family, my partner and my friends. I’m used to being self-sufficient, and asking for help, or admitting that I have some giant feelings is something I find really scary, and it’s even scarier when I think it’s going to impact the one’s I love. I am ambitious, outgoing, sensible and (most of the time) rational, and the fact that at the moment my brain doesn’t seem to be functioning at full capacity is really scary. I still live at my old place of work and the psychological effects of this are, in my opinion, bigger than I’m accepting. The smallest tasks seem massive in an environment that feels oppressive and hostile, so taking those first steps towards reordering my life seem to be taking forever in comparison to how I’d normally respond. 

So, in these situations, I need to break it down. Everything I encounter is just for today, and just for today I don’t feel great and I’m still unemployed. Just for today I still have to interact with the people who sacked me in order to fully sort out me losing my job. Just for today I am not my best self. That doesn’t mean she’s gone forever. This is my third week of not having a job, my problem is I place too much importance on being busy. It’s been nice to be able to have a rest, and a bit of breathing space, as my job was extremely stressful, but now, as I know myself, I must start to get on again. So, I applied for a job on Wednesday, which made me feel good just because I managed to actually do it. For me, that was the first step to truly leaving behind this situation. I’m going to book in and complete my driving theory, therefore making me one step closer to that act of independence. I am going to concern myself less with people who do not know me, and remind myself constantly that I am not what people say I am. I will keep focussed on me so that I can be my best self towards the people around me. I will accept my feelings and I will work through them. I will not let this nonsensical act define me when in reality it is the best thing to ever happen. 

This afternoon I changed my wallpaper on my phone to a photograph of me when I am very small with my great-grandmother. She is looking at me and smiling and I am looking back at her with the purest look of joy on my face. I have put that there to remind me of the person I am. That even with all this pain and all this confusion, really, deep-down I am that little girl who loves to be around others, who gets never-ending joy from the people she loves and that simplest of acts; being alive.  


On Reading

Today I have read two books written by women, in fact I can’t remember the last time I read a book written by a man. I chose both these books for relatively straightforward reasons. One claimed to be a response to George Orwell’s essay Why I Write, and the other presented itself as a ‘manifesto for change’. I’ve read another woman’s response to Why I Write and found it to be honest, revealing and important, and anything that claims to wish to inspire change in a world I find to be so disheartening I’m interested in. I am actively choosing to not engage with male writers. This, it can be argued, is an act of sexism, but I have been raised in a world where the patriarchy tends to have the final say and small acts of rebellion count. I recently purchased and read the second book by a female author who’s work I don’t find to be particularly original or interesting, but supporting young, female art is important and it was still infinitely better than any crime fiction I could have chosen as an easy holiday read. 

I put a lot of thought into what I read, possibly sometimes to my detriment. I’m not interested in how a book can hook me in its first few pages; I have more patience than that, in fact I give any book up to page thirty-six before I choose to pass an informed judgement on whether I am or am not enjoying it. I choose what I read based on simple things; the title can sometimes intrigue me, if the cover image encapsulates an emotion in itself, the first paragraph of a blurb. It’s worth noting that more often than not an author’s non-fiction work is likely to make me more open minded to reading anything fictional they have produced. This sentiment was ignited with one of today’s reads; Things I Don’t Want to Know, the first instalment of Deborah Levy’s memoirs. My mother bought me Swimming Home for my birthday two years ago and its sat untouched, so untouched that when I rifled through boxes upon boxes of books (I am still unpacking my life after yet another move) to try and find it today, I couldn’t.  Reading only part of her memoirs made me desperately want to read the fiction that was a product of her real life. 

I return to the sentiment of life and its experiences being a valuable creative tool over and over again. I remember being a teenager and the most experimental and daring author I could find to read in recent memory being Hunter S Thompson. I wanted to know how the author could bring their whole self into their words and he was the only obvious example I could find, and he was male. And an alcoholic, and a drug addict, and violent, and arguably insane, and travelling across large expanses of America’s United States in the 1970s. None of these qualities were relatable to me, a teenage girl working her way through secondary school who’d rarely left Manchester never mind the UK. As I got older the concept of including the self within one’s creativity was incomprehensible to my educators, and I was repeatedly told that as I was not doing a creative writing course, writing in such a creative way was inappropriate. No one at school, no one at college, no one even during my time in university pointed me towards female authors full stop, never mind female authors writing in the capacity of the personal essay. The importance of the self within an author’s work was simply not considered, this is something I have discovered and nurtured on my own.

Ironically it started with my male best friend handing me a copy of Joan Didion’s Slouching Towards Bethlehemthat he’d recently acquired on a work related visit to the States. The action was accompanied by the words, ‘you’re a woman who can’t help but include herself in her writing, you’ll like her.’ I remember at the time thinking that this sentiment indicated that my male friend had dismissed her work, hadn’t found the worth in it, as she was simply a woman writing about herself. I then remember thinking that due to this perceived attitude anything he’d read that I’d written he’d happily dismissed as just another woman writing about herself. I know this isn’t true. I know he included the word ‘woman’ in his description, as he knew his target audience; the ardent feminist he’d been friends with for half his life who placed great importance on her gender and where that stood her in the world. Annoyingly, he wasn’t wrong. I devoured Slouching Towards Bethlehemand when finished declared that Didion was a nuanced and intelligent Hunter S Thompson, whose work was far more revealing, honest and sensitive. I’d stand by this point, but I don’t want to describe her in relation to a man who’s only similarity is that he also used his writing to make a living. The reason I love Joan Didion is because she stands alone, her work is like nothing else I have ever encountered. 

Since my first introduction I have read many of Joan Didion’s works, fiction and non-fiction but as always I started with the factual. The factual opened me up to the story and the story is simply a reflection of the truth. Reading Joan Didion has made me more conscious. I am more conscious of myself, I am more conscious of what I want, I am more conscious of the world around me and I am far more conscious of what I choose to read. This has returned me to actively engaging with books. I studied literature for a long time and was, the majority of the time, told what to read and when. There weren’t many books by women throughout this period, and when there were they often covered multiple diversity bases. University gave the impression that to succeed as a female writer you must fit into some kind of minority group. We constantly focused on white male authors, but rarely white female and especially those writing in the contemporary period. The curriculum surrounding men indicated that you could be entirely dull and ordinary and still create a masterpiece; this was not conveyed for women. Women can be entirely dull and ordinary and remain that way. Leaving university has given me the time to search for those writers where I may be able to find a part of me, and therefore gain some sense of inspiration. 

Consecutively reading two books in an afternoon was intense and liberating. On the day where the biggest news headline was Boris Johnson being faux-elected as the next British Prime Minister I was able to escape into two semi-imaginary worlds where I only need focus on the start of the next paragraph and the turning of the next page. It also gave me a day that was entirely mine. Things have happened around me and I haven’t realised. I got bad news relating to work on my day off and I, for the first time in three months, didn’t care. I was busy understanding that life isn’t always perfect, and life isn’t always exceptional but that it’s always worth talking about. The documentation of the everyday is ultimately always a reflection of, a comment on, the society that individual inhabits at that forever unique time, the present moment. It is so easy to forget the present moment, to dwell on what happened five minutes ago or project so fervently into the future that it makes our eyes hurt, and we have to scrunch our face up to relieve the pain. But it is this attention to detail and the finite things that occur that means that I admire writers like Didion and Levy; they both hold the capacity to put the reader in their present moment. They focus on the senses, they allow their reader to understand them, they tell them where they’re writing from, what they see, hear and smell, and most importantly the emotions they allow themselves to feel. 

Women are often taught that the intensity with which we allow ourselves to feel our emotions is a weakness. It’s really not; it is an essential strength most people deny themselves. When you have the capability to understand that feelings are not facts and simply thoughts that flow through the body with as much right to be there as the blood that carries our oxygen, then the more strength we have understanding and expressing them. It’s also worth noting that no feeling lasts forever and that they are there to inform us of something. It is when we accept them for what they are and let ourselves experience them that we are able to act upon them with a sensible and logical attitude. Deny the feelings and refuse to accept them and the decision making process ultimately becomes a disaster. As opposed to being based in a source of truth, it is based on what is perceived to be the best course of action, something the individual may not agree with, which will ultimately cause further conflict. The experience of feeling then, and the emotional intensity that is inherent to these authors’ works becomes a part of the moment itself. It taps into that most human of experience, subjectivity. By including the self so fervently, and not denying the emotions that accompanied the experience, Didion and Levy make it more real and so much more human and therefore unique and interesting. This is why they are revered over simple fact collating travel guides or news articles that claim to provide the reader with an objective view. If I want an account of California I will reach for Didion, I want to hear what she hears, smell what she smells, feel the weight of a fluorescent blue sky in the same way that she did; sentiments that she carries so well through her words. If I want to understand the political backdrop of South Africa, I will reach for Levy who documents her own experience of how living their throughout her formative early years had an impact on her life with such honesty and tenderness. I want to understand her sadness, share her pain and feel her confusion, which I can do so easily through the construction of her sentences and the selection of her words. 

Reading expands our worlds when we cannot physically do so ourselves. The Romantic period saw literature being used to express transgression; ordinary people turned to books to have experience and live vicariously in a time when their worlds were so limited. Using art in this way has progressed into the modern world, and now it can be argued that people turn to what is intended to be more immersive techniques of doing this, in the form of gaming and virtual reality. Essentially though the power of the book will always prevail. The images I see from someone’s writing are my own. No one has constructed them for me and placed them in my vision, I have formed them myself through my interpretation of the author’s words and the sentiment they have created through them. Therefore it is entirely unique, and entirely immersive, and an escape into a world that only I have access to. Even if you read the same book as me, the world you choose to inhabit will be entirely different, no two people will ever see things the same. 

Temporary Intermittence

I know that my writing is not successful when I am not being honest, specifically when I am not being honest with myself. I have always used my writing to understand the world I live in, to understand how I form and partake in this world, to understand how I feel about myself; my actions, my emotions, my learned behaviours and my ability to change. My writing does not work when I set out to document a topic, my writing works when I have a problem, something I need to unpick, dissect and evaluate. It does not work when I am doing it self-consciously, or when I have an audience in mind; I am not writing to you, I am writing to me. This is why I have actively chosen not to pursue my passion as my career. I cannot stand the idea of someone paying me to write, for me to work to their restrictions and agendas, for me to formulate words based on a brief; there is not enough freedom or creativity in that space. Introducing a financial incentive means that truth is unable to take its rightful place at centre stage, there is someone else to adhere to, someone else to please, someone else’s opinion to impose.

As a teenager I wrote avidly. I’ve never written creatively; I am caught up in the real world, not a cynic, just a realist. I have filled notebooks upon notebooks with joy, anger, sadness, bitterness, achievements, failures, lost loves, countless relationships, first experiences, exciting milestones and those which have troubled me. Some of these I have read back, some I have read the first sentence, and upon understanding the idea shied away from its confirmation. By my fourteenth year I was filling these notebooks with my pain. I would write it out, get it all out; put it on the page so it was no longer in my head, as this pain was important to me, I couldn’t stand the idea of forgetting it, but I no longer wanted it. I would give my pain to my notebooks, changing my handwriting as the years went on, trying to formulate an identity for myself in every aspect of the written world. This isn’t so much the case now, it’s difficult to convey so much of one’s self through the impersonal and mechanic identity of machinery, the writer must work harder to convey their whole being through the pure arrangement of the written word.


Some of the most troubling times in my life have been the times when I felt incapable of expressing myself. When my Uncle died so suddenly I was unable to write; I was so frustrated, all I wanted to do was write away the pain and document the absurdness of my everyday, as even in the midst of all that grief I knew that one day the pain would change and I wouldn’t be able to comprehend the fact that I was ever that sad. From that day I have a series of key images, like stills from a film, which will be forever permanently impressed on my mind. One is being incapable of carrying myself, of collapsing in the hospital corridor, unwilling and unable to hold the weight of this sorrow. I was half carried; half dragged, into the smallest room and told I was having a panic attack. A nurse handed me water, which was disgustingly lukewarm, yet I was incapable of expressing this sentiment. I gratefully drank, ever the people pleaser who doesn’t like people.

Ten hours later I was back in Manchester, disorientated and numb. My mother and I had woken my siblings to tell them. This was my idea, my mother uncertain whether to wait until the morning; I said it couldn’t wait. We sat on my sister’s bed and sobbed, all four of us, and within that moment the room felt impenetrable. I don’t remember how I got home, or when I went home. I didn’t live at my parent’s then, my partner came to get me, opened the door and gave my mother a lingering hug. My grief was never secondary but I think to those outside of my immediate family I was doing better than I was. I lived that evening and into the night in a daze, refusing to go to sleep until I had no option, as in this day, Wednesday the sixteenth of March two-thousand and sixteen, my Uncle Ben was still alive and I was not willing to let that go.

The second thing I distinctly remember is waking on Thursday and before my eyes were open there were tears coming out of them. I remember this so vividly because it did not make sense to me. In my experience it is the closing of the eyes that makes the tears fall.


I tried with all my being to write throughout this. I wrote, rewrote and wrote again what I was intending to say at the funeral. Eventually I ended up beginning and completing my final public goodbye on the morning of the event, whilst I panicked that the dress I was wearing was transparent and one of its buttons was missing. My hair was red and I hated it. I put make-up on to cry it away and berated myself for the fact that my tights were the wrong colour. I wore all black, not because of the occasion but because I’d been intending to wear the dress to a wedding as Ben’s plus one. When I’d bought it a month prior there was nothing in my consciousness that could have comprehended the fact that I was now wearing it to his funeral.

The week before he died I dreamt I attended his funeral. The coffin was so small and as always with my dreams, the scene was exceptionally vivid. My subconscious has a fantastic way of making the most absurd unrealities reality in my deepest sleeps. Normally they are unpleasant, filled with my everyday but with disturbing distortions. Sometimes they reflect my anxieties, those I am conscious of and those I do not yet know. Sometimes, as with two nights ago, they are blissful, I am in Paris, drinking coffee in Le Deux Magots and looking across at a mirror that reflects layers upon layers of gold and I am grateful that occasionally my subconscious reminds me of things I found so beautiful.

I did not admit my dream for sometime, afraid that somehow I had willed the event to happen. I finally admitted it to my mother stood in one of the doorways at work, panicking and unable to hold myself together. I was regularly unable to hold myself together at this point, yet went back to work as I felt there was nothing else to be done. I was told to take a year away from my Masters so threw myself into a full on working lifestyle. Everyone assumed that at work my mind would be distracted from all the things that troubled me. Those who believe that one’s mind can be distracted from such a thing as uncontrollable grief have clearly never experienced it. I would cry whilst I served customers and complete monotonous tasks in the never-ending daze I existed within; that isolation that makes one feel like they are living within an invisible bubble that does not allow them to fully engage with the real world. Everything is filtered, not quite real, and untouchable. You are numb.

Normality is always just out of your reach. Every time you think you’ve managed to grasp it, put that first mouthful of food into your mouth or laughed hysterically at that moment in your favourite film, the crushing weight of your reality forces itself upon you and you are frozen, crying over pasta you are then unable to eat, laughing until the joy becomes uncontrollable sobs, because how on earth can you manage to continue with your every day when it is so very far from normal. It did not seem right that I should engage in those activities which assisted in sustaining me, did not seem right that I was able to even smile, let alone laugh so carelessly at things so trivial. I remember thinking that I was never going to be able to be happy again, and in those moments that thought was true. People regularly told me that time would heal. Time doesn’t heal, time changes. Over time my loss, and my reaction to this loss has changed; it hasn’t healed, I haven’t forgotten, it is not diminished, but it is different.

Now, I find so much joy in my every day, more joy than I ever thought imaginable and I did not have this in my life five years ago. My Uncle Ben brought me a wealth of happiness, and his sense of humour and intelligent wit is something I miss on a daily basis, along with his perspective, opinions and comfort, but I was lucky enough to ever experience these things in the first place and they have helped me become the person I am. I find joy in finding something funny, or interesting, or ridiculous and knowing that Ben would agree with me. I find joy in coming out with a phrase, a comment or an opinion that seems extremely Ben-esque and thinking to myself that he could almost be in the room. I am comforted by the fact that even though sometimes the only person I want to talk to is my Uncle I can probably quite certainly come up with a suitable answer to my problems that could have come from his mouth.

When we buried him, and were stood in front of his grave, I told my stepdad that now I must learn to drive so I could come and see him. His response was simply this: ‘you don’t need to come here to see him, you just need to look in a mirror’, his voice breaking in those final four words; my heart breaking in response.


Loneliness & Modernity

I once said that everyone should try living on his or her own. I am still a strong advocate of this, but now I have some more experience. Earlier this year I moved back to my family home, for what I thought would be quite a long time. This wasn’t the case. Within six months I was gone, moved into a little two up two down of my own back in the SK1 area. This was, and still is, ideal. Living at home at twenty-four wasn’t negative but there were points when it felt suffocating, like I didn’t have the space to make all the choices I wanted to. In fact, I think I made worse choices. I spent a lot of time with my two younger siblings, which was ace, but I think it made me act like a teenager again. There was one week where we managed to do Venue twice, with a little Smiths Disco jaunt in-between. I drank a lot, I was sick a lot and I engaged in some activities I believed to be long gone. This was all a lot of fun, but not very me. I am a big fan of a night out dancing but drinking all the rum and spending the next day in work wishing I were absolutely anywhere but there was far from ideal; I am not suited to that lifestyle at all.

Living on my own has given, and continues to give me, a significant sense of self. This was an important point for me the last time I wrote about the experience, yet this time I’m in a much better place. A year and a half has passed and a lot of my self-doubt and uncertainty has dissipated. There’s something very important about being the only person responsible for any decision-making in your household, and the only person affected by the consequences. It makes you really consider your principles, your values and your morals. You are free to exist in a way that is true to all of these things. Additionally you are forced into a routine of self-care. There is nobody else around to make sure you get yourself to bed at a sensible time (something I am still learning, midnight has long since passed in my writing of this), nobody to make sure you’re eating regularly and well (again, learning!) and nobody to help you fill your time or entertain you.

I’m quite good at being responsible for my own entertainment, and have been since I was a child. A common conversation in our house when I was little would be:

‘I’m bored’

‘Well, you must be boring then.’

I’ve never liked the idea of being boring, in fact I’ve always considered it the worst insult you could throw at me; I’m many things and have been accused of being many things, but never boring. This is a problem for me though. I fill my time with quite a lot of interesting things. My job is fast-paced and pretty unpredictable; I like to run on a lot of adrenalin it seems. In my spare time I am always doing something. I like to go on walks, I like to watch films, I like to socialise, I like being around people and I like to try and be creative for at least seventy-two percent of this free time. This doesn’t leave much downtime and it’s this that I find really hard and it’s this that I find really hard on my own.

I think my downtime is when I’m asleep, but even then my dreams are pretty mental. Although I studied literature I find reading to be quite a difficult activity to start and watching any kind of television is really just me staring blankly at a screen thinking about something utterly unrelated. I don’t have live TV, there’s very little point, and recently I’ve become so terrified through my incessant watching of Luther that I pretty much refuse to go near a screen at the moment.

(Pause here. This is one of the worst things about living on your own; watching something completely traumatising and then having no one else to be scared near/make sure you don’t get brutally murdered by an obscenely ridiculous serial killer halfway through the night. I don’t know if I can handle accepting my own death whilst trying to get to sleep at the age of twenty-four anymore. Upshot of this: no more Luther for me, which is a shame, as I’d quite like to know what happens to Alice…)

It turns out downtime for me is doing stuff like writing this. I find writing to be calming and therapeutic; probably why I spent an excessive amount of money making sure I got qualifications in it, and living on my own really forces me to spend more time doing it. There are a lot of times when I miss having somebody else in my home to interact with. I am happy that I have never stayed in a drastically miserable situation, especially with a partner, just to avoid being alone. This has never happened, I know my own mind too much for this, but I do sometimes struggle with loneliness. I feel like this is a difficult thing to admit and like I am displaying some kind of weakness by doing so. I very much have the attitude of ‘you should be fine, and yourself should be enough’ so any kind of feelings of unhappiness resulting from too much time spent on my own makes me extremely nervous. This is where the whole having more experience since last time aspect comes in.

I never got lonely the last time I lived on my own, but that’s because I avoided sitting with myself ever. I could not be on my own for prolonged amounts of time, I wasn’t well enough to be and that’s okay. When I was alone I was very good at not being alone. I was attached to my phone, always texting and always, always trawling through endless, endless rubbish on social media, which I would strongly discourage. Comparison really is the enemy of happiness and self-fulfilment. I have a very different attitude towards the outside world now. This is where I’m really taking control of what I choose to value. The modern world is a really difficult place to navigate. There’s a lot of pressure to both conform and be different. I have fallen into this at many points in my teenage years and further into my adult life. I am done with this now, or at least I hope I am. I’ve started taking positive action towards having a greater connection with the actual world we live in. I’ve set myself daily limits for screen time, which makes me sound like a child but if that’s what I have to do then so be it. I try and spend a lot of my time outside, especially now that daylight is limited. I try to pay attention to the naturalness of being human. We exist on the planet, we didn’t create it, and I believe that the majority of the human race has become so far removed from this that it’s unhealthy. Our existence is so artificially constructed that it’s no wonder everyone’s so anxious all the time.

A few weeks ago my brain wasn’t functioning as well as it usually is and I ended up using a free evening to really get into googling various mental health issues and self-diagnosing myself with three of them. Amazing what my head can do when left to its own devices. So, according to my Masters level research into the matter, I suffer not only from depression (number fifteen out of twenty-seven on the scale, nonetheless. N.B. I have no idea what this means but I’m over halfway there), some form of post-traumatic stress and anxiety, obviously. Although I find the idea that I used many hours of my free time engaging in this activity hysterical now, I still reflected upon it and particularly the idea of anxiety. After diagnosing myself with that particular disorder I wasn’t particularly worried, in fact my first thought was ‘well, who isn’t constantly anxious?’ Even then I managed a small laugh. However, inherently this isn’t funny.

It can’t just be me that’s baffled by the fact that we’ve created such a living environment that essentially most of the population is suffering from some kind of anxiety on a regular basis? I’m not referring to the kind of anxiety here that is crippling, nor am I referring to something as potentially extreme as panic attacks, although for a lot of people these are not uncommon, but rather just an underlying worry about pretty much everything and anything, and technological advancements really contribute to this. (Sorry Alex, they don’t ‘really bloody turn me on.’)

There is such an emphasis on constantly being connected to someone or something and I think this is really damaging. According to screen time, in the last week I have spent twenty hours on my phone, picking it up on average one hundred and twenty-one times a day; and this is me making a conscious effort to spend less time looking at an artificial light. Most of the time I’m not doing anything productive, I’m just consuming other people’s lives. Our constant connectivity is on the whole a negative attribute of the modern world, it can have extremely positive effects, but most of the time I don’t believe this is what it’s being used for and I’m included in that generalisation.

Having such easy access to other people’s lives is unnatural, especially access to people’s lives that we’ve never met. The Internet is the perfect platform for construction and idealisation and is largely a false representation of what it is portraying. My Instagram account is really not an accurate representation of what I get up to on a daily basis, if it were it would feature many more pictures of pints, many more pictures of me in my pyjamas sat in front of my laptop and many more unglamorous pictures of me, just finishing work at two in the morning, sweaty and covered in beer. I don’t share these aspects of my life online as they’re not attractive and they don’t conform to portraying a lifestyle that’s, essentially, full of leisure. I think I can quite certainly say that there are very few people in the world who’s lives are leisure based yet scroll through anyone’s online presence and you would think that work, sitting around on your own, wearing no make-up and eating an entire trifle meant for six were activities that never crossed their minds. (Okay, so maybe the trifle thing isn’t a regular occurrence, but whatever, I had a bad week.)

The point I’m trying to make is that we are becoming so far detached from reality that it’s as if everyone has two versions of themselves, the online and the functional. The functional exists within society, does a job, goes home and has tea, watches television, goes to sleep. The online exists as the ideal; it is the highlights reel of people’s lives, yet it is what people are using to define themselves, and I find that a lot of that definition comes from what people own, or have bought, or are aspiring to. I remember learning the phrase ‘keeping up with the Jones’’ whilst studying A Level Sociology and this has always stuck with me, the idea that in order to measure success and happiness it is essential to own the latest version of a thing in question. The key thinking behind this theory is that certain pockets of society were consistently dissatisfied as they were incapable of sustaining a lifestyle that adhered to owning the latest versions. They were always aspiring to be something better than what they were, always envious of their neighbours, ‘the Jones’’, who seemed to have it so much better, with little grasp on whether this was or was not true.

I was not brought up in a family that valued measuring success or happiness through material gain. Somewhere in my adolescence this altered. My mother thinks that my obsession (yes, that is what it is) with clothes started with her, as she would always ensure that me, my sister and brother were well turned out regardless of our circumstances. Maybe this is true or maybe, as I have theorised, I’ve used buying things to make myself feel better through extremely difficult periods of my life. Regardless of the root though I am beginning to alter these patterns; I have made sure I no longer follow any social media accounts that are trying to sell me something. The planet is under such threat with no obvious solutions being reached with our collective attitude towards sustainability that I really don’t need to buy any new things. In the wake of the current revelations about Philip Green (who, let’s be honest, everyone knew was a bastard anyway) I am on a full Arcadia Group boycott, which luckily for me only really includes Topshop. If I’m going to live within principles, values and morals that are true to me then this is essential and I am happy to report that it’s going really well. I’m also trying to change a habit of having material things in order to achieve a sense of contentment or fulfilment. I am trying extremely hard, and very slowly, to turn in a more creative direction in order to create my happiness. This will ultimately be more fulfilling and utterly sustainable. Luckily I have real-life friends who share my dreams.

Back to the issue of loneliness though, as this is really what got me writing this piece. Yes, I do love living on my own, but yes I do get lonely. I gave myself a lot of grief for this last week, believing that I should be fine and worrying that this meant that I wasn’t capable of getting on with life. My mother has always joked (been deadly serious) about me being co-dependent and I have had a lot of relationships that have conformed to this, both romantic and otherwise. I now joke (am deadly serious) that the only co-dependent relationship I am in is with my job. Co-dependency is really unhealthy but these are habits I have (hopefully!) taught myself out of over a long period of time. These things take time but are worth it. I spent time on my own to learn to like me and to learn to get on with me and most importantly to learn what is important to me and what I want out of my own life. And loneliness will feature, inevitably. Humanity is a social species, of course I enjoy and thrive off social interaction, this isn’t negative and doesn’t mean that I am incapable of spending time on my own, it just means that sometimes that time is too long and I need to practice self-care and get in touch with, spend some real-life time with, like-minded individuals who enrich my being. This isn’t a weakness; this is being human.

Fundamentally our ability to be constantly artificially connected to other people’s lives, thoughts, feelings and opinions is by no means an antidote for loneliness, but rather a creator. We are losing the ability to understand, fulfil and make ourselves happy. We are losing the excitement that comes from having engaging, vibrant conversations with others about the things we are passionate about. We are losing what it is to connect with and understand another person. We may have forms of social interaction available to us in vast quantities but as a result we are truly sacrificing its quality, and in turn our own sanity and happiness.

Today I don’t need other people to make me happy or validate my existence; I know that the only person responsible for that is myself; any outside influences are simply a bonus. However, I am an enthusiastic and passionate individual who enjoys the company of others. I like conversation and debate. I like sharing things. I like seeing things when out and about in the world and thinking, ‘so and so will like this, I’ll let them know’. I like discussion, and I like people who care enough to mull over the important things with me. This is the difference in me now. I accept these aspects of my character but I am comfortable spending time with myself. When I interact with people it is out of choice, not necessity because I am not enough. Inevitably living on my own means that loneliness will feature, but not as frequently, and today I recognise that feeling and choose what I do with it.

I think it’s important to get to know yourself, to try to understand the naturalness of your being. Living alone contributes to these values of mine extensively. I know my sleeping patterns, I know the times of day when I’ll be most creative or the points in my day where I’ll feel the least like doing anything which is normally between the hours of nine and ten at night, with my most productive hours existing within the three hours after waking up and from midnight until about three… unfortunate really. I know I don’t have a conventional routine but I do have some kind of Saffron routine, which currently consists of listening to Kate Bush really loudly at two in the morning. So really, what’s not to like? Doing exactly what I want can be the best thing in the world, if only I’ll let it.

Greek Holiday


As the sun descends behind its brittle mountains, and the moon increases its boldness, the island of Zakynthos and its inhabitants become difficult to distinguish. During this twilight zone the insects that dominate the day, with their incessant creaking from invisible bodies, moulded into olive trees, begins to deaden as one by one they succumb to what can only be assumed is sleep. There is an almost uninterrupted quiet for a while; the occasional dog bark, or whistle of a bird every now and again punctuating the silence, but nothing seems close and everything is far away.

A new kind of life begins to slowly creep out of the emerging darkness. Something has been flying above my head, under the veranda, for a while now. It is small and dark, like a bat, yet it makes a sound rendering my deduction false. Hedgerows, each exhibiting bright and extravagantly coloured flowers surround the house. In the dark, rustling sounds begin to take shape and an unidentifiable silhouette just darted from the steps to the cover of these plants. I’ve no perception of what it was, aside from the fact that it was clearly alive.

Beyond the veranda behind what, in the light of day, is an unintimidating collection of relatively small bushes is a disused and unloved old swimming pool. If you were someone who did not possess a natural curiosity then you would never know it was there. Fortunately for you, I have an innate desire to explore the unknown. Its beauty initially struck me. The relics of human existence are there; the plastic steps in and out and the integrated stone ones that occupy one edge demonstrate how this was once a place of sanctuary and joy for someone. My brain transported me to a world far away from this one and I could see two sun loungers accompanied by a striped umbrella on the far corner of the paving. A young woman, in sixties-esque swimwear, was lying on an intricately coloured blanket at the top of the feature steps, head tilted down, and eyes just visible beneath her large, white sunglasses intently perusing a battered copy of Lolita.

Why my brain decided that any woman’s favourite book would be Lolita is a mystery to me, yet there it was. In the obnoxious glare of the Greek sunlight the pond is green, filled with weeks old rainwater. It has not, and will not, rain whilst I am here. A frog leaping into its depths pulls me out of my inception of daydreams. It is dark now and the howling chorus of a thousand stray dogs has begun. Their staccato barks infiltrate the incessant noise of mopeds and quad bikes. Yet it is all far away. Close there is the sound of frogs, easily and initially mistaken for chickens, and in the distance a minute fraction of the island begins to come alive.

It is unclear whether here, in the middle of nowhere, it would be possible to be bombarded with the sensory overload that is Laganas, and its infamous tourist strip. When British teenagers say they are going to Zante, they are actually going to Zakynthos, what they meanis that they are going to Laganas. Zante is the miniscule strip of shisha bars, garish hotels, two for one cocktails and incessant euro-trash. Zakynthos is unspoilt beaches, loggerhead turtle nests and mountains. Lots and lots of mountains. It is not sitting on a veranda at eleven o’clock at night, due to the fact that you have the fortunate superpower of being inedible to mosquitos, and listening to 1980s pop hit Rio. The only acceptable setting for Duran Duran is Turner’s subtle nod in I Bet That You Look Good on the Dancefloor.

Her name isn’t Rio, but I don’t care for sand,

And lighting my fuse my result in a bang-b-b-bang-oh.

Moving Out, Moving On

I am currently writing this sat on my one remaining cushion on the floor of my flat, where there is no furniture, surrounded by the last remnants of my current life. It’s the stuff that has no category, the stuff that will inevitably end up in the ‘last box of shite … I promise this time it actually is’ box. I had already given this title to a box of what I can only describe as ‘odds and sods’ yesterday and upon seeing it my stepdad remarked ‘that’s definitely not the last, that’s the fucking first’ and well, reader, he was right.


This week I am moving out, if you hadn’t already guessed. So, this isn’t so much a blog post more a diary entry, a space for reflection. It’s an interesting topic to reflect upon though, and one I imagine I share with a lot of people, so I’d like to offer my thoughts on the matter with you.

I’ve lived in my little flat for a year and a half. It’s in an old building, meaning the windows are beautiful (I’m very particular about windows), it’s in Stockport Old Town and it’s handily next door to where I work. My boss is my neighbour, which could potentially be weird apart from the fact we’re really good friends. I have loved being so close to this little community. Due to working in hospitality I am free when many of my friends are busy and being able to essentially just bob downstairs and be surrounded by people has been comforting and fun. I never worry about getting home, I’m right in the middle of everything, I can decide what I fancy doing with my day on the spot and achieve it. One Sunday I decided I wanted to see an exhibition in Liverpool that was on its final day and within half an hour of accessing this information I was on a train and on my way.


Living in the thick of it has been both positive and arguably negative for me. A year and a half ago was to be the first time I experienced living with someone I was in a relationship with. This was exciting for me. I know what I believe a functioning relationship looks like and the idea of trying to collectively achieve something, spending the first night sleeping on a mattress on the floor and then endless weeks arranging our belongings and turning an empty shell into a home seemed a perfect reflection of two people who were truly functioning, not just individually but collectively.


This was more difficult than I expected, but I’m pretty sure that no matter how mature the twenty-two year old there’s still a level of naivety! Compromise and sharing aren’t necessarily qualities found in essentially selfish people. I have no qualms in saying that I was relatively selfish, uptight and short-tempered. I like to think that I’m not holding onto these defects so much now. I am however still reasonably particular about what I like and how I like it. If you throw into this scenario the fact that all the furniture I was moving into my first proper home I’d inherited from my Uncle who had suddenly died six months earlier, then you may be able to envisage that tension was higher than it should have been.

Ben’s sudden death catapulted me into an entirely unknown place, and one day I intend to write extensively about this, whether that stay private or if I choose to share it I do not yet know. To say I was emotionally unstable would be putting it very lightly. This event and those that followed made two thousand and sixteen an extremely traumatic year for my family and everyone’s responses were, and continue to be, extremely different. It would appear that mine was to attempt to change major aspects of my life, where I lived, my job, to only then realise that change was big and change was scary and change (due to the massive changes that had just occurred in my family) made me very, very uncomfortable. I was nervous about taking all of Ben’s stuff out of storage and moving it into a new place. I knew that our new living room was essentially going to be his, displaced from London to a tiny little flat in Stockport. I tried to mix things up, use his rug in the bedroom and ours in the main space, add different lamps and put my own books on his shelves. It was difficult as it wasn’t my stuff, well it was, but this didn’t seem right. That’s because it wasn’t right, it shouldn’t have been here, it should have been with him and he shouldn’t be dead, he should be here with us.


For a long time I found it difficult to actually live in the stuff. God forbid my partner weren’t to use a mat on the coffee table or crumbs were dropped on the sofa. Not only is this my Uncle’s stuff, it is also all of high quality. He was extremely meticulous, arguably a perfectionist, and all his belongings are beautiful and had to remain this way. My partner was very respectful of this and he took care to take care but this didn’t stop me being obsessive, short-tempered and mental about it all. Mix my mental with his mental and after just over a year of living here he became my ex.


Suddenly this all felt much more like adulthood than moving in in the first place did. It was agreed that he would move out and whilst he found somewhere we both continued to live in the same place. You may think this sounds horrendous but to be honest it was during this time that we were, in my opinion, much more honest, vocal and respectful towards each other and, apart from taking it in turns to sleep in the bed, it wasn’t too bad. The day he actually moved out was pretty difficult. I was suddenly remembering the day my dad moved out when I was a kid (not in a weird way, this is not some kind of Freudian analysis) and I was instantly drawn into a whole new level of heartbreak. (Personal NB to stop suppressing unresolved issues here…) It was then that all of a sudden, this little kind of by accident flat, became my first ever ‘only me’ home.


For the remainder of the tenancy I’ve lived on my own, just me, Ben’s furniture, and my own thoughts. It’s been great. I would thoroughly recommend this experience to all young women even if it were just for a short time like me. We live in a world where expectations, opinions and the pressure to conform is rife, especially as women. Live on your own. I have answered to no one. I’ve come and gone entirely as I pleased. I pay my own rent, my own bills. I am self sufficient (for the most part, but I have had help from my family, especially during the parts of my life that have been particularly challenging) and it is empowering. I’ve not done anything particularly exciting with this freedom, but I have existed on my own terms.

It was difficult at first this living on my own business. There were days when I felt so insignificant and strange as there was no other person to watch me exist. This sounds weird; I’ll try and explain. If I were to have a particularly good hair day, or make some really nice food then my brain could quite easily switch into ‘what’s the point, no one else knows’ mode and after talking to other people (well, actually women) I learned that this is probably quite natural. It also leads to something I think is really healthy and that is self-validation. I am someone who has consistently looked to external forces to validate my existence and my importance and this isn’t something I’d recommend. It’s too difficult, it’s cruel and self-deprecating and I found that even when I got outside praise I was still never truly happy. Living on my own has made me like myself. Not love, just like. I spend most of my time with me and have attempted to teach myself to sit with me, to stop constantly checking social media or texting someone, to just be happy with how things are, actually are, in real life at that moment.


I feel like I could continue writing about the experience of living on my own for a long time so I’m going to stop. I don’t want to be preachy, I want to just relay my own experience but when I feel something has benefited me so much I want everyone to give it a go! So, it’s on to my next step. I have plans to move in with a very good friend (being kind to my finances here) but we haven’t found the right place yet so it’s back to my mum’s for a while. I moved out nearly six years ago so this is going to be an adjustment but it is actually an adjustment I’m looking forward to. I’ve been hurt over the last two years and not just a bit. There’s been times when it feels my brain has been completely dismantled and awkwardly put back together and during some of the more stressful times I lost a lot of weight and was physically not my usual self. To go back to live with my mum is an act of self-love. I will continue to look after myself but there’s a big part of me that’s quite relieved that after all the big events that have taken place whilst I’ve lived here I can finally go back to my mum for some extra love.

I’m going to miss my flat, and I’m going to miss living amongst all of Ben’s things for a while but nothing is permanent and before I know it I’ll be whinging about having to get everything out of storage. Moving from here is the last turn of the page in this short chapter of my life and I am emotional but I know there are many more to come and on the whole I am happier, healthier and more myself than I have been in a long time and this is comforting.


I took a short break from packing yesterday and visited the Book and Record Fair. I was flicking through one bloke’s vinyl collection and suddenly saw a copy of Spanky Wilson’s Doin’ It. It was in Ben’s record collection and I’ve been trying to find my own copy for a long time. The bloke I bought it off (for £4, what a bargain!) looked like an ex-Chorlton-ite, someone who inhabited the place when it was cool and had been pushed out due to its rising prices and gentrification. He looked like the kind of bloke who would have lived in Chorlton around the same time that Ben did and we had a nice chat about soul and different bands, some I’d heard of and some I hadn’t. I came home with a sad-happy feeling. I only went to the fair due to living so close and it’ll probably be the last time I do for a while. I believe there’s something bigger and better than me, and that something seemed to push this vinyl into my hands just at the right moment. Moving for me forces me to process something different each time and it was nice that when I felt like I was losing a lot of what made me feel so close to Ben on a daily basis, this was dropped into my lap. Sometimes the world is a wonderful place.

Oh, and it’s a great album by the way, you should check it out.

Morrissey, So Much to Answer For

January 2018 Smiths Disco Band

I move in circles that love The Smiths. On my thirteenth birthday I was gifted three CDs: The Kooks (don’t judge me, at that tender age they appeared the most promising tall, skinny, curly-haired musicians around), The Stone Roses and The Smiths – Meat is Murder.

I was instantly enamoured with Meat is Murder. Brought up a vegetarian, I was in tune with the album’s sentiment and I remember feeling as if I had much more of a right to it than my peers as, I too, like Morrissey (and Marr who after the album’s release also became a vegetarian) believed meat to be nothing short of murder.

From that point on I learned what it’s like to truly love a bunch of northern blokes sporting musical instruments (or bunches of gladioli) and to stand by them in a staunchly uncompromising manner. Through my love of The Smiths I nurtured my argumentative tendencies and developed my ability to defend and reason, to the point where relationships ended and English teachers were converted. At the meagre age of fourteen I rather self assuredly declared that you simply couldn’t be a teacher of English Literature and not like The Smiths – his lyrics being poetry within their own right. By the end of the academic year the NQT (now friend) in question proudly exhibited a photograph of Morrissey behind her desk.

A cutting from the Observer that I’ve had on my wall for years.

The Smiths, as Tony Fletcher notes, have never defended themselves. People like me do it for them, passionately and more often that not, too enthusiastically for the sentiments we’re upholding. At risk of sounding tacky, they are very much like Marmite, both loved and hated in equal measure.

This is not to say that the general public at large shares a mutual love and respect for the Smiths. Due to Morrissey’s untrained and limited vocal range, which he compensated for in early days with the addition of yodelling, yelping, and the occasional grunt; abetted by the politically personal stance of his lyrics, which sought to tease, amuse, comfort, and confront […] aided by such a determined collective refusal to compromise that the Smiths were often misconstrued as awkward or arrogant, confirmed by the manner in which they stood musically and visually at direct odds to the mainstream soundtrack of the mid-1980s […] For all these reasons the Smiths were either loved or hated. There was no room for mild acceptance in between.

As Fletcher acknowledges, to love The Smiths (as it is not enough, or perhaps possible, to simply ‘like’ them) is to belong to a group that is outside of the mainstream. To identify with Morrissey and Marr is to affiliate oneself with the left-wingers, the vegetarians and pacifists of the world, to stand unashamedly outside of the collective.


From Meat is Murder I progressed onto Hatful of Hollow, The World Won’t Listen and Louder than Bombs. I discovered What Difference Does it Make? and This Charming Man. I remember one other girl at school liking The Smiths and she shared William, It Was Really Nothing and Some Girls are Bigger than Others. I couldn’t get enough. Fully out of the grunge phase that occupied me throughout my twelfth year I now lived for Morrissey and Marr.

It was around this time that the BBC aired The Seven Ages of Rock series and it was the final episode that I would become obsessed with. It was entitled What the World is Waiting For and focussed on the birth of British Indie and the subsequent explosion of Britpop. Less bothered about Oasis and Blur and their now immortalised endeavours for top spot on the album chart, I religiously watched the first half of the episode in which the rise and fall of The Smiths, and their influence on the British music scene as a whole, was painstakingly documented. I watched it every single day for months, having recorded it onto our Virgin box, each time learning something new and congratulating myself on my ability to hold onto this knowledge. Eventually my dad deleted it from our recordings library. I was gutted.

Re-issue, re-package, re-package/re-evaluate the songs/double-pack with a photograph/extra track, and a tacky badge.

It was here that I witnessed Morrissey’s infamous refusal of a microphone on Top of the Pops. If they were insisting he mimed, he would make it apparent. Morrissey, flailing around with a bunch of gladioli, singing about how he would go out if he had a stitch to wear, alongside a roll neck wearing Johnny Marr, was an image that epitomised coolness and non-conformity.

I remember being pleased that I had fallen so much in love with The Smiths. Now, I can’t imagine my life without them. When my parents announced that they were separating I shut myself in my room and played Bigmouth Strikes Again at full volume. They sound tracked many a journey to uni in Sheffield to the point where I wrote half my undergraduate dissertation on them. When I ended a four-year relationship last year Morrissey, Marr, Rourke and Joyce were there to vocalise my feelings and comfort my (extremely Morrissey-esque) aching heart. A Rush and a Push and the Land is Ours gets me out of bed most mornings (quite literally – it’s my alarm) and to commemorate receiving my Masters my dad bought me The Queen is Dead reissue. And, although I find its existence ironic (see Paint a Vulgar Picture) it’s still one of the most beautiful of my possessions. I Won’t Share You, the final track on Strangeways, is perhaps one of the most beautiful yet simultaneously heart-breaking songs I’ve ever heard. Morrissey’s voice on this album is at its most tender and Marr’s guitar at its most melancholy. Just for today it is my favourite Smiths album. Its final track is the perfect goodbye, a love song about an irretrievable relationship, with an ‘I don’t want you, but no one else can have you’ attitude. It is undeniably human and in my opinion would make an exceptional and emotional first dance!


If you were to visit my flat my love for all things Smiths is apparent, from my physical music collection, to the artwork on my walls, to the rather fabulous mug I drink my tea out of, to the books I keep on my shelves. When Penguin announced that Morrissey would be penning his autobiography and that it would be published in the realm of their Classics editions I was nothing short of ecstatic and amused. This, to the general public, was a sure sign of his arrogance and misconceived perception of himself. To me, it was a hilarious assertion of his knowledge of this perceived self-confidence. Only Steven Patrick Morrissey would have the ability to persuade Penguin to publish his autobiography as an instant classic.


Christmas morning 2013 saw me sleeping on my own floor, waking with an exceptional hangover and unwrapping this book. Not remotely bothered about any of my other presents (this, I had been waiting for) I began to read. Initially I blamed it on my emotional hung-over state; the fact that I couldn’t quite stomach his efforts, but as the day and subsequently weeks and months progressed it turned out I couldn’t handle his narration. I persevered however and a year later finally turned the page for the four hundred and fifty seventh time and completed the ordeal on a sun lounger in the South of France. It is a difficult read. There are no chapters; barely any sentences. It is the stream of consciousness of a damaged man with a persecution complex. This was the beginning of the end.

Johnny Marr’s however, was a complete contrast. Finished within two days, Marr conveys himself eloquently and tenderly. His experiences with different bands and musicians (in particularly those with The Smiths, and in sharp contrast to Morrissey) are treated with respect and resounding admiration. The negative parts of his life are acknowledged, yet not dwelt upon, and this makes for a mature work. Reading the final pages the reader is left with the impression that Johnny is just a top bloke who loves guitars, his peers, Manchester and his family. There is an entire lack of any animosity towards the dissolution of The Smiths and the court case that followed, whereas Morrissey’s portrayal suggests that it has haunted and infuriated him throughout his life.


As he’s aged, the public perception of Morrissey is that he has become more controversial. My opinion is that he knows what he’s doing and simply does it to gain a reaction. Normally, I laugh it off, acknowledge his ridiculousness and continue with my own life. However, recently he’s gone too far.

Last year, a friend of mine expressed her disgust with a certain Steven Patrick Morrissey as he announced an upcoming album tour that is defunct of any form of Manchester date. I felt a similar sentiment; who does he think he is? This icon of Northern misery refuses to play in the city that provided him with his best work. The man who once declared, ‘London is dead, London is dead’ etc. etc. is actually partaking in three (yes, three!) dates in that self-professed graveyard. His Northern stint begins in Newcastle and ends in Leeds. Surely it is only proper to see Morrissey perform in the North? And furthermore, not just the North but my North.

Northern regions, and more specifically Northern cities, are extremely distinct. Newcastle is as different to Leeds as the Amazon is to the Antarctic. Its industry is centred on coal mining and the impact of Thatcher’s Britain was felt in a wholeheartedly different way that far North. Newcastle is truly on the edge, easily overlooked, far from the capital and the centre of commerce. The attitudes in this version of the North are very different.

Leeds offers a further alternative version of Northerness. The city dealt in wool, which although perhaps not appearing to be, was exceptionally different to Manchester’s cotton. The aesthetic, attitudes and downfall all vary creating distinct versions of Northerners. As a proud Mancunian, a true descendent of Cottonopolis, I refuse to entertain the idea of watching Morrissey in Yorkshire.

Moving to LA as soon as he did demonstrates that Morrissey seems to have some sort of dissolution with Manchester. About as opposite as you could possibly get, I imagine Morrissey’s LA life is akin to Annie Hall. If you were to merge aspects of Woody Allen and Tony Roberts’ characters then you would be left with an accurate suggestion of how Morrissey conducts himself on the West Coast, with the cynicism and dissatisfaction of Allen and the narcissistic, self-conscious, obsessiveness of Roberts. It is easy to imagine him being driven around in a convertible covered with some ridiculous hood to protect against the effects of gamma.

For all his rational and welcome eighties radicalism, Morrissey is also entirely irrational. I do not intend to talk at length about his recent comments on high profile sexual assault allegations as this has been done. Dissatisfaction and disgust have been readily available and however he chooses to contend his words, the facts seem to speak for themselves. It is sad that I cannot now be both a feminist (or just decent human being) and a supporter of Morrissey. For all the defending I have mustered over the years, I feel let down. This is not a case of controversy for controversy’s sake, but rather the nonsensical delusions of an ageing man.

When he released Low in High School I know many Morrissey fans that were unwilling to listen based upon his increasingly challenging personal views. I don’t believe in this as a practice. I don’t listen to Michael Jackson because his music is awful, it just so happens that that also sits morally well with me. The pro-Israel stance through the second half of the album is somewhat unsettling, however musically, there are some really good tracks on there.

The Smiths and particularly Morrissey (as an outspoken, unapologetic, controversial figure) hold a special place in my being. They have inspired, comforted and supported me for eleven years. So, I will continue to go to Smiths Disco and relish in the weirdness that that invites. I will continue to wake up every morning to A Rush and a Push and the Land is Ours and feel as if I can (potentially) take on the world. I will continue to play Bigmouth Strikes Again at full volume in moments of crisis and take comfort in Johnny Marr’s cheerful, yet fatalistic guitar. And, above all, I will continue to staunchly defend the values and attitudes of these four outcasts from Greater Manchester, no matter how unpopular that may make me. In fact, in true Smithsonian fashion, that will only encourage me further.

Protesting the state of the world, the sign being in reference to Trump, in Manchester last year.

This is not England: Shane Meadows and the Problematic North


Location is never an accident in Shane Meadows’ work; it is meticulously searched for and manipulated. After This is England (2007) he released Somer’s Town (2008) and demonstrated a preoccupation with space so precise that he filmed in black and white, so that location appeared consistent throughout, as highlighted in this quote from Meadows himself:

I actually started taking photographs of the various locations, because there was a massive range of buildings from a massive range of times we ended up with a huge variation in colour. […] I had some of the photographs converted into black and white and suddenly it started to look like the same place rather than this mish-mash.[1]

As David Forrest suggests ‘this quote reveals within Meadows a profound concern with environment not simply as backdrop, but as an aspect of his visual repertoire that must be consciously manipulated to look or appear a certain way.’[2] This is also true within This is England; a film arguably set nowhere and everywhere simultaneously. Location is eclectic, with Meadows filming in various parts of the UK in order to convey the visual message he desires.

However it is not just the director obsessed with location, but reviewers as well. Critiquing This is England for The Guardian Peter Bradshaw suggests it is set ‘in the run-down Grimsby of 1983.’[3] Similarly, when reviewing This is England ’90 (2015), Paul Mason appears to ground the narrative in Sheffield with reference to ‘Gleadless Valley Estate.’[4] One of the issues with relying on these reviews is that they are not born from a desire to critically engage with either text. They exist in order to evaluate whether the work was enjoyable and depict that message to an audience whose motive is to determine whether they should watch Meadows’ work. Perhaps using specific ideas of place gives an audience a deeper understanding of the kind of text they will observe, even if this proves to be untrue.

It is not only journalists who have attempted to root the narrative within a definite location, but theoretical critics also. Sarah N. Petrovic suggests twice the setting of This is England. According to her work it ‘is set in an unspecified part of England’s Midlands’[5]. Similarly, later she provides a more intricate suggestion of space; ‘The film’s setting seemingly portrays the East Midlands with a coast’[6]. This assumption is linked to the director’s own autobiography. It is easy to understand why critics would assume that this is where the action takes place as there has been so much emphasis on Meadows’ personal history surrounding the initial release of the film, and his interviewers frequently return to this topic. However, there is little evidence within the actual production to suggest any truth to these claims.

When interviewing Meadows, Andrew Collin’s observes ‘it’s autobiographical to a degree [This is England], in that Shaun [(Thomas Turgoose)] is kind of you. […] Certain parts of you are in Shaun’[7], he also expresses, ‘I noticed [how] his name being Shaun Fields is a pun on your name.’[8] Throughout these statements Meadows smiles and nods and agrees with Collins and elaborates on scenes that occur within the film — such as the gang going ‘hunting’ — with an anecdote of how that scenario happened in reality. Meadows does not shy away from the autobiographical aspects of his work, and arguably encourages these readings by consistently discussing how his life at that stage was parallel to Shaun’s, to a degree. He also openly discusses his upbringing in Uttoxeter and the impact this had on himself and his work. These two notions combined, although Meadows never states that the action takes place in these areas, suggest to the viewer that this small town in the East Midlands could perhaps be where the narrative unfolds.

Throughout this essay I will argue that to ground Meadows’ feature film in a specific place is unrealistic. Meanwhile, I will attempt to demonstrate how This is England is a film firmly rooted in the north, looking to the cinematic and critical techniques Meadows employs in his treatment of space and location, as well as the socio-political-cultural history in which the film is set. I will then discuss how Meadows’ treatment of space changes by the final instalment of the subsequent television series. I will argue that within This is England ’90, Meadows’ approach to location has become less unidentifiable through his deployment of landmark buildings such as Park Hill. This, I will submit, makes the viewing of the final This is England instalment problematic. I will debate that throughout the franchise Meadows presents his viewer with a homogenised version of the north and that consequently including buildings that could be considered reasonably iconic creates something of an issue. Location becomes identifiable; viewers that know the space will have their own personal connotations relating to it. The estates Meadows uses in the final series were important architectural ventures during their conception and continue to be lived in today. They mean different things to different communities. To present these areas within this homogenised version of the north, I will argue, is not necessarily fair, ethical or successful.

This is Northern: The British New Wave and Cultural Shorthand

Dave Russell discusses how ‘the concept of the homogenous North […] is a dangerous simplification.’[9] This homogenous north, he argues, has existed since ‘representatives from the entire cultural field were drawn to the industrialising North in the late eighteenth and earlier nineteenth centuries and their observations have provided a convenient set of references and images ever since.’[10] He argues that ‘the North that has emerged on screen has been extremely restricted geographically’[11] and that ‘central to this reductive process has been the tendency to locate films not in definite, knowable places but in carefully chosen, often stereotypical terrain providing an easily recognisable and swiftly assimilated version of the region.’[12] As I submitted during the introduction, Meadows demonstrates an attitude towards space that sees him manipulating areas and regions in order to make them appear as a tangible whole. Filming This is England in disparate locations, but presenting them as a small neighbourhood within the film, Meadows arguably conforms to Russell’s theory that presents a homogenised view of the north as a location. Through a series of close readings I will examine how Meadows presents his viewer with a landscape that is significantly northern, and explore how he cinematically aligns himself with the New Wave directors of the 1960s which has a significant role in locating the film in a northern setting.

The New Wave was an important, catalytic cinematic moment in British history. Directors rejected the use of studios, shooting their films instead on location, often in the northern, industrial towns that would form the crux of Meadows’ work. There are two important factors relating to place consistently employed within the New Wave films. One is the ‘view-of-our-town-from-that-hill’ and the other poetic realism. According to John Hill, ‘Poetic realism at once represents and transcends the ordinary, the mundane, the uninteresting. And it also produces the working-class character as the […] victim of the city.’[13] Essentially, poetic realism is the practice of using ordinary, real-life locations and romanticising them within the film to make them appear and feel more emotive or to assign them with a greater meaning.

Place within This is England is, in this sense, used poetically. It acts as a character in its own right, arguably becoming the film’s central character, privileged above everything else. Space here exists before the characters, with actors only ever entering the frame after the audience has been exposed to a shot of a particular landscape. In his work, Forrest suggests why Meadows could be considered to be Britain’s latest art-house export by way of his alignment with New Wave tendencies. Most significantly for this work, this similarity is found within Meadows’ technique of ‘removing space from narrative, to invite audience engagement with environment on aesthetic and thus potentially poetic grounds.’[14] He suggests that location within Meadows’ work does not simply exist as somewhere for the narrative to take place but rather as important narrative function within itself, much like the films of the New Wave forty years previous.

Screen Shot 2017-05-26 at 10.52.51.png

This is England, Shane Meadows, Optimum Releasing (2007)

Screenshot from 2015-04-24 08_41_45.png

A Taste of Honey, Tony Richardson, British Lion Films (1961)

The two images above are strikingly similar. The first is a still from Meadows’ This is England where the viewer observes Shaun alone and isolated in a dark space, with the city lit up behind him. The following image is from Tony Richardson’s A Taste of Honey (1961) and also foregrounds a dark space with an isolated main character set against the city in the background. Although not the shot’s primary concern, the city is strikingly obvious to the viewer due to the fact that is the main source of light. This combined with its photographic-like framing demonstrate its constant presence and significance to the viewer. Both Meadows and Richardson frame the city with architecture in these shots. The viewer knows that A Taste of Honey is set and filmed in Salford, and that that city is what they are witnessing. The heavy build up of terraced houses, and the looming image of the factory chimney, are images associated with the north throughout these films. Although This is England does not include a host of terraced houses, the five tower blocks in the background of the shot convey a similar message. The terraces may not exist anymore but people living on top of each other in crowded conditions is still portrayed. Over the water is a set of units and the disused building that Shaun is playing in appears to be a relic of industrialisation. This is not a seafront designed for pleasure but rather industry, albeit industry in decline.

Screen Shot 2017-05-26 at 10.52.37.png

This is England, Shane Meadows, Optimum Releasing (2007)

These images are lifted from a sequence wherein the viewer witnesses Shaun travelling around his hometown alone. Before leaving the city for these more open spaces the viewer observes him on his bike, washing cars and buying sweets. Place is a privileged component within this sequence, but it is only when Shaun leaves the confines of the built environment that its poetic qualities really become apparent, as with the New Wave. A key feature within the films of the New Wave is characters leaving town for a day or an afternoon to travel to the country as ‘it is in the countryside or by the seaside that the characters can most be themselves’[15]. Similarly here the viewer sees Shaun leave the town for the open space of the beach and in this sequence space is used ‘as a signifier of self’[16].

Shaun is isolated. He is lonely and friendless, and the audience is aware that he is being bullied at school and lacks a father figure. The use of a grounded and wrecked boat indicates a character not moving forward but rather one trapped in their situation.

Screen Shot 2017-05-26 at 10.53.12.png

This is England, Shane Meadows, Optimum Releasing (2007)

Screen Shot 2017-05-26 at 10.53.27.png

This is England, Shane Meadows, Optimum Releasing (2007)

The images from the beach are exceptionally similar to Richardson’s deployment of this same location in The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner (1962).

Screenshot from 2017-05-30 10_32_09.png

The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner, Tony Richardson, British Lion Films (1962)

Screenshot from 2017-05-30 10_32_56 

The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner, Tony Richardson, British Lion Films (1962)

The vast expanses of ocean indicate the prospect of escape is always there but not achievable, the viewer has already deciphered this through Shaun’s grounding in the boat. Escape is a common theme in the New Wave films, with characters leaving the city but inevitably returning. In both films the figures are small, diminished by the location they inhabit. The space works to poetically suggest this concept of freedom that is ultimately unachievable. The diminishing value of the space demonstrates how the characters ultimately have no control, suggesting that their attempts to leave the industrial city are futile, as they will always ultimately return.

As demonstrated, there are moments from the New Wave that Meadows essentially replicates within This is England. His alignment with the movement, as Forrest suggests, is clear, and space does exist ‘as positive affirmations of authorship within a wider sphere of art cinema’[17]. However through demonstrating this alignment it is also reasonable to suggest that Meadows therefore presents his viewer with a stylistically northern film, albeit a ‘literally invented one, a collection of suitable images.’[18]

Maggie is a Twat: Socio-Political Concerns and the State-of-the-Nation Film

Meadows’ 1980s setting is also an indicator of region. ‘In the period 1979-82 unemployment more than doubled and unemployment stayed at over 3 million from 1982 until 1986.’[19] ‘The decline of manufacturing and the rising importance of the service sector accentuated divisions between north and south, insofar as it was the north where manufacturing jobs were most often lost’[20]. Meadows’ film and subsequent franchise portrays a jobless working-class youth in a neglected industrial heartland demonstrative of a northern setting.

Screen Shot 2017-05-26 at 11.02.57.png

This is England, Shane Meadows, Optimum Releasing (2007)

The use of archive footage indicates the time period. Within seven seconds of the film beginning the viewer witnesses then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. Meadows’ footage is a mixture of celebratory moments – the advancement of the computer, Charles and Diana’s wedding – and negative aspects of the period; the miner’s strikes, nationalist marches and the Falklands War. The images of war are the most harrowing and Meadows cuts between these and footage of Thatcher encouraging his viewer to place these ideas together. Consequently, Thatcher’s negative connotations are established early in the film.

Screen Shot 2017-05-26 at 11.05.12.png

This is England, Shane Meadows, Optimum Releasing (2007)

The image above shows a machine making CDs, a new piece of technology, demonstrating advancement. This shot also highlights the lack of work; in the factory people have been replaced with machines. Meadows uses this footage alongside scenes of riots, reminding the viewer of the industrial decline and subsequent strikes that the Conservative government caused during the period. Although a signifier of technological advancement, in this context it demonstrates something detrimental. The manufacturing of a CD – the new technology – links to Denis and Ian Derbyshire’s argument:

The decline of the ‘smokestack’ and second wave industries in the traditional industrial regions […] and the growth of the new high-tech and service sector industries in southern and eastern England […] widened regional economic differentials[21]

There is no place for ‘high-tech’ industries within Meadows’ film and his characters, minus Lol (Vicky McClure), do not work. There does not appear to be a service sector to participate in and Meadows’ presentation of a non-working working-class suggests a northern location over one in the south.

Meadows’ working-class community are isolated and frustrated with their lack of influence, Combo’s (Stephen Graham) antagonistic speech being a good example of this. In the 1979 and 1983 elections ‘only 16 per cent [of Conservative MPs were] from the north of England, the smallest proportion in over a hundred years’[22] and the film’s anti-Thatcher sentiment is clear. Although not explicitly mentioned through dialogue, it is clear through the environment the characters inhabit.

Screen Shot 2017-05-26 at 11.09.47.png

This is England, Shane Meadows, Optimum Releasing (2007)

 ‘The physical space of This is England is covered with graffiti, a sign of people trying to project themselves onto the landscape and to define themselves by marking their ideology.’[23] The graffiti in the shot above is shown twice, both with Shaun. Once alone in flares with all his hair, and later with Combo’s gang in with fake Doctor Martens and shaved head. The contrast between the two images of Shaun, isolation versus acceptance in a group demonstrates how Thatcher’s policies affected a wide range of people. Shaun is affected through Thatcher’s foreign policy and loss of his father, whilst Combo is affected through his hatred of immigration. Shaun is accepted into his group as the government too has failed him. As Snelson and Sutton suggest ‘subcultural youth collectivity is a strategy for filling the voids that Conservative policies had created while countering the Thatcherite ideology of individualism.’[24]

The cinema of the period was ‘divided between two main types: on the one hand a traditional […] cinema preoccupied with the past versus a more unorthodox, and socially aware, cinema concerned with the present.’[25] Hill discusses that ‘the latter cinema’[26], and the cinema that I will argue Meadows also aligns himself with, ‘is also a cinema which is itself predominantly critical of Thatcherism and indignant about the social tensions and hardships that resulted from the spread of Thatcherite policies and culture.’[27] Hill suggests that ‘what became known as ‘the state-of-the-nation’ film during the 1980s may be linked to a longstanding tradition of socially critical cinema in Britain.’[28] Meadows adheres to this through the ‘inclusion of hitherto ‘invisible’ social groups.’[29] Throughout the 1980s class was less simply defined and the lines that separated society became more complex with a new focus on issues such as gender, ethnicity and sexuality and, ‘it is this sense of pluralism which characterizes many of the ‘state-of-the-nation’ films’[30]. Meadows’ film does exactly this. In an increasingly classless society Meadows focuses on different aspects within the characters that would define and divide them with race the most prominent issue.

Meadows’ film subtly conveys the effects of Thatcherism on a group of characters without explicitly mentioning it. Through his use of archive footage, radio broadcasts of the period and stylistic methods Meadows critiques Thatcher and includes her as an ever-present character within the film although she is only mentioned once. The negative effect Thatcher’s policies had on communities were more readily felt in the north, as previously demonstrated through the figures. Additionally, further alignment with another cinematic tradition allows the viewer to locate Meadows’ film within a northern setting alongside the socio-cultural landscape it is a part of.

This is Sheffield: Park Hill and This is England ‘90

Screen Shot 2017-05-31 at 09.03.51.png

This is England ’90, Shane Meadows, Channel Four (2015)

 This is Park Hill, Sheffield. ‘Built between 1957 and 1960 on hilltops overlooking the city of Sheffield [… Park Hill …] re-house[d] over 2,000 people from slum clearance areas.’[31] This was the golden age of post-war architecture, a brutalist utopia ‘perhaps most famous for its elevated gangways, dubbed ‘streets in the sky’, which, to many people’s fascination allowed the milk float to access every home.’[32]

Screen Shot 2017-05-25 at 15.06.37

This is England ’90, Shane Meadows, Channel Four (2015)

Meadows’ establishing shots continue to indicate that this is not a specific location, there are no long shots with the city in view, and to identify the location through what it overlooks is not possible. The city, in the background, is a haze. Meadows uses the building in a similar way that he has employed location throughout the entire franchise. Several establishing shots are provided, and so the viewer is again forced to observe the space used simply as that: place. Again, it is not just a space for action to unfold in, but somewhere that conveys meaning and exists within its own right. To look at the façade of Park Hill does not necessarily mean it is Park Hill. The section Meadows chooses to film does not include any colour, as Owen Hatherley notes, what Urban Splash did when they took over the renovation of this Grade II listed building was remove ‘all the bricks, to be replaced with anodized aluminium panels, replicating the colour scheme while entirely abandoning true materials.’[33] Park Hill’s colour, originally produced in bricks in order to create a steady gradient of tone that moved across the building, was an extremely distinctive quality, one that stood out to its witness from afar. For Meadows to not include something so distinctive indicates his desire for this space to remain nowhere, although arguably he has not succeeded.

Screen Shot 2017-05-31 at 09.04.49.png

This is England ’90, Shane Meadows, Channel Four (2015)

As Meadows films this shot from such a low angle the viewer is subsequently forced to focus on the floor, showing how ‘claustrophobic walk-ups or corridors were rejected in favour of 12ft wide ‘streets in the sky’.’[34] This is arguably Park Hill’s defining feature, to ‘replicate the tightly packed street life of the area in the air’[35]. As mentioned, Park Hill’s walkways provided much fascination; alongside the fact you could walk from one end of the complex to the other without ever having to traverse the ground level. There were few other buildings designed in this way, either in Sheffield or the wider scope of Great Britain. Filming at ground level focuses the viewer’s attention on the width of the shot. The centrality of Harvey (Michael Socha) draws attention to the width of the corridor as Meadows adds a sense of scale with through including a character. Similarly figure fourteen demonstrates the scale through the curve of the building, indicating that these walkways do in fact lead elsewhere and that we are not observing a straightforward tower block construction.


Screen Shot 2017-05-31 at 08.26.26

This is England ’90, Shane Meadows, Channel Four (2015)

It is strange that Meadows, usually so meticulous with location, would choose in his final series to use such an architecturally distinctive space. Hatherley suggests that ‘Enjoyable as these tensions [between English Heritage and Urban Splash] are, they obscure a deeply complex story, one which perfectly exemplifies Britain’s tortured relationship with its recent past.’[36] Perhaps Meadows is aware that viewers will now be able to identify a place in which he films, but favours the connotations of that place over maintaining anonymity. Meadows’ use of a building in decline, and with much dispute over its future, he continues to suggest ideas regarding the state of the nation, and consequently, as an audience, we return to the concepts that This is England evokes. ‘Unsurprisingly, such an innovative and large-scale project attracted much national interest’[37] during its construction and throughout subsequent years. Using a building that evokes ideas of a time when planners wished to make ordinary people’s lives better, and became significant nationally, brings the franchise full circle. Throughout This is England ‘86 and ’88 the viewer is drawn into an ever deeper personal story through Lol. This is England ’90, as Meadows’ ‘full stop […] in pencil’[38] has brought the viewer back to the nation’s prevailing issues, where it currently stands, where it’s been, and perhaps where it’s going.

However, ‘Banham, pondered […] whether the idiom was an ‘Ethic or Aesthetic’, so firmly marked was it by social concerns.’[39] There have always been ethical issues and responsibilities surrounding Park Hill and consequently they surround its use within Meadows’ work. It has been a significant part of a host of communities’ lives. When inhabitants were moved to facilitate its renovation ‘three hundred […] of the two thirds of residents […] have specifically registered an interest in returning, indicating that the building is still held in high esteem by those it was designed for.’[40] For Meadows to locate this building in his version of the north is not necessarily fair. Increasingly ‘region and place have come to be even more intrinsic to people’s sense of self’[41] due to factors such as globalisation. For a filmmaker to take an iconic part of a region and locate it within an area that is not true to reality is disorientating and diminishing. As Russell notes, ‘while the pleasurable recognition of familiar sights doubtless added much to the enjoyment of films shot locally there is little evidence of communities experiencing a genuine ownership of them. The North on screen has generally been constructed too far south for that.’[42]

It is problematic to use this location as an attempt to depict realistic, working-class characters when it has such overpoweringly recognisable qualities. When the history of the building is dissected, it becomes apparent that it is no longer a space for that community. Some of the inhabitants moved to accommodate regeneration would have been part of the original working-class who were moved there out of slums. For Meadows to use the estate to depict his own version of a struggling working-class is arguably unethical as it is being filmed on a site where a working-class in turmoil did live. Park Hill is frequently associated with decay and Hatherley believes this to have begun in the nineties, as Russell notes, ‘the modernizations of the 1960s were stigmatised as planning disasters, imprisoning the local population in no-go estates and tower blocks’. In this context, Meadows appears to be utilising the space as cultural shorthand for poverty. When the estate’s caretaker is interviewed he has this to say, ‘I love the old girl. She’s an old lady who’s fallen on hard times.’[43] As Hatherley suggests, ‘Park Hill has inspired the sense of belonging its architects tried to create’[44] and so for Meadows to attempt to suggest that this building belongs to nowhere specific is insulting to its residents, architects and those who know it best.

Ultimately through his alignment with the New Wave, the state-of-the-nation film and the period he chooses to definitively set his work in Meadows succeeds in presenting his viewer with a version of the north that is comfortingly familiar. It is within This is England ’90 that this sense of place is disrupted and the viewer becomes disorientated with use of such a significant building. This essay has attempted to understand Meadows’ reasons for making such a decision and has suggested why this may have been made. However, it has also noted how making such a decision was unsuccessful in conjunction with the rest of his franchise. A film and series that was initially applicable to a nation became more specific in This is England ’90 through Meadows’ use of a famous Sheffield landmark and the viewer, if not familiar with the area, is left to question whether the issues and themes are still applicable to them.

[1] Shane Meadows, Quoted in: David Forrest, ‘Shane Meadows and the British New Wave: Britain’s Hidden Art Cinema’, Studies in European Cinema, 6:2-3 (2009), 191-201, (p. 200).

[2] Shane Meadows, Quoted in: David Forrest, ‘Shane Meadows and the British New Wave: Britain’s Hidden Art Cinema’, Studies in European Cinema, 6:2-3 (2009), 191-201, (p. 200).

[3] Peter Bradshaw, ‘This is England’, The Guardian (2007), <https://www.theguardian.com/film/2007/apr/27/drama2>, (para. 3).

[4] Paul Mason, ‘This is England ’90: when the working class still had hope’, The Guardian (2015), < https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/14/this-is-england-90-when-working-class-still-had-hope?CMP=share_btn_tw>, (para. 12).

[5] Sarah N. Petrovic, ‘Changing Spaces of Englishness: Psychogeography in This is England and Somers Town’, Shane Meadows Critical Essays, (Edinburgh University Press Ltd, 2013), 127-141, p. 129.

[6] Sarah N. Petrovic, ‘Changing Spaces of Englishness: Psychogeography in This is England and Somers Town’, Shane Meadows Critical Essays, (Edinburgh University Press Ltd, 2013), p. 130.

[7] Andrew Collins, Quoted in: Edinburgh International Television Festival, ‘This is England ’90 – Shane Meadows Q&A’, YouTube (2015), <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHvYs7yAcA&gt;

[8] Andrew Collins, Quoted in: Edinburgh International Television Festival, ‘This is England ’90 – Shane Meadows Q&A’, YouTube (2015), <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHvYs7yAcA&gt;

[9] Dave Russell, ‘Looking North Northern England and the National Imagination’, (Manchester University Press, 2004), p. 18.

[10] Dave Russell, ‘Looking North Northern England and the National Imagination’, (Manchester University Press, 2004), p. 24.

[11] Dave Russell, ‘Looking North Northern England and the National Imagination’, (Manchester University Press, 2004), p. 178.

[12] Dave Russell, ‘Looking North Northern England and the National Imagination’, (Manchester University Press, 2004), p. 179.

[13] John Hill, Quoted in: David Forrest, ‘Shane Meadows and the British New Wave: Britain’s Hidden Art Cinema’, Studies in European Cinema, 6:2-3 (2009), 191-201, (p. 198).

[14] David Forrest, ‘Shane Meadows and the British New Wave: Britain’s Hidden Art Cinema’, Studies in European Cinema, 6:2-3 (2009), 191-201, (p. 199).

[15] John Hill, ‘Sex, Class and Realism’, (British Film Institute Publishing, 1986), p. 158.

[16] David Forrest, ‘Shane Meadows and the British New Wave: Britain’s Hidden Art Cinema’, Studies in European Cinema, 6:2-3 (2009), 191-201, (p. 198).

[17] David Forrest, ‘Shane Meadows and the British New Wave: Britain’s Hidden Art Cinema’, Studies in European Cinema, 6:2-3 (2009), 191-201, (p. 194).

[18] Dave Russell, ‘Looking North Northern England and the National Imagination’, (Manchester University Press, 2004), p. 179.

[19] John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 6.

[20] John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 7.

[21] Denis Derbyshire, Ian Derbyshire, Quoted in: John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 7.

[22] David McCrone, Quoted in: John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 14.

[23] Sarah N. Petrovic, ‘Changing Spaces of Englishness: Psychogeography in This is England and Somers Town’, Shane Meadows Critical Essays, (Edinburgh University Press Ltd, 2013), 127-141, p. 130.

[24] Tim Snelson, Emma Sutton, Quoted in: Robert Murphy, ‘After Laughter Comes Tears: Passion and Redemption in This is England ‘88’, Shane Meadows Critical Essays, (Edinburgh University Press Ltd, 2013), 203-209, p. 80.

[25] Stone, Quoted in: John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 133.

[26] John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 133.

[27] John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 133.

[28] John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 134.

[29] John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 135.

[30] John Hill, ‘British Cinema in the 1980s’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 135.

[31] Matthew Hollow, ‘Governmentality on the Park Hill estate: the rationality of public housing’, Urban History, Vol. 37, Issue 1, (2010), 117-135, p. 117.

[32] Matthew Hollow, ‘Governmentality on the Park Hill estate: the rationality of public housing’, Urban History, Vol. 37, Issue 1, (2010), 117-135, p. 117.

[33] Owen Hatherley, ‘A Guide to the New Ruins of Great Britain’, (Verso, 2011), p. 99.

[34] Owen Hatherley, ‘A Guide to the New Ruins of Great Britain’, (Verso, 2011), p. 90.

[35] Owen Hatherley, ‘A Guide to the New Ruins of Great Britain’, (Verso, 2011), p. 90.

[36] Owen Hatherley, ‘A Guide to the New Ruins of Great Britain’, (Verso, 2011), p. 89.

[37] Matthew Hollow, ‘Governmentality on the Park Hill estate: the rationality of public housing’, Urban History, Vol. 37, Issue 1, (2010), 117-135, p. 118.

[38] Shane Meadows, ‘Interview with Shane Meadows’, Channel Four, < http://www.channel4.com/programmes/this-is-england-90/articles/all/interview-with-shane-meadows/3672>, (para. 9).

[39] Owen Hatherley, ‘A Guide to the New Ruins of Great Britain’, (Verso, 2011), p. 89.

[40] Owen Hatherley, ‘A Guide to the New Ruins of Great Britain’, (Verso, 2011), p. 99.

[41] Ieuan Franklin, ‘Introduction’, Regional Aesthetics Mapping UK Media Cultures, (Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), 1-13, p. 2.

[42] Dave Russell, ‘Looking North Northern England and the National Imagination’, (Manchester University Press, 2004), p. 188.

[43] Owen Hatherley, ‘A Guide to the New Ruins of Great Britain’, (Verso, 2011), pp. 99-100.

[44] Owen Hatherley, ‘A Guide to the New Ruins of Great Britain’, (Verso, 2011), p. 100.