Oatley didn't want a Coles because it probably was an indication of a few things. First it probably meant the reduction of custom to local businesses in the area. Second it also indicates a violation of the community ethics. Oatley is proud of its suburban village image that it has carved out for itself; the last old- fashioned bastion against corporately overrun neighbouring suburbs like Hurstville and Rockdale. Having a Coles in Oatley sets a frightening precedent; Coles represents a monolithic corporation shadowing the village setting and community atmosphere. Third it also meant the ungluing of community cohesiveness. Shopping at local businesses probably increases the level of cooperation and happiness within that local area so by Coles setting up their convenient practical supermarket people shop less locally and more corporately; thus disabling the potential for real community connections.
Despite 'the rage' Oatley still got a Coles and yet Oatley; the hallowed bastion of village atmosphere; remains. It makes me wonder about what real community investment looks like. Oatley is a fairly affluent suburb and people here probably don't want for very much apart from a trimmer backside and a 44 inch Plasma. For all the 'village atmosphere' that is here there really isn't any community investment or exciting opportunities for young people. I think the whole objection to Coles was more of a snobby status thing. So that people who lived here could say that they are still living inside the dream of pre- corporate Australia in some throwback era long forgotten in most of St George.
1 comment:
we've lived in oatley for around 13 years. you're on the right track with this. a lot of it is snobbery, but mostly i think they just want it quiet and unchanging. (i've warmed up to the snobby, old-fashioned, anglo-centric, exessively religious oatley. it's like living in a movie.)
by the way, we didn't mean to creep you out with the poem...sorries. :[
Post a Comment