London Soho

In the early nineteenth century Soho was known for its nightlife and fashion. However, in the mid-nineteenth century it declined due to the changes in the city’s social dynamics. Soho saw wealthy people abandoning their homes in Soho and moving into west London, which paved the way for the settlement of foreigners, artists, and musicians. Punch’s 1852 newspaper depiction of the cholera outbreak set the foundation for debates about overcrowding in Soho and introduced the debate between the connection of foreign settlers and decreased hygiene. The rise in prostitution and gang crime for which foreigners were blamed were used as a negative rhetoric to depict the rapid changes in Soho, historian Roy Porter argues that ‘Dislocation and relocating was always occurring- nothing ever stood still, nothing was constant except mobility itself.’^[1]  This essay identifies why Soho dramatically changed between the 1850’s and 1950’s by exploring key moments that assisted in the transformation of Soho – such as the social changes and movement of people and to provide an understanding of people were used  as a tool in the development of its nightlife, and how the entertainment industry changed the face of Soho.

Two significant events took place in London that changed the way people thought about living in the city: firstly, the 1665 plague that spread across London and turned London into a breeding ground for viruses, which encouraged people to consider living outside of London in uncongested towns; secondly, the Fire of London in 1666, which caused people to move away from London to seek shelter, which saw buildings left unoccupied. Evidence of the damage from the fire in the poorest areas can be seen in the 1666 London Gazette article which reported ‘that this fire happened in a part of the Town, where, tho the Commodities were not very rich, yet there were so bulky that they could not well be removed, so that the Inhabitants of that part where it first began have sustained very great loss.’^[2] Little sympathy was depicted for the aftermath of the fire, the crime rate rose due to no jobs and the rise in prostitution grew rapidly. Evidence of attitudes towards migrant prostitutes can be seen in the 1851 The Evening Standard article which reported that from the statement of the police it appeared ‘that owing to the great increase of loose women, principally foreign, and their shameless conduct in the public streets, the inhabitants had made complaints to the Police.’^[3] Author James Morton highlights the case of Chancellor of the Exchequer, William Ewart Gladstone ‘met with a young girl in Long Arce and brought her back to her lodgings in King Street’, and used bribery to hide the event. Morton suggests that prostitution was a greater entity that embraced police corruption and gang crimes.[4] Morton's depiction of Regents Street ‘as the haunt of prostitutes’ suggests that organised crime was operating under the noses of political powers.[5]

The changes in social dynamic after the Great fire of London, could be said to have contributed to further social changes in the 19th century. The movement of people away from London saw the upper class moving towards the more desirable Mayfair  with easy access to poplar Hyde Park. Vacant buildings in Soho were now embassies and others occupied by MPs and ambassadors. At a time where displacement was common due to wars and famine, people moved around to find work. Indeed, it can be said that there was a mixed reaction to the influence of foreigners as the 19th century progressed. Generalised racial stereotypes were used for all immigrants, tarnishing their characters as ‘undesirable semi-aliens subject to some discrimination.’^[6]  Soho was now seeing a peak in overcrowding, pushing people further away from the area.

Many Italian and German migrants were feared for their political influence. Karl Marx, political journalist and politician, settled in Dean Street, Soho with his family after being exiled from Germany and other countries in 1849 due to his revolutionary ideas. Marx established himself at the heart of the migrant community in Soho, where ideologies such as anarchism and communism were being established through the Communist League. Soho was gaining a reputation for being dangerous. The consistent blame on migrants for the decline in Soho in the mid-19th century was also depicted in the 1850 Cholera outbreak illustrated article in Punch Magazine. The depiction reinforced stereotypes of immigrants by drawing attention to the overcrowding of Soho, suggesting that cholera was caused by the influx of migrants and poor hygiene and air. The Medical Examiners 1852 report suggested that there was no clear link to the outbreak and that ‘sanitary defects which embarrass the excretive purification of the human body—whether by breathing or otherwise, do naturally tend in the same direction as the causes of Cholera, and are liable—if only by indirect means, to become accessory in its destructive work.’^[7] However, Epidemiologist Dr John Snow argued ‘that cholera was carried by water, and he dramatically confirmed his theory a few years later by proving all the cholera victims around Broad (now Broadwick) Street, Soho, had drawn water from the same pump.’^[8] Nevertheless, his findings were not well received by the public, and people continued to believe that the outbreak was caused by filthy overcrowded immigrant areas. Social researcher Charles Booth's 1890 investigation identified the economic geography of Soho residents. Booth’s colour coded map highlighted the extreme poverty in pockets of Soho, however most of west London was dominated by wealth, which can be said contributed to the rise in the entertainment and luxury shopping industry. 

Cosmopolitanism was now evolving in Soho, however diversity and crime were interlinked which can be seen in the debate around Greek street. With the emergence of ‘societies and clubs of the Italian colony, including the waiters’ Club Cooperative on Greek Street.’^[9] Greek street was now a hot topic of debate around Soho, raising questions about how Cosmopolitanism was shaping the area.  Migrants, however, were leaving their mark on Soho in the early 20th century by introducing the dining out experience of the ‘restaurant’. The transformation of the restaurants changed the way people saw dining and entertainment, theatres were moving away from the traditional opera shows to full variety shows with dancers and singers. Historian Panikos Panayi argues that ‘While the evolution of modern London remains inconceivable without the role of migrants, they may have had a more profound impact upon eating out than any other aspect of history of the city.’^[10] Panayi suggested that the idea of food consumption and tastes had now changed which transformed the idea of nightlife and enjoyment. Although Panayi’s argument depicts the social and financial benefits of the expansion of Soho’s nightlife, it can be said that the food industry was a catalyst for gang violence and crime. Notorious gangsters such as the Sabini gang changed the face of Soho and had interests in gambling and drinking establishments. Soho was a haven for gang operations due to the number of clubs that had opened by the early twentieth century. The sale of sex was a protected trade where women were ‘minded by their bullies, they were on every corner: there were restaurants that were facades for brothels and then as now massage parlours to which young women were recruited as ‘‘nurses’’.^[11] Crime was now a fixture of Soho’s streets and embedded with the entertainment industry and, gangs used access to restaurants and clubs for drug dealing, prostitution and crime.

The Empire theatre was home to ballet shows where men were entertained by women performing dances such as the controversial cancan; debates suggest that Soho was moving more towards a sordid culture with performers such as Maud Allen, who enticed Londoners with her nude performances. The collaboration between ‘Cockney comedy singers, followed by bohemian acrobats’ welcomed foreigners and British natives to the shows which depicted Britannia on show programs to reinforce the presence of the British empire.[12] Allan’s shows were proven to embrace men and women and were successful in depicting the relevance of women's sexuality and feminism. Soho’s nightlife embraced Allen’s popularity by dedicating Salome Dinner Dances event in Mayfair for women to dress as Allen and perform for each other and the New York Times picked up on the story. It can be said that the emergence of provocative theatre performances set the foundation for exploring sexuality as well as a new found entertainment realm in Soho’s nightlife. The idea of stardom was now embedded in Soho and new revolutionary ideologies about sexuality were expanding.

The popularity in the entertainment industry was taking a new form: ‘bottle parties’ became the latest trend of the 1930s, and nightclubs were in decline. Bottle parties allowed drinkers to gain access to a party with paying a single fee at the door. Immigrants all played a lead role in the new and improved nightlife and Black performers were the entertainers in jazz clubs. Clubs were becoming a place for uniting through the struggles of the First World War. It can be said that the early-twentieth century saw significant changes in Soho; foreign influence was shifting Soho’s ideas, and the new generation was breaking existing social boundaries. Although the war brought economic decline, it was also an opportunity for newfound freedom. The Colony Room Club on Dean Street, where famous artists such as Francis Bacon gathered in the 1940s, allowed visitors to drink until 11:30 pm, which was controversial. Soho was an inviting area and ‘the Colony Room was renowned as an afternoon drinking club for spirits, bottled beer, champagne, sex and clever conversation. It became known for its open-minded acceptance of all races.’^[13] Soho was leaving the prejudices and judgments of Edwardian Britain behind and reinventing itself into a cosmopolitan hotspot.

1950s Soho was thus home to youth culture and coffee shops were the hotspots where young people gathered to listen to music and meet. Coffee shops drew the attention of young hopeful musicians as places where they could play to gain the attention of people in the music industry. The age of rock and roll was the driving force behind rapid social changes – from the theatre goers to the coffee shop. Teenagers were not able to drink in pubs; thus, they created ‘their own distinctive identities away from the watchful suburban eye: to pose, flirt, sing, smoke, and watch the latest live music with a plenteous supply of coffee, Coca Cola and cigarettes.’^[14] The age of the teenager was transforming Soho’s nightlife from a sexualised criminal underworld into a vibrant, hip, multicultural one, where casual meeting points were more desirable than theatres and nightclubs. Soho had made significant progress in overcoming its reputation of filth and deviation and rebranded itself as the hub of bohemian London.

In conclusion, although Soho belongs to a greater entity – Britain – its evolution can be considered a reflection of the international community. The changing faces of Soho’s community have been influenced by multiple factors such as war, disease and social status; however, it has been more significantly shaped by migrants. Although immigration was initially considered to put extra pressure on wages and housing, it is evident that the emergence of the entertainment industry played a vital role in the rise of Soho, and foreign musicians, artists and restaurateurs contributed to upholding its renowned status as London’s cosmopolitan haven.

^[1] Roy Porter., ‘The Contagion of Numbers’: The Building of the Victorian Capital 1820 – 1890, (2000), Available online: <https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/London/nEogLRpuxZQC?hl=en&gbpv=1> [Accessed 9 November 2021].

^[2] British Library, Fire of London, (1666), Available online: <http://www.bl.uk/learning/timeline/item103652.html>, [Accessed 9 November 2021].

^[3] The British Newspaper Archive, Marlborough Street - West end Prostitutes, (1851) Available online: <https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000183/18511018/038/0004>, [Accessed 9 November 2021].

[4] James. Morton, Early Whores and their Pimps, (2008), p10.

[5] James. Morton, Early Whores and their Pimps, (2008), p10.

^[6] E. J. Hobsbawm and C. Wrigley, The Other Britain, (1999), p. 295.

^[7] John. Simon., Report of the Medical Officer of Health for London, (1852), Available online: <https://wellcomelibrary.org/moh/report/b1825312x/0#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0&h=overcrowded&z=-0.6659%2C0.3372%2C2.4585%2C0.9597>, p. 31.

^[8] Roy Porter., Social Problems, Social Improvements: 1820 – 1890, (2000), Available online: <https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/London/nEogLRpuxZQC?hl=en&gbpv=1> [Accessed 9 November 2021].

^[9] Judith. R. Walkowitz., The Italian Restaurant, (2012), p. 104.

^[10] Panikos. Panayi., The Restaurant, Migrant City, (2020), Available online: <https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Migrant_City/V3bWDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1>, p226

^[11] James. Morton, Early Whores and their Pimps, (2008), p10.

[12] Judith. R. Walkowitz, Battle of the Empire, Leicester Square and the Empire Theatre, (2012), p. 55.

^[13] Sophie. Parkin., Soho’s The Colony Room Club (2016). Available online: <https://www.bl.uk/20th-century-literature/articles/sohos-the-colony-room-club>  [Accessed 9 November 2021]. ​​​​​

^[14] Matthew. Green., ‘Coffee in a coffin: The fascinating story of Le Macabre and Soho's 1950s espresso revolution’, The Telegraph. (2017). Available online: <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/england/london/articles/the-amazing-story-of-soho-1950s-espresso-revolution/> [Accessed 9 November 2021].