London

North V South. Let me see North London has leafy Hampstead, Primrose Hill, there is Hyde Park, Regents Park as far as greenery goes. Maida Vale, St Johns Wood, Queens Park, Notting Hill, one of which I live in. Not to mention the tube network allowing you to be anywhere and get home via the last tube. South London, mmm middle class wanna be's smuggling it up saying they live in East Dulwich when in actual fact Brixton is more expensive. One train line that each time takes you into London Bridge - total pain. Lets face it people would love to live in the North but it's far more expensive than the south. 7 million people can't be wrong can they! Who would rather live on a train line than the tube. I love the way people harp on about the south, there really isn't much there, there is no comparison.

Very simple really.........
Neurotic North
Savvy South
That's it, in a pint glass!:

Let us set personal views to one side and deal in facts shall we? Officially 5 out of the 20 WORST places in the U.K. are in London. And they are ALL north of the river (Islington; Newham; Tower Hamlets; Haringey and Hackney). All 434 U.K. Local Authorities were surveyed...
Now, whilst 'North london' may have Hampstead and what one ought to more truthfully classify as 'Central London', pray tell what does it have besides that? Dangerous, conrete jungles that are forever in the news for some fatal gang-related incident or another.
Moi, I'll stick to my salubrious part of the truly green, clean, heatlhy and wealthy [aswell as hilly] South London thank you very much.

Let us set personal views to one side and deal in facts shall we? Officially 5 out of the 20 WORST places in the U.K. are in London. And they are ALL north of the river (Islington, Newham, Tower Hamlets, Haringey, and Hackney). All 434 U.K. Local Authorities were surveyed.
Now, whilst 'North london' may have Hampstead and what one ought to classify as 'Central London', pray tell what does it have besides that? Dangerous, conrete jungles that are forever in the news for some crime related incident or another.
Moi, I'll stick to my salubrious part of the truly green, clean, heatlhy and wealthy South London thank you very much.

Yawn!

South London is by far worst. The people who live there have to look at North London!!

I don't buy Time Out any more as features are complacent, lazy, on a rosta of every 2-3 years as mentioned above, middle-class, snobby and redundant rubbish. I look at it for facts re:event addresses etc and saw this article (online of course) and oh what a surprise, it was crap.

"Definitely the north of the river! Coz East London and West London are also on the North... South is alone... "
can't get any dumber. Richmond is in the south of the river. Yes? Greenwich is in the south, along with Southwark, Brixton, Streatham.. Yes?
look at a London map.

Definitely the north of the river! Coz East London and West London are also on the North... South is alone...

I don't get why people have to debate whether North or South London is better. I think each is special and has it's own charm.
When I moved from Coventry to London, my friend who lives in North London asked warily "but you're surely gonna live in the north of the Thames right"?.... as if South London is very bad.
Well I used to live in Brixton and I have to agree the area is quite rough, but the diversity and the market and charming. Anyway I heard that some parts of North East London is pretty rough too so what's the difference?
Also to compare simply North vs South is stupid.
South West London (Barnes, Richmond, Putney) has a totally differing typology when compared to South East London (Dulwich, Deptford, etc). North West London (Hampstead, Maida Vale) is like a different city altogether from North East London (Brick Lane, Stratford, City)...

North London is far superior and I'm very smug about it. Now excuse me while I take advantage of the local organic cafe and talk left wing politics. We have good reason to be smug.

The whole argument is balls anyway. To think of anything north of the Thames as 'North London' is daft, as it ignores the existence of East and West London. As an Eastender, I don't want to be roped in with the pretentious tossers of North London.
I'd say the rivalry between East and West London is much more relevant than the rivalry between North and South. There are not two, but five Londons - North, South, East, West, and the City and Westminster, which are their own bit.

Sorry 'they're everywhere!'
I should have gone to a proper north London school.

Yawn!
Oooh North London, oooh south London. nur nur.
It's London, it's full of poseurs and their everywhere.
Dulwich is lovely, north Peckham is pretty grim.
Hampstead is lovely, Seven Sisters Road is pretty grim.
Blah blah................

This kind of crap is the reason I gave up my TO subscription - constant snarky comments about South London, concentrating on the 'real' London of the North and West.
Funnily enough, the only people I know who actually care to argue about North v South are people who aren't real Londoners anyway.