Is Toronto Beautiful?

[Urban Shocker]

"Classical proportions" aren't exclusively the domain of the feminine. Doric was employed to suggest strength rather than elegance - the Temple of Hera ( 550 BC ), and the Temple of Neptune (450 BC) for instance, both at Paestum, are as butch as they come. And the orders were sometimes used in combination in the same building to express appropriate levels of strength/hardness and lightness/softness as was required.

 

[Hipster Duck]

I guess I can see that more, although that still plays to rather hoary gender stereotypes.

I knew I'd walk into that one

Okay, forget I said 'feminine'. You still know what I'm talking about: the thrill of discovering oddly-placed alleys, detail and ornamentation in the strangest places, non-rectilinear angles and walls that don't stay straight, floral patterns carved in wrought iron, etc. is not something we have been able to do since the end of the First World War, and definitely not since the end of the Second World War. I love the TD centre and Hafencity in Hamburg and the skyline of Pudong from the Bund and the clean lines of Freedville, but that provokes a different emotional response in me (and not necessarily better, just different) than walking the streets of Venice at night, or the Marais or Park Slope, Brooklyn or Cabbagetown here in Toronto.

This is not a "problem", in that 20th and 21st century architecture has different aspirations, and it is not an issue confined to Toronto, since no city in the world has been able to build the kinds of spaces and places I've described in recent years, nor is Toronto absent of this kind of architecture/city experience - I alluded to the fact that I get that same response in Cabbagetown. What I'm saying is that maybe it's time to give classical 'beauty', as I've defined it, another shot. This would create the mix of styles that you're looking for, and nobody ever accused old, classical cities of being unresponsive to urban living.

 

[Lenser]

Hey, I don't disagree! Sometimes I despair of the clean, minimalist lines of modernism, and the topsy-turvy stylistic mish-mash that often describes today's architecture. I like some crazy-@ssed filigreed ornamentation for its own sake.

You're right - I like the polyglot mix. A bit of everything - that's what a city is to me.

 

[pman]

I'm struck by the fact that two of the four images here are fantasy renderings of proposals that might or might not be built, and even if they are built (don't hold your breath on Yonge with Denzil Minnan-Wong on the case) they will be maintained by the same people who gave us our current public realm.

I'd also suggest that what people say to anyone about their city is at least as much about good manners as it is genuine opinion. For example, my daughter was recently in Halifax, which she found pretty much a dump, but she was complimentary about it to her hosts.

 

[neubilder]

Surface parking lots and suburban sprawl on the other hand are the definition of good taste.

Since when were there only two options?: parking lots with suburban sprawl VS. schlocky, corporate, and bland high-density residential that kills street life (Bohemian Embassy (Embarrassment) case in point)

 

[allabootmatt]

I'm struck by the fact that two of the four images here are fantasy renderings of proposals that might or might not be built, and even if they are built (don't hold your breath on Yonge with Denzil Minnan-Wong on the case) they will be maintained by the same people who gave us our current public realm.

I'd also suggest that what people say to anyone about their city is at least as much about good manners as it is genuine opinion. For example, my daughter was recently in Halifax, which she found pretty much a dump, but she was complimentary about it to her hosts.

Isn't Queens Quay under construction as we speak?

 

[old boy]

My feeling is that there is less concern for what others may think about Toronto than what some would have you believe, for whatever reasons. I think this city's people are well beyond the craving for snap shot validations from tourists. The residents quite simply know they live in a dynamic city, with an abundance of special and beautiful places. This suggests a " comfort in your own skin ", kind of maturity, that ought to enliven some traditional opinions of Toronto. The answer to the question , " Is Toronto Beautiful " , is elusive, that won't lend a stereotypical, either/or response, packaged for a Paris or San Francisco, or New York.

 

[Roy G Biv]

Beauty has to be narrowly and absolutely defined before answering. If it's not, then any 1st world/2nd world city in the world could be deemed beautiful through some muddled and over-thought argument.

I think that beauty is a visual aesthetic, and although Toronto has pockets of beauty, overall, it's not beautiful.

 

[pman]

Isn't Queens Quay under construction as we speak?

You're right it is. However, the rebuilt Queen's Quay West won't look anything like the rendering because:

1. It will take the trees around 50 years to reach the heights in the rendering - assuming they don't go the way of every other tree on every other Toronto main street, and

2. Uncoordinated utility cuts and cheap repaving will pretty much wreck the hardscape over that 50ish year period, unless Queen's Quay is going to be different from every other street in Toronto.

But even if we have a few streets which either have or will have some nice sections, I'm not sure it adds up to a beautiful city.

 

[RC8]

Since when were there only two options?: parking lots with suburban sprawl VS. schlocky, corporate, and bland high-density residential that kills street life (Bohemian Embassy (Embarrassment) case in point)

He said Toronto was prettier before the current crop of condos went up. I was here, then. It wasn't.

Nothing at all destroys street aesthetics as much as decrepit surface parking lots. We are much better off now than 5 years ago according to any remotely objective standard.

Also, the Bohemian Embassy feels cheaply built, but your perception that it kills street life is just that, a perception.

 

[neubilder]

He said Toronto was prettier before the current crop of condos went up. I was here, then. It wasn't.

Nothing at all destroys street aesthetics as much as decrepit surface parking lots. We are much better off now than 5 years ago according to any remotely objective standard.

Also, the Bohemian Embassy feels cheaply built, but your perception that it kills street life is just that, a perception.

I agree that surface parking lots can kill street life, but they also don't have much staying power. And they can be used for impromptu purposes until something better comes along. They represent potential. Once they are built on however, things are defined. it's a lifetime of whatever gets built and if it aint good it aint good.

Regarding the Bohemian Embarrassment, it isn't just my perception, it's a collective perception, and it's killing the street life of that area. These influences translate into the success or failure and cultural viability of the area. You can argue that things have to evolve, but in cases like this the very qualities that attracted developers to invest are being displaced by the poor quality of the urban design and architecture that is being undertaken here. It's mindless, placeless, generic, large-scale take-the-money-and-run development. It's about districts becoming homogenous. Loss of identity.

With better planning controls the qualities that spawned the popularity of the area could have been retained and enhanced. Instead these qualities have been displaced, consumed, and lost.

 

[radioheadmike]

THANK YOU, torontothegreat.

/thread

 

[neubilder]

You've done an excellent job of capturing the best of Toronto.

 

[Roy G Biv]

THANK YOU, torontothegreat.

/thread

Great pics, but it's called cherry-picking...

 

[old boy]

torontothegreat, I think you've just put this puppy to bed. If that was " cherry-picking ", all I can say is, what a bumper crop !