Toronto building boom

[Tewder]

People, globally, talk about MP. Nobody has ever heard of HC. I guess we just do a bad job marketing our treasures...

... and to be fair to HC it has sort of been stuck on its own for a long time. MP is easily accessible to the Loop and does have a surrounding context that is much wider developed (Grant Park, The Art Institue, Navy Pier etc). There is a monumentalism to the entire ensemble that is better suited to drawing the kind of international attention it gets. HC as it exists is indeed a treasure, but feels very much like a local or 'community' asset. This is perhaps changing as parts get added to it and as other parts of the waterfront become developed.

 

[Urban Shocker]

Referring to other large cities is the only way to know how really we are doing.

Well, freshcutgrass for one has done a good job of listing the ways in which Harbourfront outranks Chicago's waterfront alternative. The Fleck and Enwave theatres, for instance, aren't designed for large, catch-all Up With People type performances and are therefore precisely the sort of custom-designed locations for the international and locally-based performers - at Next Steps and World Stage for instance - that Millennium Park simply doesn't offer. For sheer options, ranging from the craft studios to the Music Garden concerts and HATCH, we're dealing with a genuine cultural centre for the arts community and its audience, expressing the local but also showcasing the best from around the world, compared to what Tewder correctly identifies as "monumentalism" elsewhere.

 

[freshcutgrass]

You are presenting a false comparison in that nobody is suggesting we take away HC.

But you are, because we live in a world of finite funding. MP was a bad deal for Chicago, when you consider what they could have gotten for their $1/2 billion. It's not that MP isn't nice...it's that it was a huge rip-off. Toronto's Cultural Renaissance is an example of limited funds better spent (and we still got our starchitect architecture in the process).

All pretensions aside, I can understand Kkgg7's point. The programming at HC is sort of a 'cod liver oil' brand of arts programming, in part because it is so heavily funded. It's kind of like comparing PBS with HBO, in that anything that anybody's going to give me for free isn't likely anything I'd ever pay for anyway.

Couldn't disagree more. HC hosts over 4000 events, covering every possible discipline and age group. Not all of them are, or are intended to be, "world class" events to put Toronto on the global map....and some of them are. It's just as important to host fun and educational programs for children and community groups as it is to host one of the world's most important literary festivals. This is why it attracts over 12 million visitors annually. It's always packed with people, and they aren't there to just sit on the grass.

And it's main events are first rate by any standards, despite being mostly "free"...The Authors series and it's International Festival of Authors, NextSteps, World Rotes, World Stage. The Craft Studio has spawned some of Toronto's best ceramic, glass, metal and textiles artists. The Fleck Dance Theatre is an excellent purpose built, sprung floor facility.

HC is an excellent facility for Toronto to have but I think we can all agree that to compare it to MP is simply overreaching.

No...we don't all have to agree on that, and I have presented a case why I think HC is actually as good or better simply from an aesthetic position, and crushes it in terms of cultural output. Meanwhile, I have yet to see anyone present a case as to why MP is better.

 

[freshcutgrass]

People, globally, talk about MP.

They do? And what do they say? Most of the press I've ever read relates to it as a debacle for the city.

Nobody has ever heard of HC. I guess we just do a bad job marketing our treasures..

If that is true, how does HC manage to attract over 12 million, while MP does about 3 million? Both are similar in the fact that they are just components of larger recreational venues. You seem to think of MP as a bigger "success", but haven't provided any actual evidence to support it. How do you define success?

I'll tell you why. As lovely as a big, shiny $23 million bean is, people are not going to return multiple times to look at it. Meanwhile, HC offers more to attract you back multiple times, and keep your attention longer. Even from an aesthetic point of view, it's more inviting. People are more likely to spend more time, see and do more things, and have more fun at HC than MP.

 

[Urban Shocker]

Yes, it is Canada's leading this and that, but to be fair, Canada usually has pretty low standard when it comes to this kind of stuff.

Well, if the comparison is between the international reach of the Power Plant's exhibitions and the Millennium Park's Boeing Galleries, which are restricted to outdoor exhibitions, the Power Plant clearly wins hands down. Consider the Boeing's Mark di Suvero exhibition in 2007/8, which was a major event for them and ran for a year and a half, and note that Toronto has two of his sculptures permanently on display in our city and the Power Plant has a considerably more rapid turnover of exhibitions of an equal and greater significance.

 

[Urban Shocker]

While you suspect I never get out much, I suspect you seldom get out of North America much.

Whenever I'm out of North America, which is at least once a year, I'm perfectly able to tell the difference between what has quality and what doesn't in what I find there - architecturally, historically, and in contemporary culture. Generally, I'd say that your posts reflect how your powers of discrimination are based mostly on some sort of grass-is-always-greener-somewhere-else blind faith rather than any depth of experience with Toronto's culture and therefore any ability to make qualitative comparisons between us and elsewhere.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Consider the Boeing's Mark di Suvero exhibition in 2007/8, which was a major event for them and ran for a year and a half, and note that Toronto has two of his sculptures permanently on display in our city

Speaking of which, I think Flower Power should have been returned to its original spot in High Park, rather than moved to City Place. What's going on with No Shoes...is it still being restored?

Power Plant has a considerably more rapid turnover of exhibitions of an equal and greater significance.

Power Plant is more than just top rate installations and curation...it publishes and hosts symposiums and lectures series. It's actually influential and well respected in the art world.

Listening to some people here pass judgement on "art" is like listening to someone make gastronomic critique when they're experience is limited to a food court.

 

[adma]

Whenever I'm out of North America, which is at least once a year, I'm perfectly able to tell the difference between what has quality and what doesn't in what I find there - architecturally, historically, and in contemporary culture. Generally, I'd say that your posts reflect how your powers of discrimination are based mostly on some sort of grass-is-always-greener-somewhere-else blind faith rather than any depth of experience with Toronto's culture and therefore any ability to make qualitative comparisons between us and elsewhere.

Though given kkgg7's views on capital punishment, or on homosexuality as a "lifestyle choice": the grass, for him, probably *is* greener on the other side. But I sure wouldn't want idiots like that guiding Harbourfront programming...

 

[Maggie]

Though given kkgg7's views on capital punishment, or on homosexuality as a "lifestyle choice": the grass, for him, probably *is* greener on the other side. But I sure wouldn't want idiots like that guiding Harbourfront programming...

I must say amen . On the other hand the average cork soaker has a life span of say 20 posts before Jungs theory of superiority leaves them discouraged

 

[Urban Shocker]

Speaking of which, I think Flower Power should have been returned to its original spot in High Park, rather than moved to City Place. What's going on with No Shoes...is it still being restored?

I don't know. But I rather enjoy Flower Power's new location - especially the dialogue it sets up with Francisco Gazitua's nearbye art bridge which is based on form, colour and materials. It makes me think of that red and yellow crane that's going up at U condo, and I think our delightfully monochromatic architecture acts as a great foil for bright splashes of colour that denote either the transitory nature of the construction process or the ever-provocative agency of the artistic statement.

Back to our building boom ( the subject of this thread, after all ) and it's worth noting that the construction now going on at Harbourfront's Canada Square is, appropriately, based on an expansion of Harbourfront Centre's success, by means of creating a "cultural village" rather than by going the "monumental" route that appeals to folks such as kkgg7 - who, by his own admission, is disengaged from the cultural life of our city and wants us to be somewhere else.

 

[Tewder]

But you are, because we live in a world of finite funding. MP was a bad deal for Chicago, when you consider what they could have gotten for their $1/2 billion. It's not that MP isn't nice...it's that it was a huge rip-off. Toronto's Cultural Renaissance is an example of limited funds better spent (and we still got our starchitect architecture in the process)..

First of all the cost to the Chicago taxpayer wasn't $500K. Half of it was picked up privately.

... and now you're comparing MP to the entire 'cultural renaissance' in Toronto? You're not comparing apples to apples, even with HC. Chicago already has all of the assets of HC/cultural renaissance outside of MP. MP is a park, a grand urban public space, not a cultural centre in the same way as the Toronto venues you mention. IOW, Chicago didn't 'give those things up' in order to have MP built! You're trying to establish a false opportunity cost.

Couldn't disagree more. HC hosts over 4000 events, covering every possible discipline and age group. Not all of them are, or are intended to be, "world class" events to put Toronto on the global map....and some of them are. It's just as important to host fun and educational programs for children and community groups as it is to host one of the world's most important literary festivals. This is why it attracts over 12 million visitors annually. It's always packed with people, and they aren't there to just sit on the grass.

... which is why I agree that HC is an excellent community facility. They have all of these things in Chicago too, by the way. They didn't build MP at the cost of going without similar events, festivals and arts facilities... to which, by your logic HC 'crushes' Central Park too because it doesn't offer a free pottery studio.

No...we don't all have to agree on that, and I have presented a case why I think HC is actually as good or better simply from an aesthetic position, and crushes it in terms of cultural output. Meanwhile, I have yet to see anyone present a case as to why MP is better.

I've made a case (several actually) as to why the comparing of HC with MP is false. You've created a false opportunity cost, you've skewed the numbers, and you're not comparing apples to apples... because you can't! MP doesn't share the same mandate as HC, to put it simply. MP is one grand piece of a bigger puzzle whereas HC is the whole puzzle. Bottom line, to look at MP in isolation and compare it with HC in isolation, and triumphantly conclude that Chicago got 'screwed' for their money is a delusion.

 

[Tewder]

Back to our building boom ( the subject of this thread, after all ) and it's worth noting that the construction now going on at Harbourfront's Canada Square is, appropriately, based on an expansion of Harbourfront Centre's success, by means of creating a "cultural village" rather than by going the "monumental" route that appeals to folks such as kkgg7 - who, by his own admission, is disengaged from the cultural life of our city and wants us to be somewhere else.

US, it's wonderful that HC has been expanding and Canada Square will be an excellent addition... but as it does, it will start to take on a certain degree of 'monumentalism', if only in its scale and scope. Not a bad thing though, right?

 

[Urban Shocker]

I don't think it will become big shiny bean monumental, because that's not the model we're using in Toronto.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Speaking of which, I think Flower Power should have been returned to its original spot in High Park, rather than moved to City Place. What's going on with No Shoes...is it still being restored?

http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/widgets_newsletter/read-newsletter/id/31

No Shoes will be installed at Don River Park, as per the last WT newsletter.

FWIW, I'm a big fan of Harbourfront. Our daughters did many summer camps there, we've had a number of friends display art there, we skate or walk or bike often (depending on the season), and we take in shows at the outdoor stage. Loved the roving circus performance from a few years back now -- Cirque de Soleil for Luminato, I believe.

 

[freshcutgrass]

First of all the cost to the Chicago taxpayer wasn't $500K. Half of it was picked up privately.

... and now you're comparing MP to the entire 'cultural renaissance' in Toronto? You're not comparing apples to apples

Tax dollars vs private donors doesn't matter...the point is either could have been better re-directed to other projects where better value for money spent could have been realized.

Chicago already has all of the assets of HC/cultural renaissance outside of MP.

No it doesn't. You're implying there is nothing left worthy of investing in except this $1/2 billion project, which is of course, absurd. I guess Chicago has been "perfected" to the point that all there is left to do is install big, shiny $23 million beans. Surely you must understand what I'm talking about? It's a case of mis-management of a project & funds. I would also love an outdoor stage/bandshell designed by Gehry installed in a Toronto park. But for over $60 million...I'll pass.

Mayor Daley is like the Pilipino cleaning lady who blows her pay on a LV bag to impress the other people on the elevator in her St Jamestown apartment building.

MP is a park, a grand urban public space, not a cultural centre in the same way as the Toronto venues you mention.

Nope...MP & HC were designed to serve the same purpose...a civic park with cultural programs and facilities, as an addition to a larger park. What is it that makes MP so "grand"? It's size or location falls short of "grand". Take away the Gehry roof of the $60 million bandshell and the big shiny, $23 million bean, and you begin to see the emperor has no clothes. Start looking at what is actually there, and things just don't add up.

I've made a case (several actually) as to why the comparing of HC with MP is false.

No...you made statements.

You've created a false opportunity cost, you've skewed the numbers, and you're not comparing apples to apples..

No...you are just saying I am.

MP is one grand piece of a bigger puzzle whereas HC is the whole puzzle.

Wrong again. HC is just a component of Harbourfront itself...which is itself part of a larger contiguous downtown waterfront park system.

Bottom line, to look at MP in isolation and compare it with HC in isolation, and triumphantly conclude that Chicago got 'screwed' for their money is a delusion.

What's delusional, is to deny the "grandest" part of MP, is that it was a massive financial debacle for the City of Chicago. Even the City of Chicago acknowledges that. In a city that is cutting transit service because there is no money, and who borrows $1/2 billion to fund their operational budget...took out loans of $180 million and took $95 million from its Tax Increment Financing Fund (revenue that is set aside to help spur development of economically depressed areas) to pay for MP.

Like I said...it's not a slight at MP in and of itself...it's about the "at any cost" mentality at play here.