World class, eh?

[building babel]

In addition to a Facade District, may I humbly submit that Toronto needs an Edifice District?

It'll attract the kind of people who visit Sydney to gawk at the opera house, but have no intention of ever going inside to hear an opera.

Large curvy-swoopy / spiky / blobby armature buildings that have nothing inside but look spectacular on the horizon, in documentaries, in guide books, and on postcards. They'd draw tourists here by the millions. If we had an Edifice District we'd be uniquely world class.

 

[tudararms]

^ Could call it the "Edifice complex".

 

[building babel]

Brilliant. We could market it all over the world.

 

[TdotTrickyRicky]

"Building landmarks for the sake of building landmarks is kind of pointless."

Isn't that the point?

 

[blixa442]

:rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin

 

[EnviroTO]

Funny but true. Is there a real need for the Arc de Triomphe or the Washington Monument. Sense of place and art are not "necessary" but certainly add value to creating an identity and improving the look and feel of the city.

 

[afransen TO]

Tourism isn't going anywhere, no matter how expensive energy gets.

 

[SD2]

Isn't that the point?

What I meant is that most famous landmarks around the world were built for a reason/purpose and have a certain history behind them. That's what makes them interesting and that's why people will travel to see them firsthand.

Just building something for the purpose of people visiting it eliminates the allure. Might as well spend the money improving the streetscape, etc.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

"What I meant is that most famous landmarks around the world were built for a reason/purpose and have a certain history behind them."

Touristy landmarks have a purpose - they're built for tourists. They can also have just as much history, though of a different sort than the Arc de Triomphe.

 

[SD2]

Touristy landmarks have a purpose - they're built for tourists. They can also have just as much history, though of a different sort than the Arc de Triomphe.

Are you referring to landmarks or attractions?

 

[scarberiankhatru]

The difference between the two is not black and white.

 

[SD2]

The difference between the two is not black and white.

But it can be.

Metropolis may be a landmark and an attraction, but are people going to come to Toronto just to visit it? I don't think so.

 

[tudararms]

I don't think Napolean built the Arc de triomph to sell 'cartes postales'.

 

[building babel]

Even if he had, tourists would have had to wait until 1849 to buy stamps for them.