Why Is Toronto Aesthetically/Architecturally Boring? Answer Needed!

[adma]

My Spanish visitors have enjoyed their time here, but cannot comprehend why every building in the city looks like a shoe-box.

I remember Madrid being similarly chock-a-block with shoeboxes. Not that that's bad or anything...

 

[TonyV]

Toronto isn't boring. This is the city where you can see an ornate Victorian beside a sleek high-rise with a lot more variety along a streetscape. The T-D Centre is one of the finest skyscraper complexes in the world. Even the "big name" European cities have streets lined with mostly mundane buildings, such as Paris.

Lovely.

I feel that my response was inadequate. I wanted to say the same thing: Toronto isn't boring, and you said it far better than I could have said it, junctionist.

An aside: I have gone through bereavements - two of them - this summer, and at the end of it all, Toronto was there to pick up my spirits and set me on course again. A boring city could not have helped me accomplish that kind of miracle.

 

[TO City of Light]

Once the ground rules for discussion of Toronto aesthetics/architecture are defined even in part by the fact that Paris is "streets lined with mostly mundane buildings" there is hardly any point to even continuing this thread.

 

[Tewder]

I don't think that Toronto is 'boring' but I do feel that it lacks where aesthetics are concerned. This is changing more and more but still seems to be so ingrained in us, culturally speaking. In broad strokes it's that Torontonians just feel that sensible shoes are perfectly fine, essentially, and that an investment in anything else is a splurge that would be 'morally' bettter spent on some social program. Maybe it's the Scottish/British/Protestant ancestry or a strong socialist bent or that whole 'Peace, Order and Good Government' thing that informs this. Whatever. I very hardly hear a typical Torontonian - of the street, so to speak - wax nostalgic about the city and its beauty the way I hear it done elsewhere. It's like these things just don't register or just aren't valued. Fortunately this is indeed changing though as we start to value the urban realm and understand its possibilities...

So maybe the response to your Spanish friends is to show them how this *is* changing and how the enormous unrealized potential of Toronto is what makes it a far more exciting place to be now than any museum-piece city in Spain might be.

 

[sodapop]

i hope i'm not repeating what anyone already said because didn't read the conversation, toronto didn't get a jumpstart like new york or chicago that have been big since the 1800's. torontos population boom was in the 60's when architecture was boring and dull, which is why we wound up with many ugly buildings. but new york and chicago also have crappy sixties architecture, more than toronto! they just look nicer because they have alot more super tall art deco, toronto has alot of nice buildings in the cbd (royal bank plaza, td centre scotia plaza, rbc dexia, etc. etc.) as for torontos current architecture. i'm sure people will come to there senses soon enough and realize green and blue glassed condos are not the greatest looking things in the world. they build them cause there cheap. anyways thats my opinion

 

[urbandreamer]

^I would argue that since the Scots/Irish/British stopped building the city, it became uglier! Look at photos from 100 years ago--the city was beautiful, with attractive church spires everywhere, grand public buildings, red brick masonry everywhere!

Things fell apart post-ww2 due to the rapid change in transportation requirements and cheap new building technologies perfected during ww2, and the shock of that disruptive technology (highways, affordable cars for all, buses, concrete, etc) took 50 years or so to mature back to the basics of city building.

But maybe, the real issue isn't that the city is boring: maybe you are boring?

 

[Tewder]

^I would argue that since the Scots/Irish/British stopped building the city, it became uglier! Look at photos from 100 years ago--the city was beautiful, with attractive church spires everywhere, grand public buildings, red brick masonry everywhere!

Ah, that's a good point. We do tend to bash the boring old waspies but really they were the ones that also decided it was time for the city to grow up and diversify.

 

[dahusbandofbath]

Toronto isn't boring. This is the city where you can see an ornate Victorian beside a sleek high-rise with a lot more variety along a streetscape. The T-D Centre is one of the finest skyscraper complexes in the world. Even the "big name" European cities have streets lined with mostly mundane buildings, such as Paris.

This is true. If you compare Toronto buildings with their contemporaries in Europe, we don't do so badly in the comparison. One thing I will grant post-war European buildings is that they often fit somewhat better into their context because, in many cases, there was a great historical context to protect. In 1950, Parisians were galvanised to protect their beautiful and wonderfully photogenic city from the forces of modern architecture; hence only one skyscaper in Paris proper today. Also, the concept of protecting Paris's architectural heritage was already an old one by then. There was huge controversy in 1889 over the construction of the Eiffel Tower. This stemmed from a sense of historical significance and self-importance that, understandably, didn't exist in Toronto in 1950 and is only incipient here now.

Toronto needs the same time that European cities have had to grow and mature. This difference in maturity can even be witnessed within the GTA. Think of the average condo tower going up downtown and then compare it to the condos going up along the 407.

 

[E.B.]

Again, I understand the historical justifications, but they were wondering why prominent, NEW developments continue to be boxes (now they are glass).


Does the mainstream concious of the average Canadian attribute less importance to good/interesting architecture? Why can our developers get away with being cheap?

Roy, I think your friends, generally speaking, are correct. I don't want it to be this way but it is what it is. The people of Toronto are not as interested as we are, at least when it comes to architecture. Therefore the developers will build with the lowest cost in mind, and that unfortunately is "The Box" or some variation. If any of us were a developer, wouldn't we maximize profits? With that being said, you can always take them to see The Absolute building in Mississauga. Which I find unbelievable, that kind of building should be in Toronto. What's the deal with that? Can anyone explain?

 

[lordmandeep]

Imo Toronto does a poor job in creating nice looking streets. With the wooden poles and overhead wiring, and all of that.

The streets are still buzzing, but just because the streets are buzzing does not mean the street has to look dirty.

 

[TrickyRicky]

Four words "middle class shanty town".

I'm poking some fun but if you think about it seriously it's true. Contemporary architecture is largely internationalized and similar now everywhere in the world. Hell, the same architectural firms are designing the same buildings for different cities everywhere. What is different is the base. European cities are born of social injustice, totalitarianism, autocracy, guild leagues etc. We sure as hell would not want to trade nice architecture for any of these institutions but it seems they knew how to make purdy things better than we do today.

 

[sodapop]

^ lol shanty town?

 

[Redroom Studios]

I think a lot of the comments have brought up valid points that contribute to what we have inherited. I think our history as a colony of Britain that negotiated its nationhood peacefully as compared to the competing nations of Europe or the born of rebellion US just doesnt stoke the fires of imagination or achievement here in Canada. We are more about equality, tolerance and fitting in rather than being obnoxious and showing off. Our much shorter history plays a big role... and much of the history we had has been lost to the bulldozer. We can never be Europe and I do find it a disappointing comparison at times. Toronto's development as a major world city has only happened over my lifetime (40 years or so) and is still a work in progress. Modern buildings are built ever more for efficiency and profits rather than to give back to the city. I think city planning has been a shortcoming since the beginning looking at the narrow street grid we've inherited with virtually no grand boulevards or avenues. And that continues today as the railway lands have been quickly filled with below average glass boxes with little or no thought given to creating a cohesive center- piece for the city.

but for its lack of world class beauty, there is no lack of vibrancy on the streets. In some ways the past 10 years has been quite the golden age for the city. This continuing building boom is mind boggling. The beautification of Bloor St, re-cladding of FCP, several new landmark buildings, improvements on the waterfront and plans for formerly industrial / abandoned lands holds great promise and is quite exciting to see it all happening before our eyes!

 

[Urban Shocker]

I agree that when it comes to the forms our buildings take we're largely a city about fitting in, and expanding the existing context, rather than standing out against it. Our design culture isn't one that has relied on churning out and exporting endless high-fashion novelties. Indeed, for the most part we've been late adopters historically - Modernism, for instance, wasn't automatically taken up simply because Europeans built such new forms; there was quite a time lag, though we eventually took to it like a fish to water because it suited us. Rather, we absorb ideas, treat them with some justifiable suspicion, and go with what works. We're practical, and innovate when necessary for local conditions such as weather, availability of materials, construction methods tied to economic imperatives and the availability of a skilled labour force. But I think that cautious approach has also given us an identity that's our own - it isn't surprising that some visitors, after a week or two here, are puzzled by a Toronto Style that's obviously a different form of expression from what they're used to back home. Just as a visitor ( or a local! ) may not know a Clewes from a Diamond or a KPMB from a Teeple at first glance, when you look at early photographs of Georgian Toronto there's also a homogeneity of form - many of those buildings were likely built from British architectural pattern books adapted to local conditions. While the proportions of the windows conformed to Georgian models, the window pane glass was imported from Britain in sizes produced for the British market. And the red brick Victorian commercial city had a unity to it as well, though by then we were manufacturing a wide variety of materials ( brick, stained glass for decorative windows, wooden mouldings, cast metal etc ) used in the construction of buildings that weren't interchangeable with what was built in other countries.

 

[dahusbandofbath]

I don't think that Toronto is 'boring' but I do feel that it lacks where aesthetics are concerned. This is changing more and more but still seems to be so ingrained in us, culturally speaking. In broad strokes it's that Torontonians just feel that sensible shoes are perfectly fine, essentially, and that an investment in anything else is a splurge that would be 'morally' bettter spent on some social program. Maybe it's the Scottish/British/Protestant ancestry or a strong socialist bent or that whole 'Peace, Order and Good Government' thing that informs this. Whatever. I very hardly hear a typical Torontonian - of the street, so to speak - wax nostalgic about the city and its beauty the way I hear it done elsewhere. It's like these things just don't register or just aren't valued. Fortunately this is indeed changing though as we start to value the urban realm and understand its possibilities...

So maybe the response to your Spanish friends is to show them how this *is* changing and how the enormous unrealized potential of Toronto is what makes it a far more exciting place to be now than any museum-piece city in Spain might be.

I think you've captured Toronto's Zeitgeist perfectly!