News   Apr 26, 2024
Sustainability Month: ReHousing — A Multiplex How-To Guide Explores What’s Possible in the Yellowbelt
 1K     3 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Mattamy's Soleil and Mile & Creek Condos in Milton’s Flourishing Landscape
 271     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Galleria on the Park Soon to Welcome First Residents of Masterplanned Community
 792     0 

Proposed renaming of Dundas Street

picard102 said:
and reinforces the point that it's useless and a waste of money.
Click to expand...
Why even give streets names then, huh? Big waste of money printing way-markers, signs, maps, etc. Perhaps we should just adopt the Japanese addressing system?

We name things after people to honour them. Regardless of whether they're "remembered" has no bearing on whether they deserved that honour to begin with.
 
zang said:
Why even give streets names then, huh? Big waste of money printing way-markers, signs, maps, etc. Perhaps we should just adopt the Japanese addressing system?

We name things after people to honour them. Regardless of whether they're "remembered" has no bearing on whether they deserved that honour to begin with.
Click to expand...

It's only an honour if people are aware. There a plenty of streets with names that are not people, and they can easily assume this is another and save the city millions of dollars.
 
ARG1 said:
Doug Ford Street, Doug Ford Station, Dougie West Station
Click to expand...
In 2010, the city renamed Weston Wood Park after the one-term Progressive Conservative MPP under former Premier Mike Harris, "Douglas B. Ford Park". (That's the father of current Premier Doug Ford Jr..)

Time to rename the park back to "Weston Wood Park".

ford2.jpg
From link.
 
High Park could have been named John Howard Park, but he refused. They did name a street after him, Howard Park Avenue.

(Sunnyside was named after Howard's farm, Sunnyside Farm, located east of High Park.)
 
Last edited:
zang said:
Why even give streets names then, huh? Big waste of money printing way-markers, signs, maps, etc. Perhaps we should just adopt the Japanese addressing system?

We name things after people to honour them. Regardless of whether they're "remembered" has no bearing on whether they deserved that honour to begin with.
Click to expand...

As @W. K. Lis notes above, lots of parks, streets and schools have names which 'honour' people who are dubious candidates for such honour.
The level of scrutiny applied here, to every such name, would surely lead to costs welll into the hundred's of millions of dollars if systematically followed up on throughout Toronto.
I'd hasten to add, if one applies a full range of criteria as to whether someone was a worthy person.......it might be difficult to find anyone to honour.

MLK was widely known to have had an affair. So did Trudeau the elder (though mind you his wife was at that too).
If the standard is free from any evidence of bigotry of any form, good spouse, good parent, good child, good friend, good neighbour, above scandal, beyond reproach.......the choice of names available will surely be scant

*****

Note, I have no attachment to Dundas.

I'm also loathe to be seen agreeing with Picard on anything.

But I am concerned that this is an action that produces no tangible gain for those truly disenfranchised in our society; be that for reasons of prejudice (current, or past) or other reasons of injustice or unfairness.
I'm concerned this is 6M not achieving some measure of justice, I'm more concerned that this could be 260M by the time we've expunged every questionable name.
Lest you feel my fear is misplaced............I quote from the article you cite above:

1624974506434.png


That certainly sounds like a call to continue down this road as far as the eye can see.

****

As someone with a degree in history, I've never understood the obsession of others with the same.
History is not where we live. The present is where we live, the future is where we're going.

Knowledge of history is important to inform the best plans and actions in the present, to deliver a better future.
But it is not alive. Yes, we have legacy institutions/names/buildings...........but these have already evolved to have other purposes and meanings.
To most Dundas station is/was that awfully tiled subway station, the Eaton Centre; and Ryerson University.

It didn't hold any other meaning here, if it ever did.
 
Last edited:
I associate the name Dundas with the street in Toronto (and Ontario) which itself has important historical and cultural importance to me as a Torontonian and Ontarian.

I don't know who Lord Dundas is and I couldn't care if the street that I grew up associating downtown Toronto with was initially named after him.

Renaming the street today however, feels like a removal of Toronto history given how important the street has been to our understanding of Toronto's physical, social, and cultural development.

If this is such a pressing issue to resolve however, my compromise suggestion would be to rededicate the street to another person named Dundas with a more palatable set of political beliefs. I am sure someone could be found, one likely doesn't even need to look far given that Lord Dundas was a title not a person.
 
Honestly I don't care that much either way - and I find the gesture somewhat hollow and provides an easy out. I find those who are ardently pro (and con) renaming more similar to each other than anything else. Make no mistake though, we rename things all the time and we hardly bat an eye (just think Toronto used to be called York).

Anyways, this is the city that gave us "Avenue Road", so bad naming is par the course.

AoD
 
Even some people considered to be "saintly" are not. For example...

From link.

Mother Teresa was 'anything but a saint,' Canadian study says​


This article was originally published on March 5, 2013.

Mother Teresa may be synonymous with selflessness, but according to a team of Canadian researchers, the Catholic nun was "anything but a saint," the Times of India reports.

In a study to be published this month in Religieuses, a French-language journal of studies in religion and sciences, they suggest the nun's approach to caring for the sick was to glorify human suffering instead of relieving it.

Mother Teresa was lavish with her prayers, but penny-pinching with the wealth amassed by her foundation, according to Serge Larivée and Genevieve Chenard from the University of Montreal's department of psychoeducation, and Carole Sénéchal of the University of Ottawa's faculty of education.

The beatification of Mother Teresa, which the Vatican completed in October, 2003, is the last step before sainthood.

But according to Larivée and colleagues, the Vatican turned a blind eye to Mother Teresa's "rather dubious way of caring for the sick, her questionable political contacts, her suspicious management of the enormous sums of money she received, and her overly dogmatic views regarding … abortion, contraception and divorce."

Mother Teresa believed the sick must suffer like Christ on the cross, they suggest.

"There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ's Passion. The world gains much from their suffering," the journalist Christopher Hitchens reported her as saying.

(Hitchens referred to her as "a fanaticist, a fundamentalist and a fraud.")

The study authors note that doctors visiting many of the 517 "homes for the dying" run by Mother Teresa observed unhygienic conditions and a shortage of actual care, food and painkillers. Lack of funds were no explanation, since Mother Teresa's order of the Missionaries of Charity had raised hundreds of millions in aid money. When the nun herself was in need of medical treatment, "she received it in a modern American hospital," they point out.

According to Larivée and colleagues, Mother Teresa's image of altruism is a myth. Even so, he acknowledges the power of her extraordinary reputation.

"It is likely that she has inspired many humanitarian workers whose actions have truly relieved the suffering of the destitute and addressed the causes of poverty and isolation," he said. "Nevertheless, the media coverage of Mother Teresa could have been a little more rigorous."

In death, as in life, there's no rest for the weary.
Click to expand...
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Honestly I don't care that much either way - and I find the gesture somewhat hollow and provides an easy out. I find those who are ardently pro (and con) renaming more similar to each other than anything else. Make no mistake though, we rename things all the time and we hardly bat an eye (just think Toronto used to be called York).

Anyways, this is the city that gave us "Avenue Road", so bad naming is par the course.

AoD
Click to expand...
And that’s kind of my point. We rename things all the time, why some get into such a froth when a street name is changed when the person it was named after was undoubtedly an a-hole, but have no issue with Peter St. getting cut in half for “Blue Jays Way” because a bar (that has since gone under) wanted a special address is beyond me.

A lot past stuff named in honour of others is often politically motivated or cronyism anyway. So often though, if it’s tied to someone with a terrible past, it’s jumped on by the anti-“cancel culture” crowd with the fervour of a rabid mastiff on a gerbil.

It does not remove the man from history. It just an honorific if you will. The man clearly doesn’t still deserve that honour. If anyone deserves to be honoured with a street that spans the city, its Jane Jacobs. At least she didn’t put a half million Africans into the slave market.

Regardless, it’s a street that spans many cities, and a renaming on Toronto City Council level will still leave vast parts of the GTA with a “Dundas Street”.
 
zang said:
And that’s kind of my point. We rename things all the time, why some get into such a froth when a street name is changed when the person it was named after was undoubtedly an a-hole, but have no issue with Peter St. getting cut in half for “Blue Jays Way” because a bar (that has since gone under) wanted a special address is beyond me.

A lot past stuff named in honour of others is often politically motivated or cronyism anyway. So often though, if it’s tied to someone with a terrible past, it’s jumped on by the anti-“cancel culture” crowd with the fervour of a rabid mastiff on a gerbil.

It does not remove the man from history. It just an honorific if you will. The man clearly doesn’t still deserve that honour. If anyone deserves to be honoured with a street that spans the city, its Jane Jacobs. At least she didn’t put a half million Africans into the slave market.

Regardless, it’s a street that spans many cities, and a renaming on Toronto City Council level will still leave vast parts of the GTA with a “Dundas Street”.
Click to expand...

Yep, the only really good reason for not renaming to me is familiarity, practicality and cost, not because of some particular historical worth.

AoD
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top