News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 434     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 544     2 
News   Jul 15, 2024
Sculptural Pre-Cast Panels Now Adorning ANX Near Dupont Station
 1.4K     3 

Toronto 2015 Pan American Games

jn_12 said:
I'd put the Commonwealth Games and Pan Ams on par with eachother. I don't think there would be a strong response from anyone if they were forced to choose which of the two was the grander event. And that's fine. If you look at the cities hosting the next two Commonwealth Games, I'd say they're Toronto-esque (Delhi and Glasgow) in terms of stature.
Click to expand...

I would agree but I think we send bigger teams to the CG and we always have tv coverage of them....so whether we fans/specators rate them equally or not...I don't think our sporting officials and networks do.
 
TOareaFan said:
I would agree but I think we send bigger teams to the CG and we always have tv coverage of them....so whether we fans/specators rate them equally or not...I don't think our sporting officials and networks do.
Click to expand...

But still, all things considered at this point...does anybody really notice, or care, in either case? Keep in mind that however big the teams we send, as a "mass awareness" event the Commonwealth Games have been on the wane for eons--closest thing to a CG on lasting Canuckistani radar is the 1954 Vancouver games, and blame Roger Bannister for a lot of that. But as for more recent times, far more casual Canadians remember the 1992 Olympics in Barcelona or 1996 in Atlanta than remember the 1994 Commonwealth Games in Victoria BC--indeed, I'd argue the CG presently suffer from a similar third-or-second-and-a-half-world "stigma" to the Pan Ams. They're an anachronistic relic of a time when Canada was the proverbial "overseas dependency" and there was less sporting/entertainment media competition out there.

In fact, I'm more tempted to place the 1994 Victoria CGs and the 1999 Winnipeg Pan Ams on an equal place, mass-awareness-wise. Though it's telling that what's most remembered from the latter isn't the games themselves, it was the classic-lineup Guess Who reunion in the opening ceremonies...
 
And again we ask, "what's your point, Adma?"
We've already agreed that the Pan Ams aren't the Olympics (despite the fact you continue to compare the two or three if you include the CGs), and we've already agreed that the Pan Am Games are more or less on par with the CGs. So... unless you're just enjoying "hearing" yourself "talk", I'm not sure what you're trying to add to the discussion.
 
Maybe my point goes beyond the Pan Ams...toward "Pan-Americanism" in general.

And look; where this whole jag of mine started, it's with somebody in this thread singling out Canada as an outlier--without acknowledging the USA as the far bigger "outlier factor": that's talking about the tail while ignoring the dog. The USA and Canada, together are the cultural outliers when it comes to the Pan Ams and Pan-Americanism. Maybe with Canada's situation being compounded by the USA buffer; but it's the USA long ruling the way through its cultural imperialism.

According to this longstanding cultural construct, everything south of the Rio Grande and the Florida Keys is "colonial" by definition. Banana republic. Those wusses didn't invent rock'n'roll, they didn't invent Hollywood entertainment, they didn't invent the Ivy League, they didn't invent nothin'. For the most part, they don't even speak English! Why give them power? At most, use them, condescend to them; but never let them forget: the U. S. of A. is "America". There's only one "America", and "Pan" is that faggy fellow who plays the pipes. Get the hint?

Sure, the Pan Ams and Pan-Americanism in general might be a nice feel-good gesture to wrap one's self around...if you're one of those so-branded "colonials". But north of the Rio Grande: big freaking deal. CanUSA's "truer" cultural etc allegiances in fact are (paradoxically) not Pan-American, but Pan-Atlantic: for every Elvis, there's a Beatles. Mexico didn't produce a Beatles; Brazil didn't produce a Beatles; Argentina didn't produce a Beatles; Jamaica kinda produced a Dylan, but what the hey. Pan-Americanism my foot; to the CanUSA, '12's London Olympics will likely resonate with more "immediacy" than '16's Rio Olympics.

Of course, the absurdity of that position is self-evident...and perhaps especially to under-30s who've lived their life through internet globalism and for whom American cultural imperialism is curdling into grotesque anachronism. For *them*, maybe, the concept of Pan-Americanism comes more naturally...
 
jn_12 said:
And again we ask, "what's your point, Adma?"
We've already agreed that the Pan Ams aren't the Olympics (despite the fact you continue to compare the two or three if you include the CGs), and we've already agreed that the Pan Am Games are more or less on par with the CGs. So... unless you're just enjoying "hearing" yourself "talk", I'm not sure what you're trying to add to the discussion.
Click to expand...

To add to that, both the Pan Ams and CG are "what you make them".......Victoria and Winnipeg put on understated games with minimal investment and little in the way of "legacy goals". Other cities did the games different. Manchester put on big CGs and ended with a beautiful stadium (home of Manchester City FC now) that is spurring a billion pound redevelopment of an run down area. Rio held Pan Ams and did it on an Olympic scale as a forerunner of an Olympic bid and, guess what, they now have the Olympics.

Neither games are the Olympics.....both can, however, leave whatever impression/impact as the host city chooses.
 
adma said:
Maybe my point goes beyond the Pan Ams...toward "Pan-Americanism" in general.

And look; where this whole jag of mine started, it's with somebody in this thread singling out Canada as an outlier--without acknowledging the USA as the far bigger "outlier factor": that's talking about the tail while ignoring the dog. The USA and Canada, together are the cultural outliers when it comes to the Pan Ams and Pan-Americanism. Maybe with Canada's situation being compounded by the USA buffer; but it's the USA long ruling the way through its cultural imperialism.

According to this longstanding cultural construct, everything south of the Rio Grande and the Florida Keys is "colonial" by definition. Banana republic. Those wusses didn't invent rock'n'roll, they didn't invent Hollywood entertainment, they didn't invent the Ivy League, they didn't invent nothin'. For the most part, they don't even speak English! Why give them power? At most, use them, condescend to them; but never let them forget: the U. S. of A. is "America". There's only one "America", and "Pan" is that faggy fellow who plays the pipes. Get the hint?

Sure, the Pan Ams and Pan-Americanism in general might be a nice feel-good gesture to wrap one's self around...if you're one of those so-branded "colonials". But north of the Rio Grande: big freaking deal. CanUSA's "truer" cultural etc allegiances in fact are (paradoxically) not Pan-American, but Pan-Atlantic: for every Elvis, there's a Beatles. Mexico didn't produce a Beatles; Brazil didn't produce a Beatles; Argentina didn't produce a Beatles; Jamaica kinda produced a Dylan, but what the hey. Pan-Americanism my foot; to the CanUSA, '12's London Olympics will likely resonate with more "immediacy" than '16's Rio Olympics.

Of course, the absurdity of that position is self-evident...and perhaps especially to under-30s who've lived their life through internet globalism and for whom American cultural imperialism is curdling into grotesque anachronism. For *them*, maybe, the concept of Pan-Americanism comes more naturally...
Click to expand...


So your problem really has little to do with the games, but rather the history of the world and how we are a product of our history? I don't see how it's any different than a European championship, considering the politics and political history of that continent. The concept of "Europe" is no different than the concept of a "Pan-America", really. Perhaps you would feel better if the games were known as the "Western Hemispheric Games" instead?

TOareaFan said:
To add to that, both the Pan Ams and CG are "what you make them".......Victoria and Winnipeg put on understated games with minimal investment and little in the way of "legacy goals". Other cities did the games different. Manchester put on big CGs and ended with a beautiful stadium (home of Manchester City FC now) that is spurring a billion pound redevelopment of an run down area. Rio held Pan Ams and did it on an Olympic scale as a forerunner of an Olympic bid and, guess what, they now have the Olympics.

Neither games are the Olympics.....both can, however, leave whatever impression/impact as the host city chooses.
Click to expand...
Good point, and here's hoping Toronto makes the most of it.
 
So what's wrong with the Pan-American Games for Toronto?

Within a five minute bus ride of my place, there are four Colombian restaurants and 2 Colombian stores, plus stores and restaurants catering to the Guatemalan, Salvadorian, Mexican, Chilean, Peruvian, Ecuadorian and Costa Rican crowds (and proud of it). St. Clair West is quickly transforming from Corso Italia to Calle Latino, the old Little Portugal nabes are becoming more Brazilian, and we've got the second largest Caribbean festival in the world, never mind tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands just from those islands, and hundreds of businesses representing that community in the GTA.

So maybe much of Canada won't take notice. But I'm sure we will - especially our many cultural communities represented at the games by their "home" or ancestral countries.

We're not Pan-American? Pfft.
 
Last edited:
TOareaFan said:
You are correct in saying the last games were not televised - here! They are/were televised in the rest of the Americas.....again, just because Canada ranks these games behind the Commonwealth games in importance does not make them un-important. Most of the countries involved rank them second in importance to the summer olympics.

I would expect that next year's Pan Ams (in Mexico) will be televised here....and that should get a bit more excitement going here once the masses realize that what we have won is the right to host a pretty big event.
Click to expand...

They weren't televised in Canada or the US.
 
jn_12 said:
So your problem really has little to do with the games, but rather the history of the world and how we are a product of our history? I don't see how it's any different than a European championship, considering the politics and political history of that continent. The concept of "Europe" is no different than the concept of a "Pan-America", really. Perhaps you would feel better if the games were known as the "Western Hemispheric Games" instead?
Click to expand...

To be honest, if you want to boil things down to a certain something, I have no problem with the Pan Ams in Toronto, and I'm not arguing against them (or the etymology thereof, for that matter). I'm just emphasizing that there isn't, and never has been, a particularly strong and non-patronizing "Pan-American-consciousness" within the conventional cultural canons of CanUSA. Who cares if the "concept's no different, really"; essentially, by choosing Pan-Atlanticism, we've opted to align ourselves with the colonizers over the colonized.

But again...as I offered, perhaps the tableau's blurrier for those under a certain age who've learned to live with Web-based globalism in lieu of the old Pan-Atlantic cultural model. Because of, well, what I say about colonizers vs colonized, etc--there's an internal critique there...
 
More importantly... we are only a less than 5 years for the games, can/will toronto be able to finish our 'transit city' ? At the rate I see.... shepperd will be the only thing remotely that is complete and that's being ambitious!
 
js97 said:
More importantly... we are only a less than 5 years for the games, can/will toronto be able to finish our 'transit city' ? At the rate I see.... shepperd will be the only thing remotely that is complete and that's being ambitious!
Click to expand...

Ah, what a difference two days makes. Since your last comment the entire transit portion of the Pan Am Games has been put into disarray. Will ANY transit in Scarborough be built? It will be pretty embrassing if athletes headed for the Aquatic Centre have to endure the daily commute that Scarberians face every day (i.e. 1 and a half hours on transit, with 2-3 transfers)

I'm still a bit shocked by this Ontario budget and what it doesn't do for the Pan Ams-- sure the atheltic stuff is getting built, but how the hell are athletes going to get there?
 
jswag said:
Ah, what a difference two days makes. Since your last comment the entire transit portion of the Pan Am Games has been put into disarray. Will ANY transit in Scarborough be built? It will be pretty embrassing if athletes headed for the Aquatic Centre have to endure the daily commute that Scarberians face every day (i.e. 1 and a half hours on transit, with 2-3 transfers)

I'm still a bit shocked by this Ontario budget and what it doesn't do for the Pan Ams-- sure the atheltic stuff is getting built, but how the hell are athletes going to get there?
Click to expand...


Athletes will be put on mini-buses with reserved lanes or police escorts....whatever it takes to get them from the village to their venue. The real need for transit was for spectators....if, as most suspect, the world will view these as Toronto games, then most people are expected to stay downtown.......they will be the ones who will realize how hard it is to get to Scarobrough and Brampton and such.
 
I'm not sure what is more sad, the fact that a bunch of the related TC infrastructure won't be built, or the fact that jswag thought athletes would actually have to take not just one but multiple transfers to get to their events.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top