This is a fascinating thread. It's eaten up most of my afternoon but I can't stop reading. Lots of well thought-out posts.
Architecture is a reflection of the city in its buildings. Or, to put it another way, it's an expression of the city - its history, its function, its cultural makeup - in built form. You can learn a lot about a city - what goes on there, who lives there, which direction it's headed - by looking at its buildings. A city that cares about its architecture is a city that cares about itself. It's confidence, self-assertion, pride. It's the same on an individual level; appearance is directly related to confidence. I suggest that Toronto is just beginning to care about itself in this way. London, in contrast, was brimming with confidence as the mothership of the immensely powerful British empire when many of the seemingly endless grand Victorian buildings there were built.
Toronto has been described as a teenager - awkward, still discovering its identity, but full of tremendous potential. I wholeheartedly agree with this metaphor. It's starting to understand its strengths and how it fits in. It's also starting to look more polished and confident, but it's not there yet. That's fine with me. It's a greater feat to have a genuine understanding of who you are - faults and all - than it is to have a misguided sense of self-importance brought about by insecurity. To thine own self be true...
The mere fact that this in-depth discussion on Toronto's architectural identity is taking place is an example of Toronto's burgeoning maturity. I sense that many of us can pick out some themes or sensibilities in our architecture that make us stop and realize that there are legitimate, tangible examples of a Toronto style. It may not be fully formed, and it may be difficult to articulate, but it's there. And we should discuss it, debate it, argue it, flip it upside down, rotate it and occasionally slam it down in frustration. It's all part of the process.
I suggest that part of Toronto's style is this idea of "brick to glass" mentioned in earlier posts; the gleaming new growing out of the old and paying homage to Toronto's industrial past. Also present is this idea of understated, modest highrises. What some call boring others call clean and sleek. The Bay-Adelaide Centre is an example. The TD centre is arguably one of our greatest buildings and it's just a "boring box". I also suggest that the idea of form following function is part of Toronto's style, too. The Four Seasons Centre is primarily focused on what goes on inside, not outside. The RBC Dexia building would also fall into this category. (Although it's also pretty stunning on the outside if you ask me.) It's apparently an absolutely gorgeous place to work - open, airy and full of natural light. Let's not forget that the way a building looks from the outside is only a small part of what it is. How it looks, feels and works from the inside is arguably much more important.
This is obviously a very incomplete list, but these are a few things that jumped out at me.