[old boy]

Oxford Canadian English Dictionary: Theatre is correct; Capitol is wrong. End of discussion.

As for the article: it's painful how uncool the article is. Not that I would go to the HuffPo for "cool" news, but it definitely gives off the feeling of a Dad putting on a leather car coat and calling it "cool." Toronto is considered hip, but is definitely not the capital of anything - unlike Montreal five years ago. I have a feeling 2014 is our year.

It also seems like the whole piece was written with one eye on wikipedia and with a vague memory of a trip from five years ago. No specific items that could be considered particular or different. Just vague blandness.

Make what you want of a peculiar article like this, at least the city is being talked about for more than the G20 fiasco. Is 2014 when we finally get to enjoy burgeoning ( and mature ) public spaces, - our waterfront spaces, city hall square etc. Now that would be cool !

 

[kettal]

I'm hungry. I think I'll go eat some art that feeds people.

 

[Tewder]

Given the geeky overreaction to the Niagara tourism spot Toronto's cool factor just dropped to that of:

 

[Thanos]

I never said my way is the right way! There's a difference between not right and wrong. You may want to consider the definition of wrong I am using ...

I know the context in which your using the word wrong. Times change and the english language has adjusted. However, i really hope "refudiate" is never considered as an actual word.

"Toronto is considered hip, but is definitely not the capital of anything - unlike Montreal five years ago."

Montreal lost it's cool and hip factor a long time ago. It shouldn't be considered the capital of anything.

 

[Parkdalian]

"Toronto is considered hip, but is definitely not the capital of anything - unlike Montreal five years ago."

Montreal lost it's cool and hip factor a long time ago. It shouldn't be considered the capital of anything.

The NYT respectfully disagrees:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/arts/music/06carr.html

 

[Thanos]

The NYT respectfully disagrees:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/arts/music/06carr.html

And???
The Washington Post just wrote an article declaring Ottawa as Canada's coolest. Do you agree with that as well because it was written by the Washington Post?
Montreal is an amazing city to visit but not to live there. I was born and grew up there, i know enough about it. The city has been backwards since the late 70s.

 

[Parkdalian]

And???
The Washington Post just wrote an article declaring Ottawa as Canada's coolest. Do you agree with that as well because it was written by the Washington Post?
Montreal is an amazing city to visit but not to live there. I was born and grew up there, i know enough about it. The city has been backwards since the late 70s.

Is this the article you are referring to?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/08/AR2010070805403.html

It doesn't seem to be saying that Ottawa is any better than other cities - it just says it's better than it used to be.

In 2005, a lot of American papers and magazines wrote about how amazing Montreal's music scene was. Here's an NP post talking about it:

http://www.nationalpost.com/arts/story.html?id=1249280

It's not something I made up. It was a definite fact at the time - Americans were going crazy for Montreal. HuffPo aside, the same is not happening for Toronto right now.

 

[nfitz]

The Washington Post just wrote an article declaring Ottawa as Canada's coolest. Do you agree with that as well because it was written by the Washington Post?

Have you spent a winter in Ottawa? It's cooler than either Montreal or Toronto. Though Quebec City might take the prize.

 

[Tewder]

The only thing cooler or hipper in Montreal is their own confidence about how cool and hip they are. It goes a long way

 

[Oliver Tweed]

The specifics of the article are not what's important here. What's important is that it's a positive article about the city.

 

[that_girl_there]

The specifics of the article are not what's important here. What's important is that it's a positive article about the city.

Yes. Agreed.

The only thing cooler or hipper in Montreal is their own confidence about how cool and hip they are. It goes a long way

Also agreed. Toronto needs to think of itself as a first-class city before it can be one. Montreal is plagued with many problems and yet they still think of themselves as great. We need to do more of that here.

The NYT respectfully disagrees:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/ar...ic/06carr.html

I knew from the get-go of this article that somehow that insufferable band The Arcade Fire would be mentioned. God they're obnoxious. This article really only matters to the select group of self-loving indie music fans, and proves nothing to the rest of us.

This article is also 5 years old...a lot can happen in 5 years...

 

[Thanos]

In 2005, a lot of American papers and magazines wrote about how amazing Montreal's music scene was. Here's an NP post talking about it:

http://www.nationalpost.com/arts/story.html?id=1249280

It's not something I made up. It was a definite fact at the time - Americans were going crazy for Montreal. HuffPo aside, the same is not happening for Toronto right now.

Agreed, Montreal had a good music scene in the first half of the decade but has died since then. Toronto's music scene in the second half of the decade is just as good.
While were on the topic, since when is the music scene the deciding factor of whether the city is "cool". And if it is, well Toronto's hip hop scene has been far ahead any other city in Canada. However, for you hip hop is probably far from "cool".

"The only thing cooler or hipper in Montreal is their own confidence about how cool and hip they are. It goes a long way"

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Parkdalian]

^My point is that if you want to talk about being "cool" - however dumb that objective is - you can't just give yourself that label or else it sounds like something Dads do "I'm cool with these cool sunglasses!" You have to be considered cool by outsiders. Montreal in 2005, was considered cool by outsiders because of its music scene. It was the 90s Seattle of the 00s. And no, I don't think a music scene is the only indicator. But Toronto, currently, is not being written up as any centre of hipness with any sort of regularity. (About the closest is something like this. Just a few more pieces and we can consider it a trend rather than an anecdote.)

(BTW your assumption that I don't like hip-hop is weird. Toronto's hip-hop scene is big in Canada, but it is not blowing away Americans, with the exception of Drake and maybe Kardinal Offishal.)

And compare the depth of reporting about Montreal in 2005 in the NYT - it gives specific details - with the bland, tourism-focused reporting of the HuffPo piece. I wouldn't be surprised if Toronto Tourism had actually paid for it!

I think Toronto is amazing and wonderful and all that. But let's have some perspective on how other people judge our city.

And I think this is part of Toronto's problem. My NYC friends ask me - what makes Toronto different than other North American cities? Or, what would make us visit your city rather than another? For Montreal, that question is easy - Montreal has smoked meat, bagels, crazy drivers, strip clubs, stylish boutiques - but for Toronto, it is harder to come up with things that truly differentiate us. The things we can really crow about, like having a livable downtown core and a general open-mindedness about immigration are great for people living here, but they don't really scream: come visit!! Possible aquariums and the Toronto Island and everything else are great, but how is this particularly different than other cities? We need to start focusing on figuring those things out rather than getting offended when someone suggests we could be doing things better and currently Americans think we're nice but aren't that crazy about us.

I do think the Scott Pilgrim movie will have a huge effect, tho. And BSS and Drake are big ambassadors for Toronto.

 

[adma]

Agreed, Montreal had a good music scene in the first half of the decade but has died since then. Toronto's music scene in the second half of the decade is just as good.
While were on the topic, since when is the music scene the deciding factor of whether the city is "cool". And if it is, well Toronto's hip hop scene has been far ahead any other city in Canada. However, for you hip hop is probably far from "cool".

Actually, since when *has* the music scene been such a deciding factor? The whole "music scene = cool city" equation seems mired in the boomer/Xer-centric 20th century, before the music industry collapsed and the internet overcame everything in sight. Even Montreal as something "validated" by Arcade Fire seems a pale, forced, wishful echo of Liverpool, San Francisco, Manchester, Seattle, et al.

For all that Broken Social Scenesterism, any current "coolness" to Toronto seems rather post-musical in the broader picture.

 

[kEiThZ]

And???
Montreal is an amazing city to visit but not to live there. I was born and grew up there, i know enough about it. The city has been backwards since the late 70s.

Does a city have to be uber-livable to be cool? I visit lots of cool places. Doesn't mean I would love to live there.