Fuzzy Boundaries

Actually Gizmo Williams did pretty well for himself.

Fundamentally you are posing a false dichotomy between promotion of the community and a discussion within the community. This is an opportunity to have a discussion about what our community is, what it means. The name discussion is vehicle for a broader discussion. Other community names have been used but none have been produced by a democratic process, or have gained broad recognition and usage.
The suggestion that the process is driven by the financial interest of realtors and developers is false.
Adam is aware of the process. There have already been two meetings on the topic that were certainly well attended. He came to one of them. This is a form of community promotion in that many people have come to be involved in a discussion about the community and have had a positive experience. This is important. Many people have had negative experiences with "community" meetings. In a discussion about the name of the community there is no need or likelihood that people will get angry with each other. Therefore it is easier to develop a community culture of civil discussion.

You raise some interesting points in your comments John. It is worth noting that Toronto is really just an amalgamation of a bunch of little places that became part of the city (that has grown) over the years. Toronto is the "City of Neighbourhoods" and many places still retain their connections to the past by using those old municipal names. That's one of the great things about our city. Neighbourhood identities create strong communities and better places to live because people develop attachments to their area and work to safeguard and improve it.
We don't send our kids to schools with no names. There are hundreds of schools across the city offering the same education programs, yet each school has its own identity/name that students (to varying degrees) develop an affinity for and as a result engage more closely in the whole education process.
This project is not so different. Will everybody buy-in? No, but we get the feeling there are many people interested in the discussion and that in the end we'll have a community where lots of people have made connections with their neighbours and we'll be able to work together on other issues that will make the place even better.
The real estate issue has come up before and I am happy to address that point again. This project is led by residents - new and old, homeowners and renters. The area is under-going significant re-development because of all of the former industrial land that is being put to new uses now. The community can simply do nothing and leave it to the property developers to invent a meaningless name that works for marketing purposes but no one here can relate to. The Brownstone Builder has signs up on all his projects calling the area "Davenport Village." That means nothing to anyone and before we get straddled with something so unimaginative and unconnected to reality, let's take the initiative and create an identity through a process open to everyone in the neighbourhood. Just through this discussion, we are a better neighbourhood because we are discovering more about our past (and how things came to be), exchanging ideas and information about the place, seeing areas where there is room for improvement and meeting other people who are interested in working together to bring about that change like community gardens, street murals, clean parks and non-polluting electric trains.

Too much like what you put on a hamburger.

Ferris says, "I'm looking forward to having a name! The sort of/kinda junction isn't working for me."

I understand that. I really do. The Junction has a higher profile than the Junction Triangle. If the name Junction Triangle is new to you, it's natural to say that Junction Triangle is too easily confused with the Junction.

It was a long time ago, but I vaguely remember being confused as a teenager when I first heard the Junction Triangle. Part of the confusion came from the fact that Dupont east of Dundas was sometimes called the Junction even though it is outside the boundaries of the old Junction village.

However, I got over that confusion because the name was used a lot in the 1980s. I remember a university friend of mine who became a reporter at the Toronto Star working on a feature-length article about the "Junction Triangle" that ended up on the front page. Because I have strong memories connected with that era, the distinction between the Junction and the Junction Triangle is clear to me in a way that it probably wouldn't be if you don't have those same memories.

It's normal that people disagree. I don't think there is a right or wrong here. There are just different perspectives largely based on different experiences with the neighbourhood.

I don't know what name is going to be chosen. I hope it's the Junction Triangle, but if it isn't I can live with it. However, I do hope that those people who don't like the name can understand why some of us are so attached to it.

This is not a life or death issue, but there are strong emotions attached to a place where some of us have lived our whole lives. To me at least, the name Junction Triangle carries with it a lot of positive memories that have nothing to do with pollution or other problems.

That's a fun suggestion.

But I think it's technically more of a scalene triangle, because all three sides are unequal. And "scalene" sounds way more gritty and tough, looking back at our industrial past. :)

It's also an obtuse triangle, but I don't think we want to be called "Obtuse Village".

Very funny. And kind of soscy, sco scuits usc. But I like town better than village.

Sally Hewson writes:
"nor will it evoke a past that is no longer meaningful here."

I couldn't disagree more. The past is always meaningful because it is the past that produced the present. History is not nostalgia. It is not about living in the past at the expense of the present. On the contrary, a knowledge of history deepens our understanding of what is happening right now. You can't really understand current reality without some idea of how things got to be the way they are. Everybody in this neighbourhood, whether they realize it or not, is affected by the area's history.

It's been pointed out that the name Junction Triangle was most prominent in the 1980s when residents were concerned about pollution coming from local industry. Most of that industry is now gone, but its impact is still with us, because when the factories and processing plants closed, they left behind brownfields that are still being remediated.

The environmental problems of the 1980s have not gone away completely. Here's an example. 640 Lansdowne Avenue used to be TTC barns. 224 Wallace used to be GE. The barns have been torn down and 224 is now office and studio space. However, the chemical TCE is still in the ground. The Lansdowne property sits empty because of a dispute between the TTC and GE over who is responsible for cleaning up TCE on the Lansdowne property. This is a reminder that the neighbourhood's industrial past is quite recent. We're not talking about ancient history. We're talking about events that I and many other local residents clearly remember.

Sally also says a name should have no negative connotations. I would agree that soil contamination is definitely negative, but people coming together to solve a problem is not. On the contrary, the neighbourhood groups associated with the name Junction Triangle are something worth remembering and celebrating. These groups were harbingers of the "healthy change and improvement" Sally mentions in her message.

With the exception of Royce and maybe one or two others, most of the new names being proposed don't acknowledge this neighbourhood's history. People are treating the area as if it were a new consumer product that needs to be branded and marketed.

Forgive me, but that's a cold-hearted way of looking at community. When people talk about developing a neighbourhood brand, which is something I've actually heard people say, they are treating this neighbourhood as a commodity. If local history is bad for marketing, it should be forgotten.

A final point about history: it never stops. We make it every day. On Saturday I was at the Wallace bridge for the Clean Train Coalition's human train. That event is now part of the area's history and I hope that twenty or thirty years from now people will still remember that neighbours got together to fight for the health of their community in the same way the old Junction Triangle groups did in the 1980s.

Well said Sally!!! I agree with you on all accounts. The name should be meaningful, memorable and positive. This has been the whole point of this entire process. In no way would a name change be meant for any negative out comes. The children in this community are forgotten. Without a name these children are missing out on a lot. You often see in the media celebrities going into neighbourhoods like Regent Park to help make the community better for these kids to live in. No one comes to a nameless community. If the average annual income for the majority of citizens living in our community falls below the poverty line then we too need help with things like day to day living, new sports equipment, a new play structure in Perth School for the older kids to use at recess, an expansion of the library, etc. With a new name these things can be addressed. Community can come together and improvements can be made.

I like WestEdge but keep in mind that Dundas along the rail corridor from Bloor to about Annette was recently named WestBend. I totally agree with both Stephen and Fuzzy Guy that we need our own identity.

I like the name Junction Triangle, but I understand that some other people don't. Some of those who don't argue that Junction Triangle creates confusion between this neighbourhood and the Junction. I would like to challenge that claim.

There are many places in the world that have the same or similar name while still maintaining distinct identities. For example, how many Yorks and variations of York are there in the world? In Toronto alone, we have York, East York, North York, Yorkville, County of York and York University. Meanwhile there's a York in England and a New York in the US. In my mind the difference between all of these is quite clear. I would never confuse East York with North York let alone with New York. That's because each of these names conjures up a different image. In fact these distinct images are so powerful I don't notice the similarity in names unless I go out of my way to think about it.

I agree at the moment there is some confusion between the Junction and the Junction Triangle, but that's not because the names are similar. Rather, it's because the neighbourhood itself isn't well known. If the neighbourhood were promoted or if there were some major events in the area people would find it easy enough to distinguish between the Junction and the Junction Triangle. Nobody confuses New York with North York, because North York doesn't have an Empire State Building and New York isn't home to Mel Lastman's ego which is arguably bigger. (I actually like Mel, but that's another topic.)

I was already living in the Bloor-Lansdowne area when the name Junction Triangle was still being used in newspaper headlines. Because of that experience the name carries connotations for me that it doesn't for some other people, which is why I would be disappointed if people picked another name. In my mind there's no confusion at all between the Junction and the Junction Triangle. The difference is as clear as the difference between New York and North York. I would argue that having Junction in the name is no barrier to developing a distinct neighbourhood identity.

This naming project is an interesting exercise but in the end it is less important than other things.

Your take on name extensions using Junction and Roncesvalles is well stated Stephen. "Junction Whatever" just says what we are near. A name extension subordinates our identity to (what is implied to be) a more significant neighbourhood than our own so much so that we don't have our own name, we just coat-tail on the neighbour's name and live in the shadow of those folks on the other side of the tracks. I would like to think we are bigger than that!

The name diamond, when put into the context of the
fuzzyBoundaries district is immediately connected to the track hardware that allows to tracks to cross each other, as the local train infrastructure dominates the area. The local "diamond" however is over north of Dupont and Lansdowne, on the extreme corner of the area; hardly a suitable, or well known landmark to invoke a 'name'.

I have always liked name Royce just because it sounds cool. I think that if people decide to not go with Junction Triangle then we should try to have a one word name like Royce. At least there is an historical aspect to it.

I am so sick of villages (which is inaccurate) and crossings and squares and it would be so great to have the courage to have a one word name. Something so good that it doesnt need any qualifier. I always think that village is used because people are unsure whether their name or their reputation is strong enough on its own. Royce in my opinion is strong enough on its own.