Comments on: Expo, or, the tale of two mayors

By: Jason Stewart

Jason Stewart — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:07:32 +0000

I was born in the 1970s, so I missed the whole Expo 67 event by years, though its influence was always there. I remember seeing a faded Expo poster on the wall of my dentist’s office. The event always fascinated me. I went to Montreal in 1985 and expected to see the site ‘as it was’, a popular tourist attraction? I couldn’t have been more wrong. The islands were largely forgotten by that time. The entire site was now seen as an ‘eyesore’ occasionally used by film companies who wanted footage that resembled the ‘ruins of a futuristic city’. It was clear that the rotting pavilions had no bright future and it was only a matter of time before they would be demolished. Walking through the weed-infested ‘ghost town’ was actually quite sad. It was the future that never came to be. It actually still looked quite impressive. Parts of it still had that 67 charm. The multitude of vandalism made by a post-expo generation was both heartbreaking and offensive. The dream was clearly over and now even the ruins are gone. Ironic how the beloved Expo 67 was left with few remaining structural landmarks and yet the ill-fated, 1976 Montreal Olympics still has much of its legacy still standing, including the much loathed, Olympic Stadium. Go figure!

By: Rob

Rob — Fri, 02 Apr 2004 03:30:18 +0000

I dunno. Call me an old fart, but I think the magic ingredient that’s missing is optimism about the future. When I was little, just a few years after expo67, this was my favorite book:
http://sun3.lib.uci.edu/~jsisson/youmoon.htm
I had no reason to doubt that I would, in fact, live on the moon. Today, the idea is, quite literally, a joke:
http://www.google.com/jobs/lunar_job.html
There are no flying cars, or floating anything, and houses just get uglier and uglier.(although I must admit there are pockets of hope: this view of the house of tomorrow from the Century of Progress exhibition would not look out of place at Caban:
http://www.chicagohs.org/history/century/photos6.html )
A society that builds ugly houses, and can’t work up optimism about the future will never mount a great world’s fair. We make good rotis here, and there’s good music, but we’re not gonna pull off anything like this:
http://framemaster.tripod.com/1939wf.html

Maybe someone will demo a cell phone, with a case by Roots, or there’ll be some good video games.

By: MK

MK — Thu, 01 Apr 2004 18:31:59 +0000

I deliberately left Expo ’86 out of the post, because it didn’t have the same critical factors going on that made Expo ’67 great, and that could make Expo ’15 great.

There was no visionary mayor in Vancouver at that time, and also no culturally important factors (there is of course a huge Asian influence, but I am not sure where that stood at the time, and if it was already in full swing, it wasn’t being used to full advantage.)

Quebec’s cultural richness, in part, made ’67 a success. I think it’s correct to state that Toronto has such a diversity of cultures, and is so proud of it, that it could base an exciting Expo around that fact. It is something worth telling the world about.

Expo ’86 is a good lesson in what not to do. I think Toronto’s Olympic bids are also good lessons – they failed for a reason. An Expo bid would have to acknowledge what is unique and good about Toronto – and leave a legacy that isn’t "shiny downtown condos". I think it’s possible to do it, and strike a balance with other issues affecting the city.

By: Shawn

Shawn — Thu, 01 Apr 2004 15:53:25 +0000

I went looking for ’67 ruins in October. I found a few lamp posts and foundations. And lots of space. The few structures that remained were bad renovations, like biosphere and the casino. that part was sad. but i found the Calder thing – it was still windswept, but the sun was setting behind Montreal and i was just about the only one there and it was perfect. the part that wasn’t good was the interlocking brick they put underneath. very un’67. Though the out of context feeling, knowing that the piece was there for Expo ’67 where it was surrounded by more utopic future, was neat.

Taking the Metro to the park was neat though. The station there is double big to handle the ’67 crowds.

By: rob

rob — Thu, 01 Apr 2004 02:11:07 +0000

We should hold out for for something at least as cool as the Atomium
http://www.atomium.be/
or the Philips Pavillion
http://users.skynet.be/P-ART/PARADISE/JOURNAL/JOURNAL1/journ1.htm from Expo ’58.
I had the pleasure of expoloring the burned-out shell of the American Pavillion of Expo ’67 before they turned it into some lame biosphere thingy. It was a monumental ruin, and we just don’t have enough good ruins, these days. Also on that trip we walked through a weed-choked field to find the big Calder piece. They’ve cleaned it up and moved it. I liked it beter when it was a relic of a lost age.

By: Pixel Strudel

Pixel Strudel — Thu, 01 Apr 2004 00:09:29 +0000

Toronto. Oh Toronto. We know it’s a world class city, but is it accessible to the world? Isn’t this the same lover’s quarrel we had over the Olympic bid of 2000, and 2006? Do we keep losing or are we out to sabatoge ourselves?

I remember the Pope visit with particular fondness. The young catholic invasion was realized while I was sipping a half pint of beer on the sneeky dees patio. With only a small fence guarding me from the sway of youth backpacks I wondered: what has happened to Toronto? I too thought I had an exclusive claim on the city. Dreading filled subway cars, and making polite conversation on the way home. I sulked and sipped behind my little fence. (at least I chose a side)

What is it about the Torontonian mind set that wants to be exclusive to be world class? Do want to better ourselves rather than share the wealth?

Prague, Paris, so many major European cities give themselves over to waves of tourists and large events every summer. The residents leave their cities and let the tourists take over. What is it about Toronto that makes us want to hold our ground?

By: Shawn

Shawn — Wed, 31 Mar 2004 21:50:37 +0000

While i agree, fully, about the goodness and phantasmagoricalness of Expo ’67, my big giant red flag would be Expo ’86. Do you remember Expo ’86? I do, a bit, but not really. Sure i wanted to goto Vancouver then, and it was a neat thing. But i was 12. Then it left, an d i don’t hear people talking about 86 the way people like my mom remember their trip to 67.

Expo ’86 is hardly a blip on the culture meter, the historic one, anyway. I didn’t matter. It doesn’t matter. It cleared out a lot of space for shiny downtown condos. That’s not inherently bad, but it isn’t Expo ’67.

67 was a pivotal time the history/coming of age of Montreal, Quebec and Canada. All three. You could argue we became sovereign that summer. Throw in a little Trudeaumania and we became sexy, finally, with black turtlenecks and ascots and a bit of swashbucking.

I do see a parallel with Toronto though – Toronto is at a crucial time in its own developement – we’re either going to get our shit together and turn this city into one of the best places in the world or we’re going to slide into the familar urban decay that many north american cities experience. If Expo capitalized on this Torontopian idea, it might work. We do have something to tell the rest of the world, for sure – this multicultural experiment we have going here is unrivaled. And yes, Miller and his folk would do it right if anybody could. A John Tory type could produce a big Expo, but i don’t think that sort of politician recognizes what is really wonderful in this city.