Perhaps the only thing worse than the phony apologetic Torontonian is the defensive native Torontonian.
But the "defensive Torontonian
", is nothing more than the official villain stereotype in this game we play, not a player
in the game. And we all know the "rules" of this game...only negative things about Toronto (known as the "Centre of the Universe
" in the game) can be said or agreed with...and it doesn't matter how uneducated or absurd these things are, if you disagree, then you are a "defensive Torontonian
". And if you happen to make any preemptive remarks that can be construed in any way as positive of Toronto, then it is to be mocked and dismissed as heresy immediately, and the accused found guilty of implying Toronto is "the best city in the world" (it doesn't matter that this has never actually ever been said or implied...there is no middle ground in this game).
The predetermined outcome of this game (as per the designers of the game) is always supposed to be the same...Toronto sucks. The key to this game, is that the less credibility or knowledge you have, the better player you are. Any Torontonians aware of the game generally don't mind the game, or the fact they can't really participate as players in the game, as they accept their fate regarding resentment or ignorance (the motive behind the game), or they just don't care (most Torontonians are foreign born and generally don't have strong ties or feelings of pride for the city).
Torontonians are not officially barred from playing the game, but as to not arouse suspicion from other players (like a black person pledging membership to the KKK), you will generally need to fall into one or more of these categories....extremely self defacing...suffer from "grass-is-greener" syndrome...be an ex-pat (Mtl or Van is best)...or simply masquerade
as a Torontonian (like being from Burlington for instance)...or simply be unaware that you are playing the game at all (by simply pointing out or agreeing with a specific realistic criticism).
Scaramouche's sucks. Miss at all costs.
Now here's someone who knows how to play the "game" !!
Does this sound like a realistic assessment? Well...no, not outside
the game. But it doesn't really matter what the motive is behind the statement, or the fact that we are unaware of your status that entitles you to make such blunt assessments...it fits the game perfectly...take any well established opinion, and say it's the complete opposite (please pass GO, and collect your $200 ). Restaurants are an easy target, as there's no empirical
answer...just opinions, which can never really be "wrong".
Seriously though, Scaramouche (not talking about the Pasta Bar here) enjoys its status for more than just the food. It's one of those comfy old stand-bys, serving up classic dishes and gracious service with reasonable consistency for nearly 30 years. It has an environment with a terrific view and is conversation-friendly, which is why it is favoured for business meetings and "romantic" dinners. It is where noted chefs have cut their teeth (Jamie Kennedy, Michael Stadtlander). I know, I know...in the "game" chefs like this are hacks, without enough combined talent to slather special sauce on a Big Mac. Part of its charm resides in the fact that it is located on the "hill" in Midtown, in a lovely, quiet upscale residential Avenue rd area, in an apartment building
(One Benvenuto....a terrific early 50's modernist building designed by the very talented Peter Dickinson, who died very young).
Did you design the Crystal at the ROM? Just wondering.
Yea...as if I were the ego of Daniel Libeskind, I'd feel it necessary to engage the rantings of some anonymous, chat forum mumbly-peg.
Again, being serious, I think Libeskind has the ego and enough experience at being a "starchitect" to handle the inevitable backlash that is always going to follow him.
Overall, I like his ROM addition. One... I like the juxtaposition of this design in terms of integrating the two older main structures, that are themselves of different eras, and that its "crystalline" structure ties in with exhibits of the museum. Two...I appreciate his theory which the inside space and the outside structure are one in the same, as well as the complexity of the design, which requires you take a closer inspection to figure out, when the "easy" approach is to simply see it as some "scrap pile". Three...it doesn't hurt to have these starchitect baubles here and there...shakes things up a bit, and certainly doesn't hurt attracting more people to the museum itself (which of course in the "game" is the shittiest museum on the planet, and not worthy of the effot in the first place).
What I don't like about it, is that ultimately, this kind of space is not ideally suited to its intended purpose, which is for displaying museum exhibits.
I'm surprised you didn't chime in on how crappy C5 is (or I suppose that one just goes with saying).