December 31, 2007
Villain: Hate
Torontoist is ending the year by naming our Heroes and Villains of 2007––the people, places, and things that we've either fallen head over heels in love with or developed uncontrollable rage towards over the past twelve months. Get your dose, starting Boxing Day and running into the new year, three times a day––sunrise, noon, and sunset.
That’s right. We said it. Hate is a villain. Torontonians spend a whole lot of time complaining. It’s only right to point out the things that don’t work in a city, be it failing funding for public transit, or Rob Ford just being a douche. Look no further than our own year-end coverage, of which fifty percent is dedicated purely to shitting on people. Some of those people are finally getting some well-deserved online come-uppance. Others are… a bookstore.
When it comes to things that suck in this city, we stand to gain a lot more by advocating for alternatives. Calling out bogus people, places, and things is all a part of a healthy democracy, but doing so without even attempting to suggest solutions doesn’t really accomplish anything. Is the ROM Crystal mind-blowingly ugly? Probably. Become an architect. Is Doug Holyday the worst city counselor? Yes. Yes he is. So do your best to encourage anyone you know in Etobicoke-Centre to stop their stupid voting for him.
Obviously there’s some truly evil hate in this city, but that incarnation is so beyond villainous that it barely warrants mentioning here. The kind of hate we can really curb in our day-to-day lives only involves taking an extremely small amount of time to be just a little more thoughtful. With all of us adding our own ideas of how to make this city better (hello, commenting on blog posts!), we stand to actually build a great city, not just tear down a mediocre one.
Photo by haydensimons.
|
The picture is so cute :)
Although I'm certainly not going to defend "hate," there's something to be said for working towards a better future via criticism: essentially, an opportunity for improvement is generally premised upon criticism of an existing situation.
There was a discussion of this on the Spacing Wire in June, and I've had the following quote from Dave Meslin on my Facebook profile since then:
"I try to stay positive in my work and my outlook and hate the well-deserved stereotype that activists are just complainers. But let me refer to the thesis of my Trampoline Hall lecture two years back. I spoke about the 'half full/half empty' metaphor and argued that it’s backwards. Optimism and pessimism are not a measure of your perception on the present, but rather a measure of your perception of the future. If there was no future, and we were stuck with whatever we have now, then the person who sees the cup as half full is the optimist. But, there is a future. Activists and dreamers are those who see the cup full. How do you get the cup to be full? By aknowledging that it is half empty, focusing on the empty half and working towards filling it. Those who are content with the cup remaining half full are simply apathetic. That is what’s wrong with our political culture. We equate complacency with optimism, and hope with complaint."
I'd echo the comments above to a degree by stressing that there is a difference between hate and discontent. Discontent is the most positive force the world has ever known, it is the catalyst for change, and the fuel of imagination.
I have a lot of discontent regarding my home of Toronto, but that is because I dream of what it could be.
#2: The original isn't an argument for optimism over pessimism; your quote gets lost in semantics and misses the point.
Identifying driving forces (need, discontent) and opposing forces (lack of money or political will) is less than half the job. The two need to be reconciled in an innovative way to find a solution the majority can agree on; then someone has to go out and actually change things.
The message isn't about the tone of the conversation; it's "a little less conversation, a little more action!"