I'm objecting to the "vibe" that says we're superior because we don't
live in Langford.
And to the idea that it's cool to bash Langford.
Today, we bash it for its cars and its "suburban" flavor. Yesterday we bashed it for its Dog-Patch-ishness. I call BS.
By the way, did you all see the story in The Economist, An Age of Transformation
? Don't be so sure that Langford-style "suburbs" (which, like Colwood, are actually new city centres in the making) are the embodiment of the kind of retardataire tendencies you ascribe to them. I'm much more worried about Victoria than I am about Langford, I'll tell you that for nothing.
From the article:
America's suburbs are coming to resemble its city centres. That is both good news and bad
In 1960 fewer Americans lived in suburbs than in central cities or the countryside. Ten years later the suburbs had overhauled both; by 2000 they contained more people than the cities and countryside put together. Despite more than a decade of urban boosterism, beginning with sitcoms like “Friends” and “Sex and the City” and continuing with expensive efforts to spruce up downtown districts, the drift to the cul-de-sacs continues. Between 1990 and 2006 the city of Chicago added 50,000 residents, reversing a long decline. Not bad—but in the same period the sprawling metropolis outside the city proper grew by well over a million.
As they swell, the suburbs are changing. Perhaps none ever quite resembled the colourless domestic enclaves popularised by 1970s television programmes such as “The Brady Bunch”; now, they look nothing at all like them. America's suburbs are ethnically and demographically mixed—sometimes more so than its cities. Many are less dormitories than economic powerhouses. (...)
Why are gays and ethnic minorities moving to suburbia? The obvious answer is that they can. No suburban developer would dare bar blacks or any other group from buying houses, as William Levitt did until 1960. It has taken longer to overcome local prejudices—and the fear that behind twitching net curtains live intolerant neighbours rather than merely curious ones. Yet such anxieties are now fading. The Rev Willie James, who launched a lawsuit in 1959 that led to the desegregation of Willingboro, says overt racism is no more, and the covert kind is so covert as to be almost undetectable.
To the extent that ethnic-minority groups have needs distinct from those of whites (which they do less and less) they can increasingly meet them outside city centres. Los Angeles' best dim sum is to be found in the largely Chinese suburb of Monterey Park. Its best Indian restaurants are in Artesia, another suburb. Gays can go online to socialise, points out Mr Gates—or they can go to ordinary bars and clubs, where same-sex couples raise fewer eyebrows than they used to. Many young gays hardly see the point of pricey enclaves like Chelsea in New York or the Castro in San Francisco.
Despite recent falls, property prices in cities like Los Angeles, New York, Miami and Washington have risen far more than the national average since the mid-1990s. Many Americans find it worthwhile to move out and commute to jobs in the city. And they may not have to commute at all. The most important reason people are moving to the suburbs is economic: that is where the jobs are. (More...)
As for the snide question, "You think Langford is functional?" -- just what is that supposed to mean? Are you suggesting it's dysfunctional? Jeebus, look in the mirror (Victoria) for that.
There's plenty of fixing to do all around.