HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2017, 6:26 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vancouver/[Winnipeg]
Posts: 4,892
I agree with Metro-One's post.

Renaming the Queen Charlotte Islands to the Haida Gwaii made sense; those islands already had a name, so we just got rid of the new name we gave them to the name they had all along. However, the original people of this land had no name for a political territory with a southern border at the 49th parallel, the Rocky Mountains, the 120th meridian and the 60th parallel.

I am actually fully supportive of trying to mitigate the vast cultural damage done by colonialism, but this just seems unnecessary. Yes, the name is colonial, but at the end of the day, this place was colonized. There's no erasing that now. Continuing to work towards peace and friendship with indigenous people is what will really make a difference.

Besides, at a certain point, this sort of name changing can almost be considered insulting. Sure we'll have ceremonies and change names to reflect that this land is the land of those that originally inhabited it, but are we ready to give up government control to them exclusively? Since it's their land after all, and we have almost no treaties within BC? No, so let's take it easy with the symbolic gestures. True reconciliation will come from true partnership.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2017, 7:44 AM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Notleygrad, Albertastan
Posts: 8,793
For me, the idea of renaming British Columbia to something else is less about colonialism (I agree, although atrocious things occurred in colonialism, it's a valid part of our history) and more about it just being uber generic of a name. It doesn't really mean anything, aside from referencing that the province used to be a British colony (although to the naive or unacquainted, the name would probably make one think it is still a territory of the UK). I'm not sure what an alternate name would be though, and I don't think it has to be indigenous (although it could be).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2017, 8:05 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vancouver/[Winnipeg]
Posts: 4,892
Boringness or genericness isn't really reason enough to change a name though. After all, United States of America and the United Kingdom are both competing for that title. Once a name is entrenched enough, it doesn't seem as drab. Even less of an issue, in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2017, 8:41 PM
Phil McAvity's Avatar
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
I put the F-U in FUN
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,450
Yes but the vast majority of the province lives very close to the cascades.
__________________
“Ideologies are substitutes for true knowledge, and ideologues are always dangerous when they come to power, because a simple-minded I-know-it-all approach is no match for the complexity of existence.”
― Jordan B. Peterson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2017, 4:53 AM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Notleygrad, Albertastan
Posts: 8,793
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
Boringness or genericness isn't really reason enough to change a name though. After all, United States of America and the United Kingdom are both competing for that title. Once a name is entrenched enough, it doesn't seem as drab. Even less of an issue, in my opinion.
I'd actually say the USA and UK are very drab, generic names. With the UK, you sort of have a work around with alternate names like (Great) Britain, but the US is contentious as the demonym used by North Americans is 'American' which ruffles feathers in South America, where they (fairly rightly) state that the US is not the only place that is American or the only entity that is America. Although the equivalent to United Statesian caught on in Spanish and Portuguese, it sounds even more awful than USA does and hasn't been adopted in English-speaking regions. America/American is an imperfect attempt at culling the generic-ness with a more romantic name, but something more neutral would be effective.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2017, 5:39 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vancouver/[Winnipeg]
Posts: 4,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
I'd actually say the USA and UK are very drab, generic names. With the UK, you sort of have a work around with alternate names like (Great) Britain, but the US is contentious as the demonym used by North Americans is 'American' which ruffles feathers in South America, where they (fairly rightly) state that the US is not the only place that is American or the only entity that is America. Although the equivalent to United Statesian caught on in Spanish and Portuguese, it sounds even more awful than USA does and hasn't been adopted in English-speaking regions. America/American is an imperfect attempt at culling the generic-ness with a more romantic name, but something more neutral would be effective.
Yeah, that's what I was trying to say in my post: they both have extremely boring names. It doesn't mean they should be changed though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2017, 2:58 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 12,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
Yes but the vast majority of the province lives very close to the cascades.
Not really, the actual Cascades in BC are pretty much devoid of major settlements. The Coast Mountains / Insular Mountains are far more prominent for the vast majority of people living in BC. You could even argue that the Rocky Mountains are a far more prominent / important mountain range in BC

This map helps show how small the Cascades are in BC.



The Cascades are far more prominent in Washington State and Oregon State.

Naming the entire province of BC after the small northern tail end of a mountain range that covers an extremely small part of the province is a bad idea IMO.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/306346...h/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0...lhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2017, 6:33 AM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Notleygrad, Albertastan
Posts: 8,793
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
Yeah, that's what I was trying to say in my post: they both have extremely boring names. It doesn't mean they should be changed though.
You don't think these places deserve a more unique and distinctive name?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2017, 7:39 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vancouver/[Winnipeg]
Posts: 4,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
You don't think these places deserve a more unique and distinctive name?
No, I think history is important and that there is too much tied to those names to just go and force something new on the country and their people. The name becomes an identity. I am an American, or I am British. It's like the Boston Red Sox; it is (in my opinion) a terrible name, but it's too powerful and important a name to simply be replaced.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 7:53 AM
BobLoblawsLawBlog's Avatar
BobLoblawsLawBlog BobLoblawsLawBlog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
Boringness or genericness isn't really reason enough to change a name though. After all, United States of America and the United Kingdom are both competing for that title. Once a name is entrenched enough, it doesn't seem as drab. Even less of an issue, in my opinion.
Well the US has America, which is somewhat interesting but confuses with North and South America, and the UK is also called Britain and 'England'.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jan 25, 2017, 8:16 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vancouver/[Winnipeg]
Posts: 4,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLoblawsLawBlog View Post
Well the US has America, which is somewhat interesting but confuses with North and South America, and the UK is also called Britain and 'England'.
I think the development of "America" as a commonly used name for the US is directly to do with the blandness of the United States as a name. They are just large and powerful enough to have been able to hijack it.

You're right that Britain is a good substitute, though I'm sure there must be some difference between it and the UK that I'm not aware of.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2017, 5:35 AM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
Cascadia
The Cascades are mostly in Washington and Oregon state, to start with. Secondly, this refers to a geo-economic region, (often called The Pacific Northwest) so I see no relevancy here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2017, 10:01 PM
VANRIDERFAN's Avatar
VANRIDERFAN VANRIDERFAN is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
I think the development of "America" as a commonly used name for the US is directly to do with the blandness of the United States as a name. They are just large and powerful enough to have been able to hijack it.

You're right that Britain is a good substitute, though I'm sure there must be some difference between it and the UK that I'm not aware of.
Britain is derived from name the Romans gave the area they controlled during the greatest height of their empire, and could be confined to the east coast of the island.

The United Kingdom came into being when England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland were joined under one crown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2017, 9:24 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is online now
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 8,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
British Columbia is an odd name in the contemporary sense, seeing as it is no longer British and the negative associations with Columbus, but there are bigger fish to fry, I think, if we were to rename things. I personally hate duplication of names as it is super derivative, not to mention confusing at times, and only debases the places that are named the same. For example, the Pacific Northwest has 3 Vancouver's... Vancouver BC, Vancouver WA, and Vancouver Island BC. Why? Yeah, I know, George Vancouver, but it's generic and confusing. I'd advocate leaving Vancouver BC as-is as it's the most well-known of the 3, but the other two ought to be renamed, especially Vancouver Island, as the name only makes the place feel less distinct than it really is from the Lower Mainland. Perhaps something named after the Nootka, similar to what was done with the Queen Charlotte Islands, now Haida Gwaii? Not sure about Vancouver WA but I'm sure something could be done.

Other places due for a rename -- Glacier National Park (BC, not MT), Northwest Territories, London, Hamilton, New Brunswick, Saint John (NB), PEI... either due to generic-ness or duplicity

Of course, places can have super generic names and still be popular, eg New York City, Los Angeles, Sydney, Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires, but I do think distinctive names do help, especially for places kind of in the shadow and unable to differentiate themselves.
Vancouver WA has actually considered, off and on, renaming themselves back to Fort Vancouver.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/us...r.html?mcubz=3
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Development Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2018, 7:58 PM
Omnitheo Omnitheo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 2
BC is too large to name after a single geographic feature.

Fraser comes to mind as it is the largest river entirely in BC, but even that at it it's northern extent is barely half way up the province. Also we already have a Fraser Valley region. And it's not the prettiest province name. (And to this day I still hear grown adults pronounce it "Frasier" after the TV show...)

Pacifica is unique, but also simultaneously generic.

There are also no previous local language names to describe the whole area. (not that that has stopped other provinces and territories from taking on small regional names to apply to a large area).

I would be in favour of selecting from a list of indigenous words or names to choose from to find one that sounds good, unique, and has a good meaning behind it. Heck maybe we can find something that still can be abbreviated to BC so the name change isn't as expensive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Apr 6, 2018, 9:28 PM
Phil McAvity's Avatar
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
I put the F-U in FUN
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,450
I agree that a name change is in order so i propose "English Cuba"
__________________
“Ideologies are substitutes for true knowledge, and ideologues are always dangerous when they come to power, because a simple-minded I-know-it-all approach is no match for the complexity of existence.”
― Jordan B. Peterson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2018, 5:51 PM
canadient_ canadient_ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: YMM / YEG / YOW
Posts: 4
I would be in favour of BC changing its name and flag. However, my reasons would be more political as I would prefer to leave UK dominance over Canada in the history books. Plus it would be a symbolic way to start a new partnership with groups who were marginalised by European actions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2018, 7:02 PM
s211 s211 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: The People's Glorious Republic of ... Sigh...
Posts: 5,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by canadient_ View Post
I would be in favour of BC changing its name and flag. However, my reasons would be more political as I would prefer to leave UK dominance over Canada in the history books. Plus it would be a symbolic way to start a new partnership with groups who were marginalised by European actions.
Wow, one of the fastest forum members to join my ignore list.
__________________
If it seems I'm ignoring what you may have written in response to something I have written, it's very likely that you're on my Ignore List. Please do not take it personally.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2018, 9:31 PM
canadient_ canadient_ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: YMM / YEG / YOW
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by s211 View Post
Wow, one of the fastest forum members to join my ignore list.
Great rebuttal! I can tell you put a lot of thought into furthering the discussion

I'm genuinely curious how many people would be willing to forgo the union jack and UK names/symbols in favour of bolstering more Canadian nationalism/republicanism. Polls asking about ditching the resting English symbols usually have a support floor of 40% and a max of high 50s.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2018, 10:13 PM
s211 s211 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: The People's Glorious Republic of ... Sigh...
Posts: 5,403
Quote:
Originally Posted by canadient_ View Post
Great rebuttal! I can tell you put a lot of thought into furthering the discussion

I'm genuinely curious how many people would be willing to forgo the union jack and UK names/symbols in favour of bolstering more Canadian nationalism/republicanism. Polls asking about ditching the resting English symbols usually have a support floor of 40% and a max of high 50s.


Did they also ask if they should change the name of London to remove any past reference to their Roman oppressors.

Your SJW non-sense needs no rebuttal. Bye!
__________________
If it seems I'm ignoring what you may have written in response to something I have written, it's very likely that you're on my Ignore List. Please do not take it personally.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:17 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.