With the expansion of the digital social realm and an atomized American-style transportation system, the proliferation of third places is needed now more than ever in Toronto.
The term “third place,” coined by American sociologist Ray Oldenburg, is used to describe a locale separate from the “first place,” one’s home, and the “second place,” one’s workplace or place of study. Distinct characteristics of third places are that cost should not be an inhibitor, and that one is not obligated to be there. They are conversational, low-profile, accessible, neutral, and allow patrons to ‘linger’ for extended periods of time.
With regards to downtown Toronto, places which could ideally be third places are available, but come at a high cost –– whether that be paying a $20 cover at a hip jazz bar, or paying a premium for hybrid bookstore-cafés. Even spaces such as Toronto’s historic Distillery District have become commodified, as a ticket is required to enter during the holiday season.
As written by Oldenburg in Celebrating the Third Place, “where the means and facilities for relaxation and leisure are not publicly shared, they become the objects of private ownership and consumption.”
The paradox is that non-franchised cozy and comforting places must pay their exorbitant Toronto rent, causing high prices for service. In this way, big corporations that can afford high rent and provide low pricing, like Tim Hortons or McDonald’s, seem to be the popular spaces of congregation.
In an atomized social climate such as Toronto’s, many are subjected to their own personal circles, and this sense of isolation is compensated by the ubiquity of content and community on one’s personal device. Oldenburg’s idea that the third place lends much needed “public balance to the increased privatization of home life” is clear in this aspect.
It can then be argued that the third place, like many other socio-cultural modes and mediums of life, has been shifted over to the digital realm in the modern context. Various platforms allow direct and unlimited access to not only their own social circles, but an international audience, along with a world of content without any additional charge. From the comfort of one’s own home it is possible to fulfill such sociological needs of connection, although a screen cannot truly replace another human face.
In Oldenburg’s words: “Life without community has produced, for many, a lifestyle consisting mainly of a home-to-work-and-back-again shuttle.” I’d bet this would especially resonate with fellow commuter students of York.
Even in suburbia with a mere couple of subway lines and bus routes, third places, even if they truly existed, would be inaccessible, or at best inconveniently located. This is my subtle recommendation for a more efficient and accessible transportation system. For this, Oldenburg blames “unfunctional zoning,” where Americans have to get into the car for everything, and when they do, “they drive to strips and malls where only the chains can afford to lease.” This is fortified by the lack of commercial spaces in residential zones.
Shopping malls may cross one’s mind as a potential to be a “third place,” yet there is no true sense of community in the passing faces of complete strangers, and in patroning shops whose costly rent can only be paid by corporations, crowding out small businesses.
Although parks bloom in Toronto’s summer months, whether that be at High Park, the Harbourfront, or Trinity Bellwoods, these spots are unavailable for most of the harsh Canadian winter. Especially for the elderly of Toronto, who Stuart Butler writes are at a “high risk of being cut off socially,” the call for more accessible, welcoming, and non-costly spaces is blaring. I need not say more, as Oldenburg put perfectly, that “what suburbia cries for are the means for people to gather easily, inexpensively, regularly, and pleasurably –– a ‘place on the corner,’ real life alternatives to television […] that do not necessitate getting into an automobile.”
