Lovely Names for Lost Landscapes

 

   I just did another post about the elimination of old geographic names and I will not bore you again with that subject. Instead, I will suggest that we should also be concerned about the creation of new toponymic terms. Particularly as they are applied to recently constructed housing developments.

   You may have noticed when travelling around the perimeter of London, that the natural landscape is rapidly being altered and replaced by rows of very large homes on very small lots. While they may not look attractive, they are attractively described and if you are lured by the name, you are likely to be disappointed. 

   There appear to be no truth in advertising regulations about names which are deceptive, so I will offer a few suggestions here. If the name sounds old and has the word "Mews" in it, it is brand new. Often the description is about things which don't exist on the sites, or conveys notions about what the place is not. "Rolling Meadows" is likely to be flat and not green. If trees are mentioned there will be none and do be especially wary of those that offer groves of chestnuts. Avoid descriptive phrasing that uses "At", as in "The Sanctuary at Sydenham Canyons" or "The Preserves at Port Stanley." An "Andover Trails" will have few and none that are not concrete and if the brochure uses the word "Trace" for "Trails", surely there will be no place to hike. 

Fancy Names for Bland Developments is Not a New Development

   In the early part of the last century one finds examples of entrepreneurial developers who were guilty of real estate hyperbole and in this quote you will learn that I am not the first to make fun of it.

"I had not been long in the Northwest before I discovered it to have elegancies. It first astonished and then mildly amused me to run across, among the stumps still standing on logged-off land, a hunt club, complete with red coats, masters of the hounds, and considerable view halloo….
The Northwest was spotted here and there with elegancies other than hunt clubs. I suppose all new countries go through like labors. Kensington Manors were appearing suddenly where one might yet hear the melancholy cadences of the owl. Out of the newly drained swamps, as one watched, sprang Mayfairs, Windermeres, Highland Moors. A small convivial party of newspaper reporters once devoted an entire evening to conjuring up the most preposterous names possible for one of these raw new subdivisions. We finally settled on Buckinghamshire Mews."

The Source: 
   Far Corner: A Personal View of the Pacific Northwest Including Certain Places No Longer Found, Stewart Holbook.

The Bonus:
  What the hell is a "view halloo"? ---"a shout given by a hunter on seeing a fox break cover."

British Columbia or Sasquatchia?

 

Should The Name Be Changed? 

   

   At some point in the near future, the name of the province of British Columbia may be changed. Although right now a majority of the people who reside there do not want to change the name, those in the vocal minority are likely to make the call to do so and it will be done. 

   There are two major problems with the name: 1) the word "British" and 2) the word "Columbia".  They are both now noxious. 

    Don't worry. If the name changes and you miss the news, you will still be able to find the province. For example, if you google the "Queen Charlotte Islands" you will now automatically learn from the Wikipedia entry that this group of islands is known as "Haida Gwaii." I suppose future google searches will also find Galiano Island and Mount Garibaldi under their new names. And, for that matter, Prince Edward Island. 

   I was recently in British Columbia which is why I am bringing up again, the subject of "names." I wrote "again" because I think it is mostly mistaken to yield ground to the totalitarians of toponymy who would like to vacuum clean the map, and have said so. In short, remember the children's rhyme, "Sticks and stones.." For arguably more mature reasons see, Names on the Land, No More Name Changing or First They Came For the Names. For even more about both names and words now problematic see, This is NOT About Mariah Carey, where statues are also touched upon (the puzzling title is explained by the fact that it was conjured up on a new year's eve. I would change the title, but am not unhappy with the content. You will find in it, for example, a consideration of university names which are, or will be, under the microscopes yielded by the new linguistic puritans. Remember "Ryerson University?")

   More than enough said. You can decide for yourself and probably already have. Below are seven sources relating to the name "British Columbia." The last one is my favourite. Citations are provided in case the links rot. 

Sources:

“Renaming Places: How Canada is Reexamining the Map: The History Behind the Dundas Name Change and How Canadians are Reckoning With Place Name Changes Across the Country — From Streets to Provinces,” Robert Jago, Canadian Geographic, July 21, 2021. This is an interesting piece and in it one learns that in 1858, there was consideration given to the idea that an “Indian name should be sought out and adopted in a translated shape.” Columbus is thoroughly denigrated and the author asserts that: "The name British Columbia is unquestionably offensive in this or any era. The name was never meant as anything but a placeholder, disliked at its own inception; it became the name of the colony, and then the province, because time and distance prevented the founders from finding their preferred choice — an Indigenous name.”

“Should British Columbia Change Its Name? As We Reckon With History, Some Say It's Time,” CBC NEWS, AUG. 2, 2021

“There's been a national reckoning on place names and the people they're named after — and some say that conversation should include looking at the name of British Columbia, which is derived, in part, from Christopher Columbus.”

“Majority of British Columbians In New Survey Say No Way to B.C. Name Change

CBC News · Posted: Aug 31, 2021

Most B.C. residents don't want the name of their home province to be changed to reflect the area's Indigenous heritage, according to a survey created by Research Co. 

“A New Name For British Columbia? Here Are a Few Ideas,” Vancouver is Awesome, Jack Knox, Jan, 28, 2018. 

“First, let’s get real: Nobody is going to change the name of British Columbia. Good idea or bad, it isn’t going to happen. It’s an intriguing proposal to debate, though, as proven by the response to last Sunday’s column.”

It’s an intriguing proposal to debate, though, as proven by the response to last Sunday’s column. After we asked readers to submit alternative names, more than 300 poured in. Some were serious, some frivolous, some thoughtful, some racist, some anatomically challenging.

All were in response to an idea first advanced a decade ago by Victoria’s Ben Pires, who argues the province’s current name is neither historically accurate (direct British rule didn’t last that long) nor inclusive. Thinking about that perspective was the real point of the exercise.

“Rename British Columbia: The Province’s Name is the Shameful Holdover of a Colonial Past," Stephen Collis,  The Walrus, June 16, 2020.

“It Is Time to Rename British Columbia: Changing British Columbia’s Name is an Idea That Has Been Percolating for a While. A Notion That is not as Far Fetched as it Sounds or Without Precedent,” Jennifer Cole, Toronto Star, June 29, 2021.

“No, Don’t Change British Columbia’s Name,” Mark Milke, The ORCA, May 24, 2021.

This is a good article to read if you don’t think the name should be changed. The basic argument is presented briefly below, after which the author discusses slavery on the West Coast, that is, the practice of slavery in Indigenous societies.

“To wit, if the argument for changing British Columbia’s name rests on the notion of past colonial imperfection, that misses the big picture as well: Everyone’s ancestors fail by modern standards. And others, even out-of-step on some matters, had redeeming qualities on others.

But when ideologues look back, they see only extremes in black-and-white, and never the full spectrum of colour. They engage in cartoonish history.”

The Bonus: 

Forget about the politics and have fun. Read this fascinating book:

For more about the author, George R. Stewart, see: "George R. Stewart (1895 - 1980).

The Left Coast

    My recent trip to British Columbia began with my reading about the “Far Corner”, while on the plane. The “Far Corner” is that area of the continent encompassing Oregon, Washington and British Columbia and the full title of the book being read was (and still is): Far Corner: A Personal View of the Pacific Northwest Including Certain Places No Longer Easily Found. 

   The view offered is from the 1920s and from it one learns that British Columbians were driving on the left-hand side of the road during the early part of that decade. The following description of the protests over changing the rules of the road seems now to be rather quaint given the more noxious debates currently raging. 

“At that time the stranger discovered, before he got to his hotel, that Vancouver was no Yankee city. His taxi ran on the left. So did all other traffic, including the specially built streetcars. This was odd enough even in Canada, where otherwise, except for tiny Prince Edward Island off the East coast, traffic followed the right-hand custom common to the United States. 

    It was confusing at first, though one ceased to think of it; and it was fair notice to the outlander, either Canadian or American, that the Province of British Columbia proposed to live up to its name. This was a true British Commonwealth. But there had been a mounting opposition to the left-hand rule. This presently congealed into a strong parliamentary clique and, after a good deal of impassioned oratory, the provincial legislators passed an Act changing the rule of the road to right-hand. The time set for a change was January 1, 2019.

   I was still a resident of the province, and recall the uproar as the day drew near. The letter columns of the Vancouver Province, Sun, and World, and of the Victoria Colonist and other papers, were seething with bitter protests and denunciations concerning the un-British, even traitorous adoption of “Yankee notions.” Various societies, associations and clubs were galvanized into action, They held meetings. They passed and drew up resolutions damning the whole business as the work of Satan in league with Uncle Sam. Communications signed John Bull and The Englishman, both gentlemen obviously close to apoplexy, were given prominence. What was good enough in the time of Gladstone, it appeared; what was good enough for the Pitts, both Elder and Younger, and doubtless, too, good enough for Beowulf, was good enough for British Columbia in the twentieth century. It was freely prophesied that collisions and wrecks would strew the streets and highways with carnage compared with which the field at Balaclava was as nothing.

   The awesome day came and passed. The local press reported that not a single accident occurred that could have been charged to the change. Disappointed John Bull and True Englishman returned to their more usual subjects of letters to the editors, things like the first crocus in Kerrisdale, and the correct ingredients of proper chutney."

Sources: 
Far Corner...is by Stewart Holbrook and you will enjoy it. Here are two chapter headings which will likely entice you: "The Edens of Erewhon" and "The Dead Stacked Like Cordwood."
About the subject of "Left-Handed Driving" you are now curious. For B.C. see: "99 Years Ago, British Columbians Started Driving on the Right-hand Side of the Road," Bronwyn Smyth, Vancouver Is Awesome, Jan. 1, 2021. For a list of all countries where they still drive on the "wrong side" see this Wiki entry: "Left- and Right-Hand Traffic."

The Bonus:
Speaking of quaintness, attentive readers who made it to the last sentence will have noticed that letters were being written  to newspapers in British Columbia alerting readers to the blooming of the "first crocus in Kerrisdale." Readers of this blog will recall that letters were written in Great Britain reporting on the arrival in the spring of the first cuckoo. The Times even published a series of books with the titles, The First Cuckoo, etc. See: "Books of The Times."

A Return To Action (Maybe)

 

   I have returned from the West Coast and proof that I was there is offered in the photo above. It is also raining, so I may get back to blogging. Apart from placating my complaining premium subscribers, I need to put something here to push the late Professor Hilborn farther down on the screen. Luckily, for me, no one read that post, or at least no one from up at Western. To make sure he is pushed to the bottom I will refer you to my "Featured Post" which is to the right (at least for today.) In it, I offer excuses about the last time I offered excuses. I will now try to think of a topic to post about. Surely I will be able to come up with something about British Columbia and I will get right back to you, if it is still raining.