(Ian goes on at some length, in the midst of arguing, about how 502 Eastern is consistent with the “typology” of other buildings, like 970 Eastern and the Maddy Harper Lodge.)

JOE: Why, because it’s two columns with a peaked roof?

IAN: Yeah, with one unit per floor on either side and an articulated entrance at half-level. The massing is the same: Two tall blocks with a split in the middle where the entrance is, whether it’s a split in the middle or a line. In the case of Maddy Harper Lodge, there’s a walk-through separation between the blocks. And at 970, there’s only a superficial recessed articulation between the blocks.

— I really feel like I’m just taking dictation here. Why don’t pretend we’re having a normal review?

— You only just started typing after arguing about the relevance of looking at other buildings. So let’s begin. You can put up the photos of the— They’re great photos, by the way.

— Fine. So all I was going to say here is that this is the most interesting block in Leslieville, if not the whole city, because you’ve got the old Toolbox, which fortunately is closed, and an empty lot that used to be a shanty [actually the patio of the Toolbox], then this co-op, then another shanty and the Hell’s Angels. Top that, Lower East Side! There. That’s what I wanted to say. Why don’t we just let you take over now?

— I’m not denying the importance of the context.

— There is no context. It’s a non-neighbourhood. It’s like the worst possible place to live in the city.

— It’s hell. I mean –

— But now suddenly rich people are gonna move in.

— Not beside the co-op they’re not, unless they’re planning on building a condo there or something, but then it’d be beside the Hell’s Angels. I mean, in many ways you’re right to emphasize the streetscape location etc., because talk about relegating the poor to long-forgotten parts of the city.

— But the thing I like about the building is pretty much everything but the entrance.

— Let’s have a look at the entrance there. Wow, that’s a disaster.

JOE: Especially with the easvestroughing angled on the roof there. Good for sliding down the ice onto your face.

IAN: Well, no, actually, they’ve got that corrugated metal roof with some kind of ice guard on top of it, and then some kind of ice guard and the eavestrough, but even that’s probably not enough. You know, they’ve got this commercial glass door squished and squeezed between the two huge blocks and under the terrible entrance roof.

— And the banisters for the ramp are the worst possible metal banisters. They aren’t even trying. And the bricks and the concrete don’t match.

— Where’s the concrete that you’re seeing?

— On the ramp side.

— Oh, yeah.

— Anyway, I love the four pods, which are apropos of nothing, and unlike the Maddy Harper Lodge, this doesn’t seem like an architect’s pet project that he finally got to do and it happened to be an Indian residence. This seems like the architect knew he could do whatever he wanted, so he did.

— I don’t know if I get exactly what you’re saying, because this does look like an architect’s pet project. It has a definite style and definite references, architectural references, anyway.

— It’s not something completely weird like a postmodern residence for Indians. It doesn’t seem like a preconceived notion that somebody finally decided to fund. It looks like “This neighbourhood is the pits so I can do whatever I want.” And they’re using siding in an interesting way, as you said was possible last time.

— That’s true about the siding and about the material in general, the colour. The breaks. The ascension from brick to siding to stucco.

— I don’t think it’s stucco. I think it’s more siding.

— That one there, top, is definitely stucco.

[Shows another picture]

IAN: So it is.

JOE: Anyway, the construction-site picture –

— Taken from the rear?

— Obviously. Looks like it could be anywhere on the planet that has snow. It could be a suburban development. That proves to me that there is no interest in context. It stands aloof from context.

— Thank God.

— I also find the windows kind of weird. You have these recessed almost shared balconies in the rear pods and your favourite punched windows in the front pods. Which overlook nothing.

— I would say that the front pods and the back pods have punched windows into the rear of the units into the little tiny courtyard which look into each other.

— That made no sense whatsoever.

— Anyway, the point is the front units and the back units each have these little punched windows that look into a recess or a court.

— The back windows don’t.

— How do you know?

— I’ve been there? It’s visible from the picture?

— How can you tell what’s behind that?

— I can tell what’s behind the rear pods, which, in case you can’t tell which is which, have dark brown at the base. What’s behind them is a laneway and the backsides of other houses.

— All right, in front, then. I’m talking about this courtyard, this vertical shaft. I would surmise that the front units and the back units both have windows looking into the shaft.

— I would too.

— Confusion about front and back aside, this is a totally postmodern building, without question. It not only has all of the, or many of the signature elements of the postmodern residential building, it’s also playing into a type that seems to be developing, at least in this area, for small-scale subsidized housing. And that’s what I was trying to get at with the comparison to the other buildings. The single sliding door going out onto a balcony, whether recessed or not, repeated all the way up the building. Same as Maddy Harper and 907, I think it is. Anyway, that doesn’t make the building uninteresting or inappropriate.

— Here they had the courage of their convictions, though, and they went all the way and really gutted them down the middle, though I see that the back halves are wider. You can’t see all the way through from the front to back.

— No, I probably think that’s a hall, circulation, landing, something like that. I really hope that the lower square windows don’t open into a unit. You know, why bother? It’s just the most terrifying feeling to look at the feet of the Hell’s Angels walking by, or the wheels of their bikes.

— Or the garbage.

— Or the garbage, yeah. I believe this one is taller than the other small ones, right? It’s four storeys, or 4½. And, you know, the architect does a good job of scaling the building to diminish the impact of its height.

— I don’t get why there’s bedsheets or something sticking out of the top balconies.

— Well, we’ve seen this before, right? Some people put their junk out there, and some people seem to be trying to put a screen on the open railing, which I can’t entirely blame them for. This building is facing relatively south, and it’s practical for the balconies to be recessed, and it also adds, you know, or at least takes away from the flatness of the blocks.

— I was just trying to say that this really is subsidized housing and that’s a sort of Cletus and Brandine thing to do.

— Well, maybe – “Ian laughs.” All right, well, I’m gonna offer a somewhat personal opinion/observation.

— Mm-hmm.

— I think your skills and interest in photography have improved to the point... hmm. Well, you are also looking at buildings more architecturally, or architectonically, as they say. Anyway, you’ve come to the point that you can take these pictures that can actually make the buildings look beautiful, successful, well balanced, etc., etc. It’s really one of the tricks of architecture today. You know, a building is nothing without its photos.

— And its own publicist.

— And in looking at this last photo of the whole building, I think we both agree that there are sort of some flaws that really make you think twice about this as a beautiful building. The biggest flaw has to be where it’s located. I can’t believe they’ve stuck these poor people down there, literally poor. I mean, look, there’s interesting play between volumes, materials, textures, colour, hierarchy. But that’s all an architectural sort of pastiche, you know? Why would someone that needs a roof over their head care about that more than they would care about being two doors down from a biker gang?

— Or right next door to a “notorious” leather bar. Which was really worse? The bar made noise every night.

— That’s true, you know, and because the bar’s closed now, I don’t think of it as an issue, but I guess it was, eh? Anyway, we’ve talked about Eastern Ave., especially about the last building that was right at the intersection. It’s just so quintessentially anti-residential. It is not where people live, or should be.

— And the best part is there are homeowners there.

— That’s true, isn’t it? Like the house right next door. Next door or two doors?

— Next door. But that one is more typical of the street but not as desirable, because some of them actually have nice gardens. That one has this old codger sitting in front of it sometimes. What I would want out of this [502] is for the middle stratum to be on apartment each, a two-storey apartment. That would be interesting. Then you could really have an impression of the volume of space you’re taking up, since it’s so precisely outlined on the exterior. But that’s just speculation. And I always like to think of those things. Like lying in bed mentally projecting outward to sort of visualize the space you’re occupying.

— You can’t do that on one level?

— Well, it’s less tidy, here, right, because of the colours and the lines.

— Oh, I see. You would want the interior to better reflect what the architect’s doing on the outside?

— Well, pretty much. And I’m pretty sure that the earlier photo really does have boarded-up windows on the bottom, which they fixed. Bit scary.

IAN: Good for them. But you’ve got to wonder, did somebody kick them in, you know? Did a bolt come flying off a Hell’s Angels motorcycle? Now, we’ve discussed this neighbourhood in terms of Eastern Ave. and I think there’s a lot of potential on other parts of the street – possibility of a new development, although that’s quashed now, isn’t it? What’s it called? Foundry District? It’s just this particular block, seems very little hope for it unless they can get rid of the Hell’s Angels – hate to say it, terrified for my life.

JOE: Well, they have a Web site and everything and they aren’t even hiding in plain sight, they’re just in plain sight.

— Yeah. The building is yellow!

— They didn’t used to have the same signage. They didn’t have the tacky checkerboard signage, and it used to be a different name other than Hell’s Angels, but then they decided to go for truth in advertising, I guess. And in fact they did drop into the Toolbox now and then for a beer. It was, after all, the local bar, and who could really tell them apart?

[Ian laughs]

JOE: Yes, I agree with what you’re saying [about the local architecture style], to a certain degree.

IAN: Write that down! Yeah, about the typology, right? What would be the word in linguistics? Morphology, maybe.

— Morphology.